A splintering of global supply chains, driven by political and business considerations, has hundreds of manufacturers and logistics providers debating where to go next. They would be well advised to take their cues from two Taiwanese companies who have led the charge.
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) is the world’s largest maker of chips, with clients including Apple Inc, Nvidia Corp and Advanced Micro Devices Inc.
Foxconn Technology Group, whose flagship is Taipei-based Hon Hai Precision Industry Co, assembles those components into end devices. Apple’s iPhones and Nvidia’s artificial intelligence servers are among the most famous of Foxconn’s products, but its reach extends into industrial sectors including Tesla Inc cars, factory-automation systems provider Siemens AG and even an Israeli satellite maker.
Illustration: Constance Chou
Their size, technical dominance and global influence make these two Taiwanese companies irreplaceable — no other single business could jump in to fill the gap should either disappear overnight. That is the concern policymakers from Washington to Canberra have in the event tensions between Taipei and Beijing escalate to the point of military conflict.
However, both firms are thinking less about war and more about how globalization can extend their lead.
“Instability in the Taiwan Strait is definitely one supply chain-resilience consideration,” TSMC chairman and chief executive officer C.C. Wei (魏哲家) said after its annual shareholder meeting this month. Yet the chipmaker also seen benefits from globalization “because we can get the best from around the world.”
Foxconn has also been touting the upside of its expanded reach. “Our diversified global footprint is an important part of Hon Hai’s competitive advantage,” chief executive officer Young Liu (劉揚偉) told shareholders recently, adding that it has 205 sites in 24 countries. “In the current geopolitical situation, that advantage is even more important and obvious.”
Two decades after joining the WTO, China’s position as factory to the world has shifted from being a win-win for clients and suppliers to a massive risk. Labor shortages, rising costs and stiff local competition have many looking elsewhere. Japanese and South Korean carmakers are withdrawing, US power-tool maker Stanley Black & Decker shut its factory, and Nike Inc has moved away.
TSMC and Foxconn do not supply directly to all of these companies, but they are only one step away. Almost every device on the planet is made with, or by, the goods that come out of their factories. TSMC, for example, not only controls most production of leading-edge chips, it is the single largest supplier of older (also called legacy) 28-nanometer semiconductors that go into toys, and industrial and agricultural equipment. Foxconn, though best known for churning out consumer devices, is a major player in industrial manufacturing and factory automation.
That means the site of new facilities from either company act as a guidepost for where the rest of the supply chain is already going, or ought to move next.
Take TSMC. Although it does not make cars, the company has chosen locations at the center of the automotive supply chain. Volkswagen AG, BMW AG and Porsche all have facilities near Dresden, the site of TSMC’s forthcoming European fab. Co-investors in that factory include Robert Bosch GmbH, Infineon Technologies AG and NXP Semiconductors NV. As a result, anyone who wants to supply materials or equipment to TSMC would need to have operations near the German city.
For its factory in Japan’s Kumamoto Prefecture, TSMC is teaming up with Sony Group Corp, Toyota Motor Corp and automotive-electronics supplier Denso Corp. This facility would serve Japan’s world-leading carmaking, industrial and consumer electronics industries. The expansion plan, announced in 2021, spurred suppliers Mitsubishi Electric Corp, Sumco Corp and Kyocera Corp to outline new investments in the area.
TSMC’s facility in Arizona is a different story. There is no business case to be made for setting up there: The region lacks any related industries of note. However, pressure from clients, and incentives from US governments at the state and federal level, left the Taiwanese company little choice. Even then, suppliers were quick to follow, including industrial companies LCY Chemical Corp and Topco Scientific Co.
Foxconn’s decision to expand in Mexico, India and Southeast Asia as well as numerous tie-ups with European industrial companies like Siemens, ZF Group and Stellantis NV show that its diversification is not only geographic but also sector-based. The company is pushing into factory automation, transportation and logistics, aerospace and alternative energy. Many of its current vendors built facilities in Shenzhen to enjoy the benefits of being close to China’s manufacturing heartland.
This Foxconn effect was repeated over a decade ago when it set up near central China’s Zhengzhou city and suppliers followed suit.
Now, because of their crucial role at the center of industry, not only would the same entourage of vendors to TSMC and Foxconn need to tag along on their global journey, anyone else expecting to be part of international supply chains would have no choice but to follow, too.
Tim Culpan is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering technology in Asia. This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
US president-elect Donald Trump continues to make nominations for his Cabinet and US agencies, with most of his picks being staunchly against Beijing. For US ambassador to China, Trump has tapped former US senator David Perdue. This appointment makes it crystal clear that Trump has no intention of letting China continue to steal from the US while infiltrating it in a surreptitious quasi-war, harming world peace and stability. Originally earning a name for himself in the business world, Perdue made his start with Chinese supply chains as a manager for several US firms. He later served as the CEO of Reebok and
US$18.278 billion is a simple dollar figure; one that’s illustrative of the first Trump administration’s defense commitment to Taiwan. But what does Donald Trump care for money? During President Trump’s first term, the US defense department approved gross sales of “defense articles and services” to Taiwan of over US$18 billion. In September, the US-Taiwan Business Council compared Trump’s figure to the other four presidential administrations since 1993: President Clinton approved a total of US$8.702 billion from 1993 through 2000. President George W. Bush approved US$15.614 billion in eight years. This total would have been significantly greater had Taiwan’s Kuomintang-controlled Legislative Yuan been cooperative. During
US president-elect Donald Trump in an interview with NBC News on Monday said he would “never say” if the US is committed to defending Taiwan against China. Trump said he would “prefer” that China does not attempt to invade Taiwan, and that he has a “very good relationship” with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). Before committing US troops to defending Taiwan he would “have to negotiate things,” he said. This is a departure from the stance of incumbent US President Joe Biden, who on several occasions expressed resolutely that he would commit US troops in the event of a conflict in
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in recent days was the focus of the media due to his role in arranging a Chinese “student” group to visit Taiwan. While his team defends the visit as friendly, civilized and apolitical, the general impression is that it was a political stunt orchestrated as part of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) propaganda, as its members were mainly young communists or university graduates who speak of a future of a unified country. While Ma lived in Taiwan almost his entire life — except during his early childhood in Hong Kong and student years in the US —
RSS