Skip to main content

Nexperia: Is It a Dutch Takeover or a Message to China?

 How China’s Investments Are Reshaping Europe’s Economic Independence

In October 2025, the Dutch government invoked the rarely used Goods Availability Act to take effective control of Nexperia, a semiconductor company based in Nijmegen but owned by China's Wingtech Technology. This unprecedented move has sparked a geopolitical standoff, raising critical questions about China's growing footprint in Europe's strategic sectors.

🇨🇳 China’s Strategic Acquisitions: A Pattern of Influence

China's approach to foreign direct investment (FDI) in Europe has been marked by a focus on critical infrastructure and advanced technology sectors. According to the European Parliament, China's footprint in European critical assets has grown steadily over time, without any centralized mechanism that could give the European Union (EU) and Member State agencies visibility and scrutiny over projects of strategic significance for Europe’s defense and security. This poses specific challenges to Europe’s efforts to protect its critical infrastructure. European Parliament

In 2023, Chinese FDI in Europe rebounded, with a significant portion directed towards the electric vehicle (EV) sector. Hungary emerged as a top destination, receiving 44% of all Chinese FDI in Europe, benefiting from the surge in EV investments. Rhodium Group

🏭 Nexperia: A Case Study in Strategic Control

Nexperia, a key supplier to Europe’s automotive industry, was acquired by Wingtech in 2019. The company's strategic importance was underscored when the U.S. Department of Commerce added Wingtech to its Entity List in December 2024, citing national security concerns. Subsequently, the Dutch government took control of Nexperia, removing its Chinese CEO, Zhang Xuezheng, and replacing him with Dutch businessman Guido Dierick. This intervention was driven by concerns over governance issues that could threaten Dutch and European technological sovereignty. Financial Times+1

In retaliation, China imposed export controls on Nexperia, prohibiting the company and its subcontractors from exporting specific finished components and sub-assemblies manufactured in China. Nexperia is actively engaging with the Chinese authorities to obtain an exemption from these restrictions. Nexperia

🔍 Comparative Analysis: China vs. Japan vs. USA

Country

Investment Focus

Strategic Motive

Dependency Outcome

🇨🇳 China

Critical infrastructure, technology, EV supply chains

Strategic control, supply chain dominance

Structural dependency

🇯🇵 Japan

Manufacturing, industrial efficiency

Productivity & cooperation

Mutual growth

🇺🇸 USA

Markets, consumers, services

Market access & innovation

Digital dependency

China's investments often target sectors that are vital to national security, such as semiconductors and energy infrastructure. This approach contrasts with Japan's focus on manufacturing efficiency and the USA's emphasis on market expansion and innovation. China's strategy aims to integrate host countries into its economic orbit, creating long-term dependencies.

🛡️ Europe's Response: Balancing Openness and Security

The EU has recognized the need to balance openness to foreign investment with the protection of strategic assets. The European Commission continues to be a driver of FDI screening across the EU, encouraging member states to adopt and adapt their regimes, and to move toward coordinated enforcement. White & Case LLP

The Dutch intervention in Nexperia is part of a broader trend of governments reversing foreign acquisitions due to national security tensions. This move reflects Europe's struggle to maintain technological sovereignty while remaining open to foreign investment.

🔮 Conclusion: A Wake-Up Call for Europe

The Nexperia case serves as a stark reminder of the complexities surrounding foreign investments in critical sectors. While foreign capital can drive economic growth, it can also lead to strategic vulnerabilities if not carefully managed. Europe's challenge lies in finding a balance that allows for economic openness without compromising national security.

As China continues to expand its influence through strategic investments, European nations must develop robust frameworks to assess and manage the risks associated with foreign ownership of critical infrastructure. The Nexperia incident underscores the need for vigilance and proactive measures to safeguard Europe's technological and economic independence.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

USEFUL WEBSITES WHEN LOOKING FOR JOBS

General Citycalling.com   Indeed.co.uk/jobs Jobsite.co.uk Totaljobs.com Jobs.theguardian.com Reed.co.uk/jobs Gumtree.com/jobs Fish4.co.uk Monster.co.uk Jobs.telegraph.co.uk cv-library.co.uk glassdoor.co.uk/job brightrecruits.com/tiptop quintcareers.com/general-job-sites jobs.vivastreet.co.uk/careers jobs.trovit.co.uk jobs.independent.co.uk uk.jobrapido.com gigajob.com/en-gb jobisjob.co.uk jobstoday.co.uk myjobhelper.co.uk stepstone.com londonjobs.metro.co.uk Londonjobs.co.uk Accounting and Auditing Accountancyagejobs.com Hays.co.uk/job/accountancy-finance-jobs Myaccountancyjobs.com Morganmckinley.co.uk/accounting-jobs Efinancialcareers.co.uk Icaewjobs.com Topfinancialjobs.co.uk Badenochandclark.com Roberthalf.co.uk Michaelpage.co.uk/browse/jobs/accounting/all/all Robertwalters.co.uk/accounting&finance.html Gaapweb.com Jobs4a.com Administrative and Office ...

Why there should be a 2nd referendum?

UK REFERENDUM Why there needs to be a 2 nd referendum? 1 st reason Turnover was under 75%. It was 72%. 2 nd reason It was not a clear choice. It was 52% not no argument 80% or 70% or 67.2% that was in 1975, that should represent broad majority of people with a clear choice. 3 rd reason Biased. It did not reflect the population. It did not reflect London, Scotland and Northern Ireland. It reflected only some part of the Country, and some part of the working population. I did not see scores of London reflected in this referendum. London, the beacon, the power house of United Kingdom was not reflected in the Referendum. Purely based on this reason can be enough. Results look as if it biased and if a survey, study or test resulted similar outcome it would be discarded. 4 th reason Naivety. It is not as important as the ones but there was naivety in the public. This public had no experience of a referendum before since 1975, that’s a generation long gap. And ...
NATO Cyber Alliance (NATOC) - A New Threat in our Global World - These days, there are many means to attack a country, whether by militarily, politically, indiscriminately, financially and the new threat on Cyberspace. Any kind of attack on another country should still be considered as an attack and responded in same manner. A country should be able to defend itself in any form of threat. Biggest cyber threat today coming from regimes such as N. Korea and current Russia regime and what country there will be in the future. We had seen them attacking emails, secret conversation, meddling democracy, creating fake accounts, stealing virtual documents. These are all cyber attacks and should be defined as, especially if sponsored by a Government. At the moment the West doesn't have protection to counter-act that. There will be many forms of cyber attack in the future. Most our lives are more and more reliant on cyberspace, whether shopping, banking, diagnosing, secret conversat...