The edition of the China Café of 15 December 2025, moderated by Cindy Shao and presented by Lianne Baaij, brought rare clarity to one of the most complicated and politically charged business files in the Netherlands: the Nexperia affair. In conversation with Charles Smit, former General Counsel and Head of Corporate Affairs at Nexperia and René Raaijmakers, journalist and founder of Bits&Chips, the legal, geopolitical and industrial dynamics that clashed around the company were dissected – and what this means for Europe’s high-tech future.
The result was a conversation that went beyond the headlines and provided a nuanced, factual representation of what really happened, the context in which it happened – and how the Netherlands and Europe should respond.
A crisis in corporate governance misunderstood as a geopolitical fight
While media coverage often portrays the turbulence surrounding Nexperia as a geopolitical event – a new chapter in the EU-China-US technological rivalry – the China Café discussion made it clear that the decisive intervention was caused by failure in governance, not geopolitics.
What really happened: The Dutch Enterprise Chamber removed Nexperia’s CEO, Mr. Wing, and temporarily transferred shareholder voting rights to an independent trustee, after it was determined that Mr. Wing wanted Nexperia to enter into an unusually risky agreement with an external wafer fab, which was controlled by Mr. Wing, but was not part of the Wingtech/Nexperia group. The court concluded that the proposed terms – including excessive upfront payments – posed an imminent threat to Nexperia’s financial stability, warranting swift legal action without lengthy hearings.
A supervisory order from the minister, Vincent Karremans, was signed (and later suspended) around the same time, but – contrary to public intuition – this order did not replace or override the court’s decision. Both measures ran in parallel, illustrating how legal and political processes can become entangled in public debate, even when their goals differ.
Both Smit and Raaijmakers emphasized that the case should be seen primarily as a dispute about corporate governance and fiduciary duty, not as a ruling against foreign ownership.
Chinese ownership: a story of investment, not exploitation
During this meeting, misconceptions about the ownership structure of Nexperia and the role of the Chinese shareholders were also corrected. Nexperia is wholly owned by the publicly traded Wingtech Technology Inc., approximately 15% of which is owned by the CEO, Mr. Wing, and his family; the remaining shares are distributed among various Chinese and non-Chinese investors. These owners are largely not discussed in the public debate, despite the fact that they bear the financial risk of the case.
It is also often overlooked that since the acquisition in 2016 (approved by US and German authorities at the time), the Chinese owners have made substantial long-term investments in Nexperia and its European operations, including:
- Hundreds of millions of euros in reinvestments
- Expansion of the workforce in Nijmegen from 150 to more than 500 employees
- Making a nearly bankrupt factory in Wales profitable again (until Nexperia was ordered to sell the factory by the British government – for purely political reasons, according to Smit)
- A €200 million silicon carbide project in Hamburg
In addition, a 12-inch wafer fab was built by Mr. Wing and other investors in Lingang, China, intended as a foundry for the production of Nexperia wafers. This required legitimate IP transfers under standard commercial licensing agreements, in accordance with common market practices.
These investments, Smit argued, were therefore predominantly beneficial to Nexperia. Nevertheless, geopolitical tensions – especially following the war in Ukraine – have created a political environment in which Chinese investment in Europe are subject to heightened scrutiny and enjoy less public support.
A low-tech company with a high global impact
Despite the fact that Nexperia is often described as a producer of ‘simple’ chips, it plays a central role in the global semiconductor supply chain. Smit and Raaijmakers pointed to several key figures to illustrate:
- Nexperia produces roughly 10% of global semiconductors by volume
- It holds 5% of a market valued at $36 billion
- Its components are used in almost all cars produced worldwide
- It manufactures about 100 billion chips per year
- European wafer fabs in Hamburg and Manchester supply parts to assembly operations in China, Malaysia and the Philippines.
This ecosystem makes the company vulnerable to geopolitical disruptions. According to recent reports, around 70% of Nexperia’s back-end packaging takes place in Dongguan, China. This means that shutting down those factories will have an immediate impact on the global automotive supply chain. Even when alternative assembly lines exist, qualification processes for the automotive industry take weeks or months, which limits the company’s flexibility.
According to Raaijmakers, Nexperia is therefore exemplary of a deeper structural challenge in Europe: global supply chains depend on mature-node chips that governments have considered non-strategic for years.
Geopolitical tensions are redefining the ‘maturity’ of semiconductors
One of the most striking insights from this China Cafe was that mature-semiconductors – transistors, diodes and other components of low complexity – have become strategically sensitive because of their central role in industrial production.
Recent developments were discussed in the discussion:
- Texas Instruments announces $60 billion in investments in mature-node semiconductors, backed by $1.6 billion from the U.S. CHIPS Act
- China rapidly scales up its own mature nodes capacity
- American and European customers demand ‘China-plus-one’ production footprints
- A political climate that discourages Chinese high-tech investments in Europe or the US, including for suppliers linked to ASML, for example.
These developments are forcing governments to rethink their definition and regulation of critical infrastructure, even in technologies that were once considered commodities.
Europe at a crossroads: from dreams of autonomy to the management of strategic dependencies
Finally, the European semiconductor strategy was discussed during this China Café. While the EU once aimed for 20% of world production, cost realities and fragmentation of supply chains are forcing a course correction. According to Smit and various experts present in the room, Europe should:
- Need to build on its strengths such as equipment (e.g. ASML), advanced packaging and analogue chips
- Building strategic control points instead of striving for complete technological independence, in order to create better negotiating positions.
- Remain open to carefully screened foreign investment
- Clarify foreign ownership rules and legal interventions.
At the same time, it must be taken into account that there is no level playing field in China for European companies. Although IP laws are improving in China, the chances of winning in Chinese courts still remain highly uncertain.
Conclusion: beyond politics, clarification and cooperation
At the end of the evening, the audience had a deeper insight into a case that is too often reduced to political soundbites. The Nexperia affair shows that relatively small issues can flare up disproportionately, derailing carefully constructed supply chains – with only losers and no winners. To avoid this, it is crucial that traditional diplomatic channels remain intact and that countries try to understand each other instead of acting impulsively at the expense of industries. Europe needs to find a balance: excluding Chinese companies will not strengthen European competitiveness, but unregulated access can hurt strategic sectors. Managed cooperation, based on legal clarity and mutual respect, is the only viable path.
At the same time, China must accept that Chinese companies in Europe must comply with European legislation. The Chinese intervention in Nexperia’s supply chain is highly damaging and clearly an inappropriate response to what is essentially a legitimate court decision against a CEO who abused his powers.
In the words of one participant, Europe and China are not each other’s answer – but how they work together will shape the geopolitical and industrial landscape of the 21st century.
