Global markets continue to search for anything they can grasp onto that points to possible signs of progress on global trade tensions, and by anything, we do mean ‘anything’ – truth social posts, X posts, this person heard from this person something tangible. It shows just how volatile this current market really is that inuendo and whim is being treated as fact.Back in the ‘tangible’ real world, the other white knight that is being watched ever closely is some form of possible policy backstop from central banks - Particularly the Federal Reserve. Considering the President’s consistent input here that US rates should be lower either through a post or a media rant, so far this has not moved the Fed one inch.While the recent 90-day tariff pause from Liberation Day has provided a temporary market reprieve, the underlying trade tensions, especially between the U.S. and China, remain largely unresolved. In fact, we would argue they are only getting stronger as nations and blocs are now looking to each other to offset the US trade impasse.China remains the most consequential player in this landscape, and despite the pause, the effective U.S. (weighted-average) tariff rate on goods has only fallen modestly, just 3%, from a 24% peak to 21% year-to-date.Beijing appears to be holding the ‘better hand’ currently; the additional back down from Washington with its ‘exemption’ on electronics is case in point. Just take Apple as the example, down over 23% since its peak in December last year, and it is the poster child for the full impact of Trump’s program. This back-down is showing just how much strain the US is experiencing with Beijing playing hardball.Think about it: a US$3,000 iPhone versus a Samsung that, even with tariffs, could be as much as 20% less for the US consumers. That’s a killer for the Silicon Valley Titan and Trump’s plan on the whole.This just shows the structural nature of the U.S.-China trade imbalance and the scale of bilateral tariffs already in place.As negotiations remain tentative and tensions persist, the market is left navigating a landscape shaped by potential escalation, geopolitical signalling, and the lingering question of whether or even what policymakers will/can do if economic or market stress intensifies.China: Market KingmakerAs mentioned, the modest drop in the effective tariff rate even after a 90-day pause highlights the entrenched nature of the dispute. The sheer scale of U.S.-China trade means that even minor changes have significant global implications. While no breakthrough appears imminent, traders and investors alike continue to watch for any sign of constructive engagement – which currently does not exist, if we are honest.Any sign of negotiation could take place, or even if there is a modest de-escalation, it could trigger a risk-on response across asset classes as seen in the final part of the week beginning 7 March 2025. This is why China is now the market kingmaker – it is currently holding firm on ‘escalating’ when responding to Washington’s moves.The indicator we all need to watch for around US/China relations is US Treasury Bonds. Any sign that Beijing is turning from escalation to de-escalation should produce a rally sharply here as market flows have been dominated by heightened cash preference as persistent stagflation concerns, coupled with recession risks.Where’s the Fed at?Will the Federal Reserve step in to support markets? The better question is, can it step in? From a traditional standpoint with rate cuts – no. However, there are other mechanisms like exemptions to the Supplementary Leverage Ratio (this is the amount of tier one capital required to be held at US banks), which was temporarily introduced during the 2020 pandemic crisis. A repeat of that policy would increase the banking system’s capacity to absorb government bonds without triggering capital constraints.More aggressive tools, such as direct purchases at the long end of the U.S. yield curve, are considered much less likely in the current macro environment, and Fed officials have been cautious in their recent commentary around this idea.Realistically, there are limited signs of funding stress and a relatively high threshold for intervention; the probability of a "Fed put" being activated near-term appears low to non-existent. This means the Fed is just as much a spectator as we are.The FX flowWith US exceptionalism now on the blink, the broader trend of US dollar weakness is expected to persist, but the weak spots may change.Rather than concentrating on current account surplus currencies such as JPY and CHF, the weakness may broaden out to risk-sensitive FX like AUD, NZD, and CAD. Just take a look at the bounce back in AUDUSD at the backend of the 7 March week’s trading – a 3.8% jump in 2 days is unheard of.The euro is expected to perform well across both “risk-on” and “risk-off” tariff scenarios, driven by long-term capital reallocation and structural factors within the euro area.We need to highlight Japan and South Korea – both nations have shown signs they are willing to engage with Washington, and the response from the market was huge. More importantly, the administration has responded positively. This puts JPY and KRW in a more positive light than peers, and they would be wary of being exposed as a deal would put them into upside air very quickly.Outlook: Cloudy but clearing – chance of tariff showers later in the week.Markets remain in a holding pattern, waiting for clearer signals on trade policy.The recent softening of rhetoric from the U.S., particularly in response to financial market volatility, suggests some room for constructive negotiations—especially with countries outside China.The 90-day pause has provided some breathing space, but it will need to be followed by tangible progress if market sentiment is to turn, and on that metric, the outlook is still cloudy but clearing. Yet tariff risks retain high later in the period as the 90-day period looks to expire and specific tariffs (healthcare, electronics, etc) get announced.
For most of the artificial intelligence (AI) boom, the market has treated Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) as the toll road everyone had to use. Nvidia, Apple, AMD, Broadcom and many major AI chip players relied on its manufacturing capacity.
Now that story is getting more complicated.
Intel reportedly jumped more than 11% on Monday, 8 June 2026, after reports that Google had placed an order for more than 3 million custom tensor processing units (TPUs) with Intel Foundry for delivery from 2028.
That does not make Intel the new TSMC. It does suggest the market is asking a sharper question: what happens when the AI boom starts running into capacity limits?
Here’s the setup
Demand for leading-edge wafers and advanced packaging has grown faster than the supply chain can comfortably absorb. That pressure is now forcing major AI customers to consider alternatives, not necessarily because they are abandoning TSMC, but because they may need more than one route to production.
One answer that emerged on Monday was Intel.
Google has reportedly placed an order with Intel to manufacture more than three million in-house tensor processing units in 2028. Nvidia is also reportedly evaluating Intel’s advanced packaging and 18A process for future chips, according to The Information, which cited people with direct knowledge of the talks.
Why Intel moved
Intel shares rose roughly 11% on Monday, closing at US$110.27. The move added to a sharp 2026 rally and signalled that investors may be reassessing Intel’s role in the AI supply chain.
Explore the architectural landscape of Asian tech giants outside major US infrastructure, tracing which foundry components and supply layers are positioned to optimize massive market cash flows.
Why packaging is the bottleneck
To understand why Monday's news mattered so much, it helps to understand one often-overlooked part of chipmaking: advanced packaging.
Building an AI chip is not just about making the chip itself. Manufacturers also need to connect the processor, memory and other components together so they can work as a single system. That final assembly step is known as advanced packaging.
TSMC dominates one of the most important packaging technologies, called CoWoS (Chip on Wafer on Substrate). The challenge is that demand for CoWoS has surged alongside the AI boom.
Nvidia alone is expected to account for about 60% of global CoWoS demand in 2026, while Broadcom and AMD are expected to take another 26%. That leaves relatively little capacity available for smaller AI chip developers and custom chip makers.
In simple terms, demand for AI chips is growing so quickly that one of the industry's key manufacturing steps is becoming a bottleneck.
Where Intel may fit
Intel has been developing its own alternative packaging technology, called EMIB, or Embedded Multi-die Interconnect Bridge. The technical details are complex, but the market point is simple: Intel believes EMIB can support large AI chip designs and may become an alternative to TSMC’s CoWoS for some workloads.
Intel’s EMIB has reportedly gained traction at Google and Meta, with production yields said to reach around 90%. Yield refers to the percentage of chips that come off the production line working properly. Higher yields generally mean lower costs and more reliable manufacturing.
The geopolitical angle also matters. Some chips made at TSMC’s Arizona facility may still need advanced packaging in Taiwan before final delivery. That weakens the idea of a fully onshore supply chain and helps explain why US-based packaging capacity is getting more attention.
Dies etched at TSMC facility in Arizona, USA.
Partly completed chips shipped over the Pacific.
Advanced packaging applied back in Taiwan.
Finished hardware distributed to end markets.
A granular evaluation of proprietary cloud computing modules vs decentralized hardware footprints, defining the margin advantages and scalability metrics shaping sovereign tech shifts.
Why the market cares
The Intel story is not just about one company winning a contract. It is a signal about where the AI supply chain may be heading.
When Google, one of TSMC’s key customers, reportedly tests a competitor’s packaging technology and then places a multi-million-unit order, the market hears several things at once: TSMC’s capacity constraints may be pushing customers toward alternatives, Intel’s technology may be gaining credibility, and the old “Intel is too far behind to matter” narrative may need updating.
Intel has gained approximately 422% over the past 12 months, an unusually large move for a large-cap semiconductor stock. For traders, the transmission effect is broader than Intel alone. A stronger Intel foundry story may attract capital into US semiconductor names and create a relative value debate between Intel and TSMC, not because TSMC is in trouble, but because its near-monopoly premium is being reassessed.
Assets and names to watch
A structural shift in foundry dynamics ripples outward across key technology components. Monitor this streamlined breakdown to scan positioning profiles.
| Name | Why it matters | What to watch |
|---|---|---|
| Intel Corporation | US foundry challenger. The reported Google TPU order and Nvidia trials support the second-source story, but foundry losses and execution risk remain the key limits. | Google order final confirmation, 18A process yields, structural foundry unit losses. |
| TSMC | Still the dominant global foundry. The risk is not immediate share loss, but that capacity limits create space for alternatives to gain relevance. | CoWoS advanced packaging expansion timelines, gross margins, key customer retention. |
| NVIDIA | The demand engine behind much of the AI supply chain pressure. Its Intel trials matter, but testing does not equal a production shift. | Whether multi-project wafer trials translate into high-volume commercial production orders. |
| SMH ETF | Broad semiconductor exposure through a basket containing TSMC, NVIDIA and Intel. | Useful for tracking whether the story is stock-specific or sector-wide. |
Bull case, cautionary case and what could go wrong
The supportive case for Intel is easy to understand. AI demand remains strong, TSMC capacity stays tight and major customers are looking for credible second-source manufacturing options. If Intel can turn reported trials and early customer interest into commercial production, the market may continue to treat its foundry strategy as more credible.
But this is still a conditional story, not a completed turnaround.
Intel’s foundry unit posted an operating loss of approximately US$10.3 billion in fiscal 2025, while the stock has already rallied about 175% year to date (YTD). That leaves less room for disappointment if future updates fall short.
The biggest technical test is 18A. Intel needs its manufacturing process to reach yields that commercial customers can rely on. Yield refers to the share of chips that come out usable. If Q2 disclosures disappoint, confidence in the foundry story could weaken.
Customer confirmation also matters. NVIDIA has not placed a production order with Intel. Reported Feynman architecture trials are still early stage, and testing does not guarantee committed production volume.
TSMC is another constraint on the Intel bull case. It is targeting CoWoS capacity of approximately 130,000 to 140,000 wafers per month by 2026 to 2027. If that expansion catches up with demand, the pressure pushing customers toward alternatives may ease.
There is also the broader AI spending cycle. If hyperscalers such as Google, Microsoft, Amazon and Meta slow infrastructure spending, the whole semiconductor sector could come under pressure, regardless of Intel’s progress.
The key variables to watch are customer confirmation, 18A yield progress, Intel foundry pipeline updates, TSMC capacity expansion and whether AI infrastructure spending remains strong.
The semiconductor space is no longer just about raw processor speeds, it has become an execution battleground for advanced packaging capacity and global footprint resilience.



.jpeg)
.jpeg)
.jpeg)


