Chipmakers warn US: meddling in the memory market will deepen the shortage

On July 2, 2026, the semiconductor manufacturers' association sent a formal warning to the Trump administration: government attempts to end the global memory chip shortage by influencing prices or adjusting production capacity will only worsen a historically acute shortfall, the main cause of which is surging demand driven by the artificial intelligence boom.

Why is government intervention dangerous?

The association pointed to a fundamental flaw in any state attempt to "fix" the memory market: manufacturers make multibillion-dollar investment decisions based primarily on long-term price signals. When the state regulates prices artificially, those signals become distorted, and companies lose their bearings for planning new capacity. Intervention meant to eliminate the shortage ends up deepening it.

Building a new memory fab is a multi-year process that requires a predictable investment environment. Administrative pressure creates exactly what the industry fears most: regulatory uncertainty. When investors cannot calculate whether the rules of the game will change in three or four years, they postpone capital spending. As a result, new capacity is not built, and the memory chip shortage continues.

According to the association, the government should focus on lowering trade barriers and encouraging competition rather than directly managing prices or production volumes. The market creates the right incentives on its own, if it is allowed to.

Where did the historic shortage come from?

The current memory chip shortage is a direct result of the explosive growth of the AI industry. Training and deploying large language models requires enormous volumes of high-performance memory: both specialized high-speed memory for AI accelerators and standard server DRAM. The largest tech companies, Microsoft, Google, Meta and Amazon, are rapidly expanding their data centers and buying up all available volumes, creating pressure the market cannot absorb in time. Supply orders are placed one to two years ahead, and manufacturers are running at full capacity.

The production cycle in the memory industry is physically constrained: a new fab requires highly complex equipment, years of construction and tens of billions of dollars, with no guarantee of a quick return on investment. The global memory market is effectively controlled by a few large players, and their combined capacity cannot be expanded by administrative decision, only when it makes market sense.

Geopolitics is an additional factor: US export restrictions on advanced chips to China and Beijing's retaliatory measures are shrinking the global pool of production capacity available on the open market. Geopolitical confrontation accelerates the fragmentation of supply chains and deprives buyers of the ability to cover shortfalls through their usual channels.

What is behind the warning?

The Trump administration treats the semiconductor industry as a strategic priority, in the context of competition with China and of reducing US dependence on Asian supply chains. Amid the acute memory shortage, the government is tempted to "help" the industry with directive measures: price regulation, subsidies for capacity expansion or direct pressure on manufacturers. The association opposes exactly such initiatives, warning that good intentions here can make the situation worse.

The industry makes clear that the solution lies in long-term market incentives, a predictable regulatory environment and fair trade policy, not in administrative interventions that could upset a fragile investment balance. Manufacturers need confidence in the future, and without it capital will not come.

What this means

The semiconductor industry's warning signals how fragile the market balance is in the age of the AI race. The memory shortage is becoming a strategic constraint: it slows the rollout of AI infrastructure and raises costs for the entire technology ecosystem. The industry has stated its position unambiguously: government intervention is not help but an additional risk. The market will find its own equilibrium, if it is left alone.

*Meta has been designated an extremist organization and is banned in Russia.