Nexperia Explained: Why the Netherlands Took Control in 2025

On 12 October 2025, the Dutch government made public a rare move: it intervened in Nexperia, the Nijmegen-based chip firm owned by China’s Wingtech, citing “serious governance shortcomings” and invoking the Goods Availability Act. (Financial Times)

Under this measure, the minister can now block or reverse board decisions deemed harmful — while day-to-day operations continue. (Reuters)

What Exactly Happened?

The Netherlands used its rarely applied Goods Availability Act (Wet beschikbaarheid goederen) to secure control over Nexperia’s strategic decisions. The government cited “threats to continuity and the safeguarding of crucial technological knowledge” on Dutch and European soil. (AP News)

This was not a nationalisation. Instead, it curtailed Wingtech’s unilateral control: major corporate moves must now survive government oversight or reversal. (Bloomberg)

Why It Matters

Nexperia manufactures essential semiconductors used across Europe — in cars, phones, and industrial systems. Any disruption would ripple through supply chains. The intervention shows that Europe is done pretending strategic assets can run on autopilot.

Has This Happened Before?

• Germany (2022): Berlin blocked Chinese bids for Elmos Semiconductor and ERMAFA, citing national-security concerns (Reuters).
• United Kingdom (2022): Ordered Nexperia to divest Newport Wafer Fab under the National Security and Investment Act (BBC).
• France (2020–21): Expanded foreign-investment screening to tech and biotech (Politico Europe).
• Italy (2021): Used its “Golden Power” decree to restrict Huawei’s 5G role (Reuters).
• United States: The CFIUS committee blocked Broadcom–Qualcomm and forced Chinese divestments in TikTok and Grindr (U.S. Treasury).

Different laws, same intent: protect critical technology when alliances shift. The Dutch version adds precision — oversight without expropriation.

What Does It Mean in Practice?

• Foreign investors stay welcome — if they accept European security oversight.
• States keep a “red button.” Fast, temporary intervention when supply or governance falters.
• No sweeping nationalisations. Ownership stays private; critical decisions get a safety brake.
• EU alignment. National tools are being woven together under the Chips Act and the FDI Screening Regulation.

The message is simple: Europe will trade, but it will also guard its backbone. The age of “anything for investment” is over; the new doctrine is open, but protected.

Necessity or Power Grab?

Supporters call it economic self-defence — long overdue after years of naïve dependency. Critics see a quiet shift from regulation to intervention. If governments can enter boardrooms whenever “strategic risk” is invoked, where does that stop?

The Dutch case was triggered by real governance gaps, yet it expands what the state can touch. The line between strategic necessity and political convenience is thin — and Europe is still learning to walk it without tipping into protectionism.

Critics Say

Industry groups warn repeated interventions could chill joint ventures and tech transfers. Chinese officials call the move discriminatory; European strategists counter that predictability dies faster when supply chains collapse. For investors, sovereignty now comes with a compliance cost. For citizens, it means essential chips keep flowing when politics get rough.

Final Word

This wasn’t nationalism dressed as policy. It was Europe’s growing pain — proof that openness without control isn’t freedom, it’s exposure. Every democracy must decide how much control is too much, and how much freedom it can afford to lose before it stops being sovereign. The Netherlands just drew its line. The rest of Europe is watching.