.

The federal government is now Intel’s largest shareholder after President Donald Trump approved a 10% stake in the ailing American chipmaker. It’s a significant move away from conventional Republican economic orthodoxy, and it has sparked condemnation from conservatives who would otherwise support the president.

But Trump is pushing back, arguing that the deal was a good investment and one that will make the U.S. “richer and richer” and signaling that it is just the start of his ambitions. “I hope I’m going to have many more cases like it,” he said. The move amounts to a return of something that was once called industrial policy — government intervention to direct and support key industries.

The question for many onlookers is whether Trump’s decision represents a bridge too far into socialism. After all, socialism has for decades been understood as, among other things, government ownership of the means of production for the good of all of society. By that measure, the critics have argued, Trump’s decision isn’t all that different from the state capitalism of China or Russia.

The politics of all this are deliciously ironic, given that when former President Barack Obama’s administration sought to seize control of Chrysler and General Motors during the 2008–2009 financial crisis, it was widely understood by conservatives as an emergency move to save those iconic American companies from collapse. If Obama had taken a 10% stake in Intel, allies of Trump are saying, the conservative media would have been calling it communism.

Trump, of course, is arguing that this is different and that he is not bailing out Intel with this deal. He converted nearly $9 billion in grants — taxpayer dollars that had already been allocated to the company under President Joe Biden’s bipartisan Chips Act — into equity for the U.S. government, he noted, and by doing that, he created an immediate benefit for taxpayers of $10 billion to $11 billion. “Why are ‘stupid’ people unhappy with that?” he asked.

Conservatives Are Speaking Up

Conservative reaction has nonetheless been swift. Trump’s former top economic adviser, Larry Kudlow, told Fox Business he was “very, very uncomfortable with that idea.” Steve Moore, another informal Trump economic adviser, was more colorful. “I hate corporate welfare,” Moore said on CNN. “That’s privatization in reverse. We want the government to divest of assets, not buy assets. So terrible, one of the bad ideas that’s come out of this White House.”

Editorials at the National Review argued “government shouldn’t get into the chip business.” Senator Thom Tillis said he was “very concerned” that it would create “a semi-state-owned enterprise a la CCCP” — a reference to the former Soviet Union. Senator Rand Paul tweeted that the deal would “mean the government has control over the American chip industry. Wouldn’t the government owning part of Intel be a step toward socialism? Terrible idea.”

Not everyone, of course, is panicking about the decision. Progressive Senator Bernie Sanders released a statement hailing it as an instance of government using its powers to shape the direction of industry for the common good. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick appeared on Laura Ingraham’s show to defend Trump: “That is not socialism. That’s the best businessman in the United States of America in the Oval Office doing fair things for us.”

Intel said it had warned in an SEC filing of a host of risks created by the decision, including a diminished ability to attract future government grants, “possible adverse reaction from global sales and other business partners,” and increased regulatory scrutiny. Intel is fighting for its life; earlier this year, it announced it was laying off 15% of its workforce. The company is valued at about $110 billion in the stock market, down 50% since the start of the year, but its shares rose 4% immediately after Trump’s announcement.

The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump had initially demanded Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan’s resignation because of past associations with China, but reversed himself after a meeting at the White House. “I liked him a lot, I thought he was very good,” Trump said after the meeting.

Intel’s stockholders have approved Trump’s move, and the U.S. government will be a non-voting shareholder, but Intel hasn’t said whether that means the president will refrain from meddling in the company’s affairs. Trump has not yet proven willing to do that with other companies he once owned. Critics note, too, that when the president of the United States becomes your largest shareholder, your board of directors is likely to listen to him.

If Intel rights the ship and starts to recover, Trump will have an answer to anyone who says he’s weakened America’s high-tech prowess. If it keeps sinking, it will be taxpayers who have footed the bill. Trump has promised more deals like this one, and it’s not clear whether this is socialism, capitalism, or simply Trumpism. But at the very least, it represents a fundamental shift in the relationship between the federal government and the private sector and a measure of just how far Trump has warped the Republican Party’s economic policy.