Intel is unlikely to fulfill all the promises it made Ohio, chip industry analyst says

COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) -- After Intel announced construction on the Ohio One plant will be delayed again, Ohioans are asking if the project will make good on its promises. NBC4 spoke with an expert who believes Ohio One will fall short of its initial expectations. See previous coverage of Intel's delay in the video player above.

Originally scheduled for completion this year, Intel's $28 billion foray into central Ohio has seen more than a few hiccups. The timeline adjustment came just days before President Donald Trump called for an end to the CHIPS Act, which promised nearly $8 billion to Intel for projects like the Ohio One plant. State and local leaders said Intel promised to bring its $20 billion dual chip factories and accompanying 10,000 jobs before CHIPS Act funding was ever guaranteed.

That may be easier said than done. Intel has struggled financially since its landmark announcement, laying off 15% of its employees in 2024 and losing its CEO in an abrupt December retirement. Possible buyout rumors have surfaced in 2025, but at least one potential suitor, Broadband, told reporters last week that the company is not currently considering an Intel purchase.

Lenny Siegel is the executive director of the Center for Public Environmental Oversight and a nationally accredited expert on semiconductor production and toxins. He is also the former mayor of Mountain View, California, the birthplace of Intel, Silicon Valley and semiconductor manufacturing. Siegel helped oversee the cleanup of Intel’s superfund sites in the area during his time in office, although he had monitored Intel long before.

Siegel said that in many ways, Ohio’s construction delays are unsurprising. As Intel’s only entirely new development project in the U.S., it will face harsher complications than other Intel CHIPS Act projects, which are expansions or modifications, he said.

“Given the level of investment and construction, I believe the Ohio plant will eventually be completed, but perhaps by another company,” Siegel said. “I don’t expect Intel or its successor to fulfill all the promises the company made to Ohio in order to win state subsidies.”

Siegel said so much of Intel’s information is speculative, so some of his comments are as well. He said Intel's troubles date back beyond recent developments. Siegel said Intel was an industry leader in the early decades of semiconductor manufacturing because it assembled and packaged its chips internally, rather than contracting them to facilities abroad. 

However, as the industry narrowed, some companies began designing chips while contracting their manufacturing out to separate companies, called foundries, Siegel said. Intel has its own foundry division, which includes the Ohio One plant, instead of following the industry trend.

“When it set up its own foundry, it ran into the problem of one part of the company competing against another part,” Siegel said. “In addition, it has reportedly had technical problems with its newest production line.”

Siegel said this is the worst financial condition Intel has been in, adding the company's long-term financial health will depend on how widespread the move toward AI will be, a race Intel is playing catch up in.

The world's leading semiconductor manufacturer, TSMC, is a Taiwanese company that announced a new $100 billion investment in the U.S. with the Trump administration on March 3. TSMC also received CHIPS Act funding, but Siegel said he does not anticipate major changes in the CHIPS Act allocation, such as moving funds from Intel to TSMC.

However, Siegel said, cutting staff in the CHIPS office will likely hinder its operations. CNBC reported about one-third of CHIPS Act staffers were fired from the U.S. Commerce Department last week. According to reports, around 40 probationary employees lost their jobs on March 3, with another 20 or so leaving in the federal buy-out program.

Siegel said it's hard for him to tell what Trump intends, adding he may be bluffing to further negotiations. He said outside of the CHIPS Act, economic conditions will play a role. For instance, a recession could contribute to further delays.

Siegel also said local and state authorities should think critically about development, both with Intel and other tech companies. He said major tech investments usually bring in outside, highly paid professionals rather than tapping local workforces. Intel has promised to create 3,000 high-paying jobs for Ohioans by the plants' completion.

"In the absence of new, nearby workforce housing and supporting infrastructure and services, that can increase costs for and even displace longtime residents," he said. "Good planning can overcome such challenges, but that’s difficult when it’s unclear when production will actually begin."

In January, Intel had received at least $2.2 billion of its $7.86 billion promised CHIPS Act money. Intel representatives said they do not have any comments on the CHIPS Act or Intel's delayed timeline at this time, and would not confirm if Intel has received any additional CHIPS money since January.