EU chip goal 'unrealistic' says ASML CEO

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

EU plans to spend €43 billion under its Chips Act to reach a 20% share of global semiconductor production by 2030, a target the CEO of lithography giant ASML has called “totally unrealistic.” Commenters note that building and ramping advanced fabs takes many years, vast capital and scarce specialized talent, and that every major bloc (US, EU, China, Taiwan, Korea, Japan) is simultaneously trying to grow its chip share, making the math and timelines dubious. At the same time, many see strategic value in Europe expanding its semiconductor base for security and resilience, but argue this will require more coherent industrial policy, smarter subsidies, and immigration and tax regimes that actually attract and retain highly skilled workers.

EU Chips Act Goal & Realism

  • The EU’s target of 20% global chip market share by 2030 is widely seen as unrealistic given current capacity (~2.7M 8" wpm vs much higher in China, Taiwan, Korea, Japan, US).
  • Multiple commenters stress fab timelines: 3–5+ years to build and ramp a fab, plus long supply chains and workforce constraints. 2030 is viewed as too soon for a “dozen new fabs at volume.”
  • Some argue high, even unrealistic goals can still drive useful investment and partial success.

ASML, Strategic Control & Geopolitics

  • ASML and Zeiss are highlighted as Europe’s key strategic assets in lithography.
  • Debate over who effectively “controls” ASML:
    • One side claims NATO/US exert decisive control via export licenses and US-origin IP in EUV.
    • Others say this stems from US co-investment, IP, and components, not conspiracy; ASML is seen as a willing partner because China is a strategic threat.
  • Several note China has been blocked from advanced ASML tools and is trying (so far unsuccessfully) to replicate EUV.

Industrial Policy, Market Share & China

  • All major blocs (EU, US, Taiwan, Korea, China, Japan) are subsidizing chips; posters note it’s mathematically impossible for everyone’s share to rise, though absolute revenue can.
  • Some predict only China is likely to significantly grow share, due to:
    • Large internal market, import dependence, and sanctions-driven push for self-sufficiency.
    • History of Chinese industrial policy catching up in other sectors (solar, batteries, displays).
  • Others question China’s trajectory, citing political risk, demographic issues, and Xi’s interference.

EU Innovation, Regulation & Talent

  • Mixed views on whether Europe can build its own “Silicon Valley”:
    • Optimists point to ASML, strong industrial base, solar history, and infrastructure.
    • Skeptics cite fragmentation (languages, national rules), bureaucracy, and weaker late-stage capital than the US.
  • Multiple comments discuss ASML and Dutch tech pay: good by local standards but often below US big tech; software at ASML is seen as technologically conservative but with lots of work.

Immigration, Expat Tax Breaks, and Politics

  • Long subthread on Dutch/European expat tax breaks (e.g., 30% ruling):
    • Supporters: high-skill migrants are net fiscal positives, trained abroad, and essential for shortages.
    • Critics: they raise housing costs, pay less tax than locals, and may stay only a few years.
  • Discussion widens into EU vs US political culture, accusations of “reactionary” tendencies on HN, and debates about sexism in political jokes.