Nvidia chip probe moved after lawyer’s intervention
An investigation into the possible diversion of Nvidia chips to China was transferred from Trade to Justice after Nvidia contacted regulators.
Listen to this article
There is no audio version yet. Request one and an AI voice will read the article aloud.
Read by an AI voice.
An investigation into the possible illegal diversion of Nvidia chips to China has been transferred from the US Department of Commerce to the Justice Department. This happened after Nvidia’s general counsel contacted officials conducting the investigation, according to a reconstruction described by Reuters.
The case centres on Megaspeed, a data-centre company based in Singapore. US authorities investigated whether the company had routed advanced Nvidia chips to China via Malaysia. Operating data centres for Chinese customers is not in itself prohibited, but the authorities suspected that some chips had ended up in China in breach of US export rules.
According to the reconstruction, Nvidia’s general counsel Tim Teter contacted investigators at the Department of Commerce in August 2025. He asked for information about the investigation and referred to Jeff Kessler, a senior official overseeing export controls.
The investigators did not comply with the request. After the email exchange became known internally, Kessler instructed them, according to an official, to continue the investigation in accordance with the rules. Reuters describes no evidence that Kessler instructed the investigators to share information with Nvidia or to intervene substantively.
Nevertheless, discussion arose within the department over whether the contact with Nvidia could undermine the investigation’s independence. The Justice Department subsequently asked for the investigation to be suspended and took it over. Justice is now conducting a criminal investigation into Megaspeed.
The transfer is notable because Commerce investigators had already been working on the case for months and might themselves have been able to take administrative measures, such as restricting access to US technology. A criminal investigation follows a different legal route and can take longer before it becomes clear whether charges will follow.
The case is separate from the investigation Nvidia has announced into chief executive Jensen Huang, but the two files do overlap. According to US intelligence officials, a Megaspeed director may have had links to the Chinese government. Nvidia is also investigating the relationship between that director and Huang. Neither the espionage allegations nor the possible diversion of chips has been definitively established.
The issue also affects the Netherlands and Europe indirectly. US export rules for advanced AI chips influence the availability of computing power, data-centre investment and the scope for companies to work with Chinese customers. The new facts do not yet show that Nvidia influenced enforcement, but they do raise questions about the distance between regulators and a company at the centre of the AI industry.
Also show the region and a close-up
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- An investigation into the possible diversion of Nvidia chips to China was transferred from the Department of Commerce to the Justice Department.
- Nvidia had contacted Commerce investigators.
- There is no established evidence that Nvidia influenced the substantive outcome of the investigation.
Left
Arguments Export rules are credible only if major technology companies cannot secure preferential treatment through political access.
Values Equal enforcement, democratic oversight and limiting the power of multinationals.
Consequences More independent oversight may slow companies and governments in the short term, but should prevent conflicts of interest.
Centre
Arguments Companies may provide information to regulators, but cases should be transferred when independence becomes an issue.
Values The rule of law, procedural care and protection of national security.
Consequences A transparent transfer can restore confidence, although a change of agency may delay the case.
Right
Arguments The United States must take firm action against technology transfers to China while preventing bureaucratic procedures from weakening its own industry.
Values National security, economic power and strategic competition.
Consequences Stricter enforcement may limit exports and cooperation, but may also prevent crucial AI technology from falling into the hands of a geopolitical rival.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The article distinguishes between established procedural facts and unproven suspicions. The sources confirm the transfer to Justice, but not that Nvidia directed the outcome of the investigation.
- confirmed The investigation into Megaspeed was transferred from Commerce to Justice. — Reuters describes the transfer and the departments involved. source
- confirmed Nvidia’s general counsel Tim Teter contacted investigators. — Reuters mentions the email and the date on which it was sent. source
- confirmed The possible illegal diversion of chips and espionage have not been definitively established. — The sources describe ongoing investigations and suspicions, not convictions. source
Editor's note
The transfer of the investigation and Nvidia’s contacts with the US Department of Commerce were reported on the basis of a Reuters reconstruction. There is no established evidence that Nvidia influenced the outcome of enforcement; the possible illegal diversion and espionage remain under investigation.Sources
More on this in Dutch media
- AD — „nvidia ai-chips”
- RTL Nieuws — „nvidia ai-chips”
- FD — „nvidia ai-chips”