Thread

ASML says it sold 'absolutely nothing' in Europe in 2026

402 points · 900 comments · MC995

t43562 · 1790347718 · focus · HN ↗
It seems to be "dump on Europe" day which I'm sure is popular but lets just stop for a second and ask what the sales of ASML machinery to the US would be without the CHIPS act .... a massive subsidy. Aren't subsidies supposed to be a bad European thing??? I'm confused. Are we free market proponents or planned economy proponents?
1. upupupandaway · 1790348103 · focus · HN ↗
  I don't think this is the main point (subsidies). ASML sold nothing in Europe because Europe is not a factor in semi manufacturing, primarily due to regulations and bureaucracy.
  1. elric · 1790487876 · focus · HN ↗
    > primarily due to regulations and bureaucracy
    Or, more likely, due to energy prices.
    logicchains · 1790489502 · focus · HN ↗
    The energy prices in Europe are also up due to regulations and bureaucracy, without which the continent would be full of nuclear plants.
    wewxjfq · 1790492907 · focus · HN ↗
    Europe is the only continent where some countries are close to fully nuclear and they aren't close to being the industrial powerhouses HN commenters would make you believe. Tell my why are the US (gas) and China (coal) are beating France (nuclear)?
    The whole world essentially stopped building nuclear power plants at the end of the 1970s and there's one obvious answer which you guys just can't accept, so you keep inventing one stab-in-the-back narrative after another for why nuclear energy failed.
    logicchains · 1790501980 · focus · HN ↗
    >The whole world essentially stopped building nuclear power plants at the end of the 1970s
    China has over 30 nuclear power plants currently in development, the only way nuclear "failed" is the industry's failure to convince dumb boomers not to regulate it out of existence in the west.
    dv_dt · 1790512355 · focus · HN ↗
    Nuclear failed and will fail because it economically doesn't pay off without large government subsidies for everything from the power purchase agreement, to security and long term waste management. Its also centralized, and more difficult to defend in a world that is threatening to descend into at least regional conflicts. If one were seeious about industrial progress, you would avoid nuclear, avoid fossil fuels, and install and develop renewables and battery techs
    dalyons · 1790516352 · focus · HN ↗
    And yet their % share of nuclear is declining and will continue to decline every year. Because nukes are too expensive, even for a single party state
    microtonal · 1790494167 · focus · HN ↗
    Energy prices are up in Europe because Europe was too dependent on Russia for gas (and now the US) and the Middle East for oil, not regulation. We are too dependent on fossil fuels because (mostly right wing) politicians tried to block/underinvest in wind/solar/geothermal for too long.
    TrickyRick · 1790498512 · focus · HN ↗
    Almost correct, except it's the green/left that forced a shutdown of nuclear and sold the gas as "green". At least in Germany/Scandinavia, might be different in the rest of Europe.
    IsTom · 1790501374 · focus · HN ↗
    > During the chancellorship of Gerhard Schröder, the social democratic-green government decreed Germany's final retreat from using nuclear power by 2022.[1]
    The Gerhard Schröder that
    > Since leaving public office, Schröder has worked for Russian state-owned energy companies, including Nord Stream AG, Rosneft, and Gazprom.[2]
    [1]<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_Germany" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_Germany
    [2]<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerhard_Schr%C3%B6der" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerhard_Schr%C3%B6der
    uecker · 1790519298 · focus · HN ↗
    And yet, Germany does not import gas from Russia anymore. Did nuclear industry in other countries stop importing from Rosatom already?
    IsTom · 1790532141 · focus · HN ↗
    If the Nord Stream didn't get blown up it could have been different.
    uecker · 1790620041 · focus · HN ↗
    The nord stream pipeline was not carrying gas when blown up. But other pipelines were.
    Lumich · 1790631792 · focus · HN ↗
    > Since leaving public office, Schröder has worked for Russian state-owned energy companies
    People often cite this fact as if there were a problem to it. (Not sure it is your case though.) Is it that Germany is not allowed to have national interests? Who is the judge on this? Our "friend", the remaining exceptional occupation power?
    By the way, chancellor Merz, before taking office, had worked for (and owes his personal wealth to) Usanian financial company Blackrock, thus creating a (rarely cited) allegiance problem at the highest level of the state apparatus.
    microtonal · 1790511499 · focus · HN ↗
    Different in the rest of Europe. Many countries have kept mostly the same number of nuclear power plants.
    daedrdev · 1790517087 · focus · HN ↗
    For example, the Netherlands are currently pouring cement down their oil derricks to try and prevent a future government from re opening them, over absurdly minor earthquakes, despite the energy crisis.
    autuni · 1790580092 · focus · HN ↗
    which regulations and bureaucracy are you talking about specifically?
    there are several nuclear plants operation in Europe, some countries also just announced to restart some of their old power plants. There are no regulations that prevent any of the countries from doing it, each country makes that decision for themselves and has their own reasons to do it or not to do it
    hermanzegerman · 1790620273 · focus · HN ↗
    They're also up thanks to corrupt politicians like Katharina Reiche in Germany which sabotages Renewables and Battery Storage in favor of Gas Plants
  2. wewxjfq · 1790492426 · focus · HN ↗
    The same regulations and bureaucracy that doesn't stop ASML from producing these machines? Makes sense. Also it's funny how in the US/China/EU threads, you'd never guess that China is state-run. You'd think they are a capitalist heaven like the US.
    Could the "EU has too much bureaucracy" users even say how much more bureaucracy EU is producing compared to the US and China? I doubt it. The US Congress has produced some insane behemoths of laws where the glossary is bigger than your average EU directive, so please put some numbers behind your claims.
    Lastly, I think the average HN user just doesn't understand that the EU streamlines regulation across 28 countries, which is almost the opposite of coming up with new regulations. It makes things easier. But that would already require an iota of knowledge past the HN kneejerk worldview.
    bcrosby95 · 1790520446 · focus · HN ↗
    ASML is selling $300 million dollar machines that are fairly small for it's price point. Regulation is going to have very little impact on producing something like that vs mass produced widgets, cars, or chips.
  3. goobatrooba · 1790496942 · focus · HN ↗
    I dont think there is any hard fact behind your statement. EU has a number of semiconductor companies and fabs, though they tend to focus on embedded/industrial applications. Some went bankrupt (e.g. a big German RAM manufacturer) and the number dwindled, but it's not like there's nothing.
    Like in anything high tech you need either massive subsidies or network effects, this is why things have built up in Taiwan, Shenzhen and South Korea, with remnants in the US, EU and a bit more Japan as all three thought they can let the market play out, fell a bit behind, and then the network effects won out.
    Similarly the car industry - Germany (and Japan) rose due to massive investment and network effects, then the shareholders put in CEOs with a clear mission just to milk the cows and get wealth out of the system; this gave China a chance to go all in on investments and overtake them on innovation and price. This has nothing to do with regulation, just with short-termism and the inherent diseases of a "pure" capitalism.
    That there are few new innovative companies coming up is probably more due to regulations (need to figure out how to make the product work and be legal in various regimes). In turn that they don't scale is due to less financing options and a much more fragmented market (to sell in France and Spain and Poland you need to translate everything and adapt it to local expectations and payment standards.. to sell in Florida, Minnesota and Texas you just need to throw a single English version up.
    A shame that the national governments keep blocking any real integration of the financial and regulatory regimes at EU level, this would solve the startup and scale up issues to a large degree. The EU just proposed "EU Inc" as a solution, not sure this will not be ground up in 27 regimes...
    benjiro29 · 1790514260 · focus · HN ↗
    To give a idea of fun regulations. This is one regarding imports that my partner is dealing with recently.
    A new regulation when importing into Europe, is that you need to show that import materials do not have toxic substances, ... on ... shipping labels (meaning the physical labels are free from harmful chemicals like BPA, PFAS, or PVC).
    You need from every company that ships from China, they need to provide certificates that their shipping labels are toxic free.
    Pulled from AI because i hate summarizing this...
    * EU Ecolabel: The gold standard in Europe. It officially guarantees that a product has low aquatic toxicity, a reduced environmental footprint, and strictly limited hazardous substances throughout its life cycle.
    * EN 13432 Certification: If using compostable labels (like those from Better Packaging Co.), this mandatory European standard ensures the label, liner, and adhesive break down safely in industrial composting without leaving toxic chemical residues.
    * FSC (Forest Stewardship Council): Certifies that the paper backing and label face stock are sourced from sustainably managed, non-destructive forests.
    * Phenol-Free / BPA-Free Declarations: Thermal printing labels must formally declare compliance with EU Regulation 2016/2235, which legally restricts bisphenols in thermal paper across the European Economic Area.
    Its a mess of paperwork ... We have not talked about a ton of others, and those are on the import side.
    We had some fun discussions about vitamine pill manufacturing, where importing materials made it "made in China".
    But if we imported the raw material, and the capsules are made in Europe, and its mixed / bottled here. Well, made in Europe. But the prime materials that goes into your body is from China ... Does not matter.
    But wait, if the capsules are made in China and mixed / bottled here in Europe, then its still made in China. Because the capsule somehow made the difference?! I do not remember the details but the amount of easy customer cheating that can be done with "Made in EU / Germany / France"..
    I can go on with some of the insanities i get told about ... There are good rules but a lot are like this mix that make no sense, and you can almost hear that somebody pushed for exceptions when the rule was designed. So you get this odd crap that half the time makes no sense.
    Hard to do business when the rules are often a issue.
    foobarian · 1790515230 · focus · HN ↗
    This almost reminds me of the Ancien regime mess with a million different taxes and fees on everything
    pillefitz · 1790521243 · focus · HN ↗
    I'm glad we're not importing hundreds of tons of toxic labels that, when touched, mess with your endocrine system. What's your point?
    benjiro29 · 1790539365 · focus · HN ↗
    The fact that the issue as described is such a small problem, that pales into the other issues.
    One of the issues mentioned is PFAS, ... ignoring the fact that we have tons of PFAS pollutions already in our soils and not a darn thing is done.
    We live very close to one of those sites, but its always excuses after excuse to solve. But PFAS on labels, panic, panic, ... The whole label issue can easily be solved by random sampling at import and a fine system. That automatically puts backpressure to fix it. No need for certificates left and right.
    My point is that we keep making bureaucratic rules, that make every step more difficult for entrepreneurs here in Europe, instead of having a proper compliance setup. There is a entire industry around yearly audits (that cost 10.000's), like people who do it non-stop suddenly forget how to do it.
    That is the issue ... Its not about rules but about barriers that make often setup in such a way to be barriers of entry/working, then compliance.
    Tell me, how many times do you go to have your car checked. Yearly or every two years? That is one of those example where in some countries its yearly, other twice. Do the countries with two years have issues with their car park. No ... The result is the same but some people get to be inconvenienced twice (and pay twice). Do you understand it a bit more now?
    There are rules and there are rules that add little beyond making everything difficult, when it can be solved in a better way.
    hermanzegerman · 1790620187 · focus · HN ↗
    Maybe don't dump some AI Bullshit about many things that don't apply to shipping labels or are mandatory at all. Like 3 out of the 4 are completely irrevelant at all.
    to11mtm · 1790529423 · focus · HN ↗
    FWIW I view Japan as still a player, just more specialized (although yes, TSMC is often still involved.)
    Specifically, imaging sensors. Canon still makes their own sensors in Japan, and Sony makes all sorts of sensors that are used both by competitors in the camera space as well as Phones, (e.x. Apple after over a decade is only now starting to diversify with Samsung US Fabbed sensors,) Dashcams and Security Cams(Even a lot of the Chinese built ones, if you see STARVIS it's a Sony sensor)
    That said, Imaging sensors do hit a curious level of 'needing bleeding edge but is not necessarily as complex as a cpu'. i.e. you're striving for precision and quality but the part itself is a lot more 'repetitive' across the silicon area compared to a CPU.
  4. AdamN · 1790501954 · focus · HN ↗
    They're making the point that you're wrong. The CHIPS act under Biden is a big subsidy to bring modern fabs to the US and without it there wouldn't be any orders in the US either (which has less regulation). The EU came up with a competitor to that subsidy but it wasn't generous enough to compete (neither regulation nor bureaucracy at play here).
    On a side note, none of the TSMC fabs in the US are cutting edge. They're all at least a generation behind.
    petcat · 1790510072 · focus · HN ↗
    > none of the TSMC fabs in the US are cutting edge. They're all at least a generation behind.
    TSMC Arizona is a "gigafab" built in phases. The 4nm fab is already built and in volume production of chips for Apple and Nvidia. The 3nm fab construction is complete, and the 2nm (current SOTA) is under construction slated to start chip production in 2028.
    crote · 1790529101 · focus · HN ↗
    TSMC is starting A16 mass production this year. Its 2nm process entered mass production in their domestic fabs in 2025.
    In other words: TSMC Arizona isn't SOTA - it is lagging 3 years (~1.5 nodes) behind.
    Taiwan isn't stupid. It knows that keeping SOTA domestically is the only way it can rely on the US for protection. The second their fabs aren't absolutely crucial for cutting-edge chips anymore, the US will drop them like a brick - and China will happily devour the country.
    AdamN · 1790842968 · focus · HN ↗
    Drop them like a brick is overblown. The US defended Taiwan long before TSMC became singular and will continue to even if SOTA is available elsewhere. Of course Taiwan is smart enough to know that the US isn't a monolithic decision-maker and just having companies like Apple on your side inside the US administration is important for long term security.
  5. rowanajmarshall · 1790509593 · focus · HN ↗
    No, Europe is not a factor in cutting-edge chip assembly. That is a tiny fraction of the overall supply chain to manufacture a finished, compute-ready semiconductor. There is sense in not trying to compete with the "sexy" part of chip manufacturing, and instead concentrating on the steps of the supply chain you are already good at.
    PowerElectronix · 1790524811 · focus · HN ↗
    I'd say being able to compete instead of trying. I bet a lot of euro companies would love to compete against nvidia, amd, intel or tsmc, globalfoundries, etc. They just can't.
    liquidpele · 1790531750 · focus · HN ↗
    USA just can’t compete at banana production, film at 11.
    PowerElectronix · 1790538267 · focus · HN ↗
    Yeah, but it's not for lack of talent in tech, investemnt money and support from lawmakers. Just a climate that doesn't help bananas grow, unlike chip design and manufacturing in europe.
    cemkum · 1790587829 · focus · HN ↗
    If banana production was such an important cornerstone of world economy, a competent team of engineers would be able to create the perfect indoor plantations to raise bananas.
    The plantation described above is less complex than the ultra-cleanrooms used by semiconductor producers like TSMC.
    unparagoned · 1790723318 · focus · HN ↗
    That’s completely useless. The point is that we need full control over the full pipeline for security.
    If China invades Taiwan 70% of noting is still nothing.
  6. dools · 1790512603 · focus · HN ↗
    Isn’t ASML a European company?
    cenamus · 1790513946 · focus · HN ↗
    Yes, but but but evil regulations and bureaucracy

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.