CHIPS Act Statistics 2026
By Axis Intelligence Research
Co-authors: Mia Scarlett, Business and Capital Markets & Sarah Mitchell, AI Expert | Last updated: August 30, 2026 | License: CC BY 4.0
The Department of Commerce has awarded $31.7 billion in direct CHIPS Act funding across 49 projects at 24 companies as of July 15, 2026, and disbursed $13.1 billion of it. That is 42 percent of committed dollars actually paid out four years after enactment, and 60 percent of every dollar disbursed has gone to a single recipient.
Quick Answer
As of the most recent federal reporting, the CHIPS incentives program has committed approximately 89 percent of its available $35.5 billion but delivered 42 percent of committed direct funding. According to Axis Intelligence Research, the CHIPS Execution Index reads 39.79 out of 100 at its baseline, and stripping Intel out drops the capital delivery rate to 22.43 percent.
Key Findings
- Commerce disbursed $13.1 billion of $31.2 billion in direct funding awards as of April 2026, approximately 42 percent, per the Government Accountability Office report published August 6, 2026.
- According to Axis Intelligence Research, Intel received $7.865 billion of that total, meaning 60.0 percent of all CHIPS disbursements went to one company, and the capital delivery rate for every other awardee combined is 22.43 percent.
- Commerce canceled advanced microelectronics research awards worth $7.8 billion of the $11 billion appropriated, and has expended $506.8 million, approximately 5 percent of that appropriation, per GAO.
- The semiconductor industry has announced $820.8 billion in private supply chain investment across more than 160 projects in 30 states since 2020, per the Semiconductor Industry Association tracker updated August 18, 2026.
- Peer-reviewed estimates published in Brookings Papers on Economic Activity put the measured short-term direct employment effect at 15,000 to 16,000 jobs in the core semiconductor sector, against 71,000 announced facility jobs.
How Much CHIPS Act Money Has Actually Been Paid Out?
The distinction between awarded and disbursed is the whole story, and it is the one most coverage collapses.
CHIPS incentives are reimbursement instruments. A company signs a direct funding agreement containing project milestones, spends its own capital, documents completion, and Commerce pays against the milestone. Nothing moves on announcement day. The Government Accountability Office reported on August 6, 2026 that Commerce had disbursed $13.1 billion against $31.2 billion in direct funding awards as of April 2026.
| Status of direct funding, April 2026 | $ billion | Share | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Disbursed to Intel | 7.865 | 25.2% | GAO-26-109121 |
| Disbursed to all other awardees | 5.235 | 16.8% | Axis calculation from GAO |
| Awarded, not yet disbursed | 18.100 | 58.0% | Axis calculation from GAO |
| Total awarded | 31.200 | 100% | GAO-26-109121 |
The Intel line is not an ordinary disbursement. In August 2025 Commerce amended Intel’s award covering six projects, removed the unachieved project milestones, and treated each project as complete once Intel had incurred eligible costs equal to the award. GAO records the resulting payment as $7.865 billion, largely from that amended structure rather than from milestone verification.
According to Axis Intelligence Research, removing Intel from both sides of the ratio produces a capital delivery rate of 22.43 percent, computed as $5.235 billion disbursed against $23.335 billion awarded. That number describes the program as experienced by the other 23 companies, and it is roughly half the headline rate.
Of the $5.235 billion that reached other awardees, $32.1 million funded design porting and $11.2 million funded workforce activities. The remainder came through milestone completions by eleven awardees.
Mia Scarlett: Read the disbursement line the way you would read cash conversion in a quarterly filing. Commerce has committed 89 percent of available incentive funds, which is the number that gets quoted, and converted 42 percent of commitments into cash, which is the number that determines whether a cleanroom gets built. Strip the one amended agreement that paid out against incurred costs rather than verified milestones and conversion falls to 22 percent. That is what reimbursement programs look like when the underlying assets take five to nine years to build. It becomes a problem only if you were budgeting on the headline.
Source: Axis Intelligence Research — CC BY 4.0
The CHIPS Execution Index: A Single Reading for Program Delivery
Federal reporting scatters delivery evidence across three unrelated denominators: dollars, milestones, and agreements. Each can be quoted to support a different narrative. The CHIPS Execution Index consolidates all three.
CXI, the CHIPS Execution Index™, is the equally weighted arithmetic mean of three published delivery rates, expressed 0 to 100.
Formula: CXI = (Capital delivery rate + Milestone attainment rate + Award finalization rate) ÷ 3
| CXI component | Formula | Inputs | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capital delivery rate | Disbursed ÷ awarded direct funding | $13.1B ÷ $31.2B | 41.99% |
| Milestone attainment rate | Milestones completed ÷ milestones tracked | 24 ÷ 149 | 16.11% |
| Award finalization rate | Companies with final awards ÷ companies at final or preliminary stage | 19 ÷ 31 | 61.29% |
| CXI composite | Mean of the three | 39.79 |
Worked example. Capital delivery: 13.1 ÷ 31.2 = 0.4199, so 41.99 percent. Milestone attainment: GAO reports 24 milestones completed with disbursement and 125 still in progress, giving 149 tracked; 24 ÷ 149 = 0.1611, so 16.11 percent. Award finalization: the Congressional Research Service counts 19 companies with final commercial fab awards and 12 holding preliminary memoranda of terms without one; 19 ÷ 31 = 0.6129, so 61.29 percent. Mean = (41.99 + 16.11 + 61.29) ÷ 3 = 39.79.
According to Axis Intelligence Research, the CHIPS Execution Index reads 39.79 at its baseline. This is the first computation of the index. No earlier readings exist and none are implied.
What moves it. The milestone component is the slowest-moving and currently the heaviest drag. GAO notes that most in-progress milestones have not yet reached their anticipated completion date, so the component should rise mechanically as the 2027 to 2030 construction wave lands. The finalization component moves in steps as pending preliminary agreements convert or lapse; twelve companies representing roughly $1.56 billion sit in that queue, Wolfspeed’s $750 million the largest. The capital delivery component is the one that reflects actual cash.
What it does not capture. CXI measures delivery of the incentives program only. It excludes the separate $11 billion research appropriation, the $3.5 billion Secure Enclave allocation, and the Advanced Manufacturing Investment Credit, which is a tax expenditure rather than a grant and moves far more money than the grants do. Equity conversions are counted as delivery when cash moves, since from the recipient’s side the cash is identical.
Which States Received the Most CHIPS Act Funding?
Commerce publishes awards company by company and site by site. It does not publish a state ledger. Axis Intelligence Research built one by summing the site-level grant figures on each NIST CHIPS project page and assigning them to the state of the named facility.
| Rank | State | Grant awards ($M) | Sites | Share | Cumulative | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Arizona | 10,940.0 | 3 | 35.06% | 35.06% | Axis compilation from NIST |
| 2 | New York | 6,100.0 | 4 | 19.55% | 54.61% | Axis compilation from NIST |
| 3 | Texas | 6,025.0 | 3 | 19.31% | 73.92% | Axis compilation from NIST |
| 4 | Oregon | 1,913.0 | 2 | 6.13% | 80.05% | Axis compilation from NIST |
| 5 | Idaho | 1,500.0 | 1 | 4.81% | 84.86% | Axis compilation from NIST |
| 6 | Ohio | 1,500.0 | 1 | 4.81% | 89.66% | Axis compilation from NIST |
| 7 | Utah | 700.0 | 1 | 2.24% | 91.91% | Axis compilation from NIST |
| 8 | New Mexico | 523.9 | 2 | 1.68% | 93.59% | Axis compilation from NIST |
| 9 | Indiana | 458.0 | 1 | 1.47% | 95.05% | Axis compilation from NIST |
| 10 | Michigan | 325.0 | 1 | 1.04% | 96.09% | Axis compilation from NIST |
| 11 | Virginia | 275.0 | 1 | 0.88% | 96.98% | Axis compilation from NIST |
| 12 | California | 225.0 | 1 | 0.72% | 97.70% | Axis compilation from NIST |
| 13 | Tennessee | 210.0 | 1 | 0.67% | 98.37% | Axis compilation from NIST |
| 14 | Vermont | 125.0 | 1 | 0.40% | 98.77% | Axis compilation from NIST |
| 15 | Minnesota | 123.0 | 1 | 0.39% | 99.16% | Axis compilation from NIST |
| 16 | Colorado | 77.0 | 1 | 0.25% | 99.41% | Axis compilation from NIST |
| 17 | Georgia | 75.0 | 1 | 0.24% | 99.65% | Axis compilation from NIST |
| 18 | North Carolina | 50.0 | 1 | 0.16% | 99.81% | Axis compilation from NIST |
| 19 | New Hampshire | 35.0 | 1 | 0.11% | 99.92% | Axis compilation from NIST |
| 20 | Missouri | 20.0 | 1 | 0.06% | 99.99% | Axis compilation from NIST |
| 21 | Pennsylvania | 3.0 | 1 | 0.01% | 100.00% | Axis compilation from NIST |
| Total | 31,202.9 | 30 |
Reconciliation. The compilation totals $31.203 billion across 30 named sites in 21 states. Adding USA Rare Earth’s $277 million, which covers five projects across Texas, Oklahoma and South Carolina with no published per-state split, brings the accounted total to $31.480 billion against GAO’s stated $31.7 billion awarded as of July 15, 2026. That leaves a residual of $220.1 million, or 0.69 percent of the program, unaccounted at site level. According to Axis Intelligence Research, this compilation captures 99.31 percent of awarded direct funding.
Three states hold 73.92 percent of compiled grant dollars. The Herfindahl index of grant dollars across the 21 states is 2,081, equivalent to 4.80 equally sized recipient states.
Mia Scarlett: The concentration is not an accident of politics, it is an accident of physics and balance sheets. Leading-edge logic and leading-edge DRAM are the only product categories where a single site absorbs tens of billions in capital expenditure, and there are five companies on earth that build them. Arizona, New York and Texas host those five. Every other state on this list is a materials, packaging or mature-node line, and those cost hundreds of millions, not billions. Read as a map of political favor, the table is the wrong column.
Federal Leverage Ratio by State
Grant size tells you what Washington committed, not what it bought. The Federal Leverage Ratio does.
FLR, the Federal Leverage Ratio™, is announced private project value at CHIPS-awarded sites in a state divided by federal grant awards at those same sites.
Formula: FLR = (announced private project value, $) ÷ (federal grant awards at the same sites, $)
Worked example, Ohio. Intel’s New Albany project carries a stated project size of $28 billion and a grant of $1.5 billion. FLR = 28,000 ÷ 1,500 = 18.67. Every federal dollar committed in Ohio sits alongside $18.67 of announced private capital.
| Rank | State | FLR | Announced private ($B) | Grants ($M) | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Oregon | 18.82x | 36.000 | 1,913 | Axis calculation from NIST |
| 2 | Ohio | 18.67x | 28.000 | 1,500 | Axis calculation from NIST |
| 3 | New York | 18.54x | 113.100 | 6,100 | Axis calculation from NIST |
| 4 | Idaho | 16.67x | 25.000 | 1,500 | Axis calculation from NIST |
| 5 | Colorado | 9.38x | 0.722 | 77 | Axis calculation from NIST |
| 6 | Texas | 9.13x | 55.000 | 6,025 | Axis calculation from NIST |
| 7 | Arizona | 9.05x | 99.000 | 10,940 | Axis calculation from NIST |
| 8 | Indiana | 8.45x | 3.870 | 458 | Axis calculation from NIST |
| 9 | New Mexico | 7.64x | 4.000 | 523.9 | Axis calculation from NIST |
| 10 | Virginia | 7.27x | 2.000 | 275 | Axis calculation from NIST |
| 11 | Vermont | 7.20x | 0.900 | 125 | Axis calculation from NIST |
| 12 | Georgia | 4.57x | 0.343 | 75 | Axis calculation from NIST |
| 13 | Minnesota | 4.27x | 0.525 | 123 | Axis calculation from NIST |
According to Axis Intelligence Research, the weighted average FLR at awarded sites is 12.43x, and the spread from Oregon to Minnesota is 4.41x. Arizona ranks first on grant dollars and seventh on leverage: it received the largest federal commitment precisely because leading-edge foundry capacity needed the deepest subsidy to be sited domestically at all.
Utah is excluded from this ranking. Texas Instruments states an $18 billion project value spanning Sherman, Texas and Lehi, Utah jointly, so the private figure cannot be separated and is assigned to Texas.
Did the CHIPS Act Create the Jobs It Announced?
This is where the two most-cited numbers in the entire policy debate come from incompatible universes, and almost nobody says so.
The Semiconductor Industry Association tracker, updated August 18, 2026, records $820.8 billion in announced private investment supporting over 525,000 jobs: 71,000 facility jobs, 122,000 construction jobs, and over 350,000 additional jobs across the economy. Those are announcement-stage commitments compiled from company statements.
Erten, Stiglitz and Verhoogen measured what actually happened. Using quarterly county-level data from the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages and two difference-in-differences designs, their NBER working paper, published in Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, finds positive employment effects that hold across both designs, at 110 jobs per affected county in the first and 180 in the second. Their back-of-the-envelope national extrapolation puts direct effects at approximately 15,000 to 16,000 jobs in the core semiconductor sector and indirect effects at 15,000 to 30,000 in related sectors.
| Job measure | Count | Basis | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Announced facility jobs | 71,000 | Company announcements | SIA tracker |
| Announced construction jobs | 122,000 | Company announcements | SIA tracker |
| Announced economy-wide jobs | 350,000 | Company announcements | SIA tracker |
| Measured direct effect | 15,000 to 16,000 | QCEW difference-in-differences | Erten, Stiglitz and Verhoogen |
| Measured indirect effect | 15,000 to 30,000 | QCEW difference-in-differences | Erten, Stiglitz and Verhoogen |
According to Axis Intelligence Research, announced facility jobs exceed the upper bound of the measured direct employment effect by a factor of 4.44. That ratio is a comparison, not a shortfall. Announced facility jobs are a steady-state figure for fabs that will not reach production until 2028 to 2033; the measured effect is a short-run estimate over a window that largely predates those fabs opening. The two should diverge. The number worth tracking is whether the gap narrows on the schedule the milestones imply.
A calculation we will not publish. Dividing $13.1 billion in disbursements by 15,500 measured jobs produces a tidy cost-per-job figure. It would be wrong. Disbursements are cumulative and national; the measured employment effect is a short-run county-level estimate with a different observation window and a stated set of caveats from its own authors. The methodologies do not align, so Axis Intelligence Research declines to merge them and publishes them side by side instead.
Cost Per Announced Job
Announcement-stage numerator against announcement-stage denominator is a valid comparison, and the denominator choice changes the answer by a factor of seven. Everyone quoting a cost-per-job figure is picking one silently. Here are all three.
| Denominator | Jobs | Federal grants awarded | Cost per announced job |
|---|---|---|---|
| Facility jobs only | 71,000 | $33.0787B | $465,897 |
| Facility plus construction | 193,000 | $33.0787B | $171,392 |
| SIA headline total | 525,000 | $33.0787B | $63,007 |
One published inconsistency deserves flagging. SIA’s three job components sum to 543,000, while the same page headlines “over 525,000.” Axis Intelligence Research publishes both figures rather than silently selecting one; the 18,000 difference is unexplained in the source.
What Happened to the $11 Billion CHIPS Research Budget?
The incentives program gets the coverage. The research appropriation is where the sharpest change occurred, and GAO’s August 2026 report is the first full accounting of it.
| $11B advanced microelectronics R&D appropriation | Amount | Share | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Awards canceled | $7.8B | 70.9% | GAO-26-109121 |
| Expended | $0.507B | 4.6% | GAO-26-109121 |
| Neither canceled nor expended | $2.693B | 24.5% | Axis calculation from GAO |
The largest cancellation was Natcast, the nonprofit awarded $7.4 billion to operate the National Semiconductor Technology Center. Commerce voided the agreement in August 2025 after the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel concluded that Natcast’s creation violated the Government Corporation Control Act. Natcast laid off all employees and ceased operations in September 2025, taking with it 200 registered member organizations and an $825 million subaward to NY CREATES for an extreme ultraviolet lithography accelerator. Commerce reclaimed most disbursed funding but paid $64.1 million in administrative closeout costs.
A $285 million Manufacturing USA institute award to the Semiconductor Research Corporation was terminated for convenience in December 2025 after $17.3 million had been disbursed; the institute closed in February 2026 and SRC laid off over two-thirds of its employees.
The composition of what was actually spent is the detail to carry away. Of $506.8 million expended, $347.3 million went to internal NIST research, $79.2 million to administration, and $64.1 million to closing a canceled award. According to Axis Intelligence Research, $16.1 million reached external awardees, which is 3.2 percent of R&D spending and 0.15 percent of the appropriation.
Commerce has since made three awards totaling $900 million under a new broad agency announcement, to xLight, SandboxAQ and I-Pulse, all carrying equity provisions, plus nine preliminary awards worth roughly $2 billion for quantum computing and seven letters of intent worth $874 million for the compute supply chain announced July 29, 2026. GAO’s finding is that Commerce has not described how these align with the four statutory research programs, and recommended it produce plans and timelines within a year. Commerce agreed with all three recommendations.
Mia Scarlett: The footnote that reframes this whole section is the expenditure split. Sixty-nine cents of every research dollar spent went to NIST’s own laboratories, thirteen cents went to unwinding a canceled agreement, and three cents reached an outside awardee. A research appropriation that spends more on closeout than on grantees has not underperformed against its plan. It has changed plan mid-flight and is still rebuilding the vehicle.
How Is the Equity Conversion Changing the Program’s Economics?
Commerce began exchanging funding for ownership in 2025, and the arithmetic has moved a long way since.
Intel’s agreement was amended to give Commerce 9.9 percent of outstanding shares, valued at $8.9 billion at the time. GAO records that stake at approximately $44.6 billion at the July 15, 2026 market close, at $102.99 per share. According to Axis Intelligence Research, that is an unrealized gain of $35.7 billion against the agreement value and 5.67 times the $7.865 billion in cash Commerce actually disbursed to Intel. The terms are set out in Intel’s Form 8-K filed August 22, 2025, which also notes the release from original project milestones and the risk that the arrangement could later be voided.
Equity is no longer exceptional. For awards made from August 2025 onward Commerce began weighing whether an applicant would provide equity when setting the award amount, a factor absent from earlier awards. USA Rare Earth gave equity valued at $277 million against $277 million in direct funding, plus warrants valued at approximately $302.2 million against a $1.3 billion loan. Crucible Metals affiliates and Vulcan Elements also provided equity. The three new research awards carry equity. The nine preliminary quantum awards are stated to include it.
Upside-sharing agreements are moving the other way. Commerce had negotiated them for 27 of 40 projects as of July 2025; two were subsequently removed and one revised.
When Do the CHIPS-Funded Fabs Actually Open?
Milestone schedules run on three distinct dates, and conflating them is the most common error in fab-timeline reporting. The anticipated completion date is when the milestone is expected to finish, with no funding consequence for missing it. The due date, or longstop, is when it must finish for the associated disbursement to be paid. The clawback date is when the entire project must be complete or Commerce may demand recovery of funds already paid.
As of April 2026 every completed milestone had been finished by its contractual due date. Nine in-progress milestones were past their anticipated completion date; none had passed a due date. The last negotiated project milestone across the portfolio falls in 2033.
| Project | Original start | Revised start | Stated reason | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Micron, Clay NY | 2028 | Q3 2030 | Labor and supply chain shortages, per Onondaga County | CRS R49031 |
| Intel, New Albany OH | 2026 | 2030 | Needs of the business and broader market demand | CRS R49031 |
| Amkor, Peoria AZ | 2027 | 2028 | Site relocation; market demands and increased scope | CRS R49031 |
| TSMC, Phoenix AZ fab 1 | 2024 | 2025 | Insufficient skilled workers for equipment installation | CRS R49031 |
| Samsung, Taylor TX | 2024 | 2025 | Announced before receiving preliminary terms | CRS R49031 |
| TSMC, Phoenix AZ fab 2 | 2028 | 2027 | AI-related customer demand, accelerated | CRS R49031 |
The TSMC fab 2 line runs the other way, and it matters. Schedule risk in this program is demand risk more than construction risk. When the order book is there, dates move forward.
Money in the ground is cooling regardless. Manufacturing construction spending ran at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of $172.674 billion in June 2026, down 21.4 percent from $219.564 billion a year earlier, per the Census Bureau release published August 3, 2026. Our US manufacturing statistics page tracks that series monthly.
What Changes at the End of 2026?
Fiscal 2026 is the final year for which the CHIPS Act appropriates incentives funding to Commerce. Separately, the Advanced Manufacturing Investment Credit, raised from 25 percent to 35 percent by the 2025 reconciliation law, applies only to projects that begin fab construction before December 31, 2026.
That tax credit is the larger instrument. At 35 percent of qualified capital expenditure, a $20 billion fab carries a credit worth more than the entire grant awarded to any company other than TSMC, Intel or Micron. Commerce accounted for anticipated credit receipts when setting grant amounts, so the grants were sized on the assumption the credit exists.
Commerce continues accepting concept plans for materials and equipment awards until November 1, 2026, and $3.8 billion of incentive headroom remains uncommitted.
Mia Scarlett: If you are modelling 2027 capacity, the construction-start deadline is the line item that moves your numbers, not the grant pipeline. Grants are sized in hundreds of millions for most recipients. The credit is 35 percent of capital expenditure, uncapped, and it is the reason a marginal fab pencils. Watch how many groundbreakings land in the fourth quarter of 2026. That is the honest leading indicator, and it will be visible in the Census construction series before it appears in any award announcement.
Definitions and Method
Collection. Every figure was retrieved from a primary document during production on August 30, 2026. Federal program data: GAO-26-109121, published August 6, 2026, covering awards through July 15, 2026 and disbursements and amendments through April 30, 2026, and CRS R49031, July 14, 2026. Award and site data: NIST CHIPS Program Office project pages. Private investment and announced jobs: SIA supply chain investment tracker, August 18, 2026. Employment estimates: NBER Working Paper 34625, published in Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 2025(2). Construction: Census release CB26-126, August 3, 2026. Equity terms: Intel Form 8-K filed August 22, 2025.
Snapshot dates differ by design. GAO’s award count runs to July 15, 2026 while its disbursement and milestone data runs to April 30, 2026. CXI therefore mixes an April disbursement base with a June award-finalization base, and each component carries its own as-of date in the dataset.
CXI construction. Three published rates, equally weighted, arithmetic mean, expressed 0 to 100. Equal weighting is deliberate: no evidence base exists for ranking dollars above milestones or agreements above dollars. The methodology is fixed as of August 2026; any change to components or weights will be disclosed and the series re-baselined openly, never silently rewritten.
FLR construction. Announced private project value at CHIPS-awarded sites divided by federal grants at those same sites. Both figures are as published on NIST project pages. Where a company states a project value spanning two states, the value is assigned to one state and the other is excluded from the ranking rather than apportioned by estimate.
Two reconciliations we publish rather than smooth. First, GAO’s project categories sum to 53 against a stated 49-project total; the four-project overlap is consistent with GAO’s note that two new projects combine chip manufacturing with packaging, so the categories are not mutually exclusive. Second, Intel’s site-level grant figures sum to $7.800 billion against a CRS company total of $7.865 billion, and Micron’s sum to $6.375 billion against $6.440 billion. Both gaps are $65 million. NIST site pages do not reconcile to company totals, and we report both rather than adjust either.
Scope. CXI and FLR describe the semiconductor incentives program. They exclude the Secure Enclave allocation, the advanced microelectronics research appropriation, and the Advanced Manufacturing Investment Credit. Announced private investment is ecosystem-wide since 2020 and is not attributable to the CHIPS Act alone; the SIA tracker itself credits both the tax credit and grant incentives.
About This Dataset
The accompanying CSV contains 300 observations across 157 distinct metrics, each with value, unit, as-of date, geography, source organization, source document, source URL, retrieval date, primary-source flag, calculation flag, and a method note on every derived row. Every figure in this article exists as a row; every row is traceable to a fetched document.
License: CC BY 4.0. Free to use, redistribute and build on with attribution.
Citation: Axis Intelligence Research, CHIPS Act Statistics 2026, 2026.
APA: Axis Intelligence Research. (2026). CHIPS Act statistics 2026: Funding, fabs, investment and jobs. https://axis-intelligence.com/chips-act-statistics/
MLA: Axis Intelligence Research. “CHIPS Act Statistics 2026: Funding, Fabs, Investment and Jobs.” Axis Intelligence, 30 Aug. 2026, axis-intelligence.com/chips-act-statistics/.
Chicago: Axis Intelligence Research. “CHIPS Act Statistics 2026: Funding, Fabs, Investment and Jobs.” Axis Intelligence, August 30, 2026. https://axis-intelligence.com/chips-act-statistics/.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does a CHIPS award mean a company has received the money?
No. Direct funding agreements are reimbursement instruments. Commerce pays after an awardee documents completion of a negotiated milestone, so an award announcement creates a payment schedule rather than a transfer. As of April 2026, 42 percent of awarded direct funding had been disbursed, and 58 percent had not.
What is a clawback date, and has any company hit one?
The clawback date, formally the project completion clawback date, is the date by which an awardee must complete the entire project or Commerce may demand recovery of funds already disbursed. It is distinct from a milestone due date, which only governs whether the next payment is released. No clawback has been triggered in public reporting, and as of April 2026 no in-progress milestone had passed its contractual due date.
If a project slips, does the awardee lose funding?
Not automatically. Missing an anticipated completion date carries no funding consequence; GAO is explicit that awardees are not denied disbursements for missing it. Missing a due date withholds the associated disbursement. Only missing the clawback date exposes funds already paid. Nine milestones were past their anticipated completion date as of April 2026 with no funding consequence.
Does the federal equity stake in Intel replace the grant, or sit on top of it?
It restructures it. The August 2025 amendment gave Commerce 9.9 percent of Intel’s outstanding shares and removed the unachieved project milestones, treating each project as complete once Intel incurred eligible costs equal to the award. The government did not add money; it converted the payment obligation into ownership and released the milestone conditions.
Why do the CHIPS Act job numbers vary so widely between sources?
Because they measure different things. SIA counts jobs announced by companies, including construction and economy-wide effects, for fabs that mostly open between 2028 and 2033. The peer-reviewed QCEW estimate counts employment that has already appeared in affected counties over a shorter window. A steady-state announcement and a short-run measurement are not comparable, and neither is wrong.
Is CHIPS funding still available, or is the program closed?
Roughly $3.8 billion of the $35.5 billion available for incentives remains uncommitted, and Commerce accepts concept plans for semiconductor materials and equipment awards until November 1, 2026. Fiscal 2026 is the final year of appropriations, so any commitment beyond that requires new legislation.
What is the significance of December 31, 2026 for chipmakers?
The Advanced Manufacturing Investment Credit, worth 35 percent of qualified capital expenditure, is available only to projects that begin fab construction before that date. Because the credit is uncapped and proportional to capital expenditure, it is a larger instrument than the grants for most projects, and Commerce sized grant awards partly on the assumption that recipients would claim it.
Why did Commerce cancel most of the CHIPS research funding?
GAO records $7.8 billion of $11 billion in research awards canceled. The largest, Natcast’s $7.4 billion National Semiconductor Technology Center agreement, was voided in August 2025 after the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel concluded its creation violated the Government Corporation Control Act. Commerce separately terminated a $285 million Manufacturing USA institute award for convenience and has been reworking its research approach through a new broad agency announcement.
Which state got the best return per federal dollar?
On announced private capital per federal grant dollar at awarded sites, Oregon leads at 18.82x, followed by Ohio at 18.67x and New York at 18.54x. Arizona received the largest grant total, $10,940 million, but ranks seventh on leverage at 9.05x, reflecting that leading-edge foundry capacity required the deepest subsidy per dollar of private capital to be sited domestically.
Are any large awards still pending?
Twelve companies hold preliminary memoranda of terms for commercial fabs without a final award, representing roughly $1.56 billion. Wolfspeed’s $750 million is the largest. All twelve received their preliminary terms more than a year before the July 2026 reporting date, while every company that did convert did so in under a year.
Related Axis Intelligence Research datasets: Semiconductor Statistics 2026 · Semiconductor Manufacturing Statistics 2026 · US Manufacturing Statistics 2026 · AI Chip Market Share 2026 · Samsung Statistics 2026 · Nvidia Blackwell Statistics 2026 · AI Data Center Forecast 2030