NextFin

Cantor Fitzgerald CEO Lutnick Asserts No Loosening for Nvidia Under China Chip Controls

Summarized by NextFin AI
  • U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick emphasized that Nvidia must adhere to stringent licensing conditions for its H200 AI chips sold to China, negotiated to prevent technology diversion to military uses.
  • The October 2025 agreement between the U.S. and China aimed to postpone tech restrictions, but Nvidia hesitated to comply with proposed verification protocols, indicating a hardening U.S. stance on AI hardware as a national security asset.
  • Nvidia has faced an $8 billion loss in potential sales due to export curbs, reflecting a shift in the semiconductor industry towards compliance with national security interests.
  • The U.S. government's 25% tariff on advanced chips complicates the market for Chinese buyers, signaling a bifurcated global AI ecosystem with the U.S. leading in advanced technology.

NextFin News - In a high-stakes congressional hearing on Tuesday, February 10, 2026, U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick delivered a firm message to Nvidia Corp., asserting that the semiconductor giant "must live with" the stringent licensing conditions governing the sale of its H200 artificial intelligence chips to China. Lutnick, who also serves as the CEO of Cantor Fitzgerald, emphasized that these terms were meticulously negotiated in coordination with the State Department to prevent the diversion of advanced technology to China’s military or intelligence apparatus. The H200, while authorized for export under a fragile trade truce brokered in late 2025, remains subject to rigorous "Know-Your-Customer" (KYC) requirements and case-by-case reviews by the Bureau of Industry and Security.

The current friction stems from the October 2025 agreement between U.S. President Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping, which initially promised a one-year postponement of sweeping technology restrictions. However, the implementation of this truce has been fraught with complexity. According to Reuters, Nvidia has hesitated to fully accept the proposed verification protocols, which mandate unprecedented transparency regarding end-users like ByteDance, Alibaba, and Tencent. Lutnick’s testimony underscores a hardening stance within the administration, treating advanced AI hardware not merely as a commercial product, but as a national security asset on par with critical minerals and rare earth elements.

This uncompromising regulatory environment is already reshaping the financial landscape for the semiconductor industry. Nvidia has reportedly faced an $8 billion hit in potential sales due to ongoing export curbs, and the company previously recorded a $5.5 billion charge related to the halting of earlier GPU models. The H200 represents a significant capability leap over the previously restricted H800, yet it remains a generation behind Nvidia’s latest Blackwell and Rubin architectures, which are currently barred from the Chinese market. By enforcing these "guardrails," the U.S. government is effectively attempting to manage a "controlled addiction" where Chinese firms remain dependent on American technology but are restricted from achieving parity in AI training and inference capabilities.

The strategic logic behind Lutnick’s assertions reflects a broader shift toward technological decoupling. The administration’s 25% tariff on advanced computing chips, imposed in January 2026, further complicates the cost-benefit analysis for Chinese buyers. From a geopolitical perspective, the U.S. is leveraging its dominance in the AI "stack" to maintain a strategic lead, even at the cost of domestic corporate revenue. This policy is a direct response to concerns raised by lawmakers, such as House Select Committee on China Chairman John Moolenaar, who recently alleged that technical assistance provided by Nvidia to firms like DeepSeek had been utilized for military applications.

Looking forward, the "no loosening" policy is likely to accelerate China’s drive for technological self-reliance. As U.S. President Trump continues to use technology transfers as a primary lever in trade negotiations, Chinese domestic competitors like Huawei and Cambricon are gaining traction. Huawei’s Ascend 910C series, though currently a generation behind, is being positioned as the primary alternative for Chinese data centers facing U.S. supply volatility. The trend suggests a bifurcated global AI ecosystem: one led by the U.S. with cutting-edge Blackwell-class hardware, and a secondary Chinese ecosystem built on domestic silicon and older, highly-regulated American exports.

For Nvidia and its investors, the H200 saga serves as a bellwether for the "new normal" of international trade. The era of unfettered global semiconductor markets has been replaced by a regime where national security interests dictate the flow of silicon. As Lutnick noted, the ultimate authority on these matters rests with U.S. President Trump, signaling that chip policy will remain a central, non-negotiable component of the administration’s broader strategic competition with Beijing. The long-term impact will be a permanent increase in compliance costs and a structural shift in how multinational tech firms value their presence in the Chinese market.

Explore more exclusive insights at nextfin.ai.

Insights

What are the licensing conditions governing Nvidia's H200 chip sales?

How did the U.S.-China trade truce impact the chip export landscape?

What are the implications of the 25% tariff on advanced computing chips?

How has Nvidia's revenue been affected by export curbs?

What challenges does Nvidia face regarding verification protocols?

What does the term 'technological decoupling' refer to?

How might China's technological self-reliance evolve in response to U.S. policies?

What role does national security play in the semiconductor industry?

How do Nvidia's competitors like Huawei and Cambricon position themselves?

What are the historical factors leading to current U.S.-China tensions in tech?

What are the risks associated with Nvidia's technological assistance to Chinese firms?

What measures are being taken to prevent technology diversion to China?

How does the U.S. view advanced AI hardware in terms of national security?

What are the potential long-term impacts of the current chip export policies?

How has the perception of semiconductor markets changed recently?

What is the significance of the 'controlled addiction' strategy mentioned?

What structural shifts are expected in multinational tech firms' operations?

Search
NextFinNextFin
NextFin.Al
No Noise, only Signal.
Open App