Intel’s long-anticipated multi-billion-dollar semiconductor manufacturing facility in Ohio has been delayed yet again—this time pushing construction into the next decade. The Buckeye State, once promised a first-of-its-kind chipmaking hub, continues to wait as Intel cites business “needs [and] broader market demand, [as reasons for the latest postponement]”, according to company executive Naga Chandrasekaran.
The project, initially set at $20 billion and now approaching $30 billion, was expected to be a major economic driver for Central Ohio, particularly Licking County. Funded in part by the CHIPS Act, signed by Former President Joe Biden in August 2022, the plant was projected to generate 3,000 long-term, high-paying jobs, 7,000 construction positions, and thousands more additional employment opportunities. Instead, Ohio now expects two fabrication facilities—the first slated for completion in 2030 with operations beginning in 2031, followed by a second in 2031, operational by 2032.
“We’re just really on for a little bit longer ride than what we thought,” assured Mike Knisley, of the Ohio State Building and Construction Trades Council. While Intel previously attributed delays to awaiting CHIPS Act funding, it received $1.5 billion in federal support for the Ohio plant in November. Despite this, Chandrasekaran acknowledged that construction is progressing at a “slower pace.” Knisley noted that while such slowdowns are industry norms, the delay remains concerning.
“We’ve got to have faith in that company,” Knisley emphasized. “It would be disastrous for everybody, not just the trade unions, but for the administration, for the millions of dollars that have been spent on incentives.”
Reasons For Doubt
State Senator Bill DeMora (D-Columbus) called for greater accountability, warning that Intel should not be allowed to “hold the state hostage for as long as they want.” He added, “It’s ridiculous.”
Governor Mike DeWine and state officials have already allocated billions in subsidies for the project. Meanwhile, unions and local colleges have been training workers in preparation, and municipalities have made infrastructure commitments. “The City of Columbus is planning a nonstop bus route down 161 to get to Intel,” DeMora noted, referencing additional county deals aimed at supporting the development.
Despite the prolonged timeline, Knisley expressed cautious optimism. “Some of the larger unions, electrical workers and pipefitters, spent an enormous amount of money on training, getting ready for this,” he said. “Had we not had that, and we had made all this investment on recruiting and training, it could have been a real detriment.”
Looking more broadly, Intel’s struggles extend beyond Ohio. The company has faced significant setbacks, including the abrupt resignation of former CEO Pat Gelsinger in December, a more than 50% drop in stock value over the past year despite industry-wide growth of 120%, and mass layoffs that cut its workforce by 15%. In November, Intel was replaced by rival company Nvidia on the Dow Jones Industrial Average, after Intel’s status there for 25 years.
Some Ohio officials fear Intel’s project could turn into another “Foxconn” debacle—a reference to the legal battle between Ohio-based Lordstown Motors and global manufacturer Foxconn over a failed investment deal. “At some point, you got to hold their feet to the fire and either take away some of their tax incentives, start charging them, or start taking back some of the money they were promised until they actually do what they’re supposed to do,” DeMora argued.
Upholding Contracts and Arguing Construction Issues
However, the Ohio Department of Development defended Intel’s progress. “Intel’s latest report highlights the progress the company is making on its Ohio One project,” said spokesperson Mason Waldvogel. “The statewide economic impact is already evident—6.4 million construction hours worked by Ohioans from 83 counties, and more than 430 Ohio companies supporting the effort across 50 counties. We remain confident that Intel will deliver on its commitments.”
Governor DeWine’s office echoed that sentiment. “While we are disappointed the plants will not open sooner, construction continues at the Ohio Intel site and the company has continued to tell the state the fabs will be completed and produce chips,” said spokesperson Dan Tierney. “This is a construction delay. The project is moving forward.”
JobsOhio, a private nonprofit involved in state economic development, struck a similar tone. “Although Intel’s timeline has moved to address market realities, the commitment to creating at least 3,000 jobs and $20 billion in capital investment remains unchanged,” said spokesperson Matt Englehart.
DeMora, however, questioned whether Intel’s repeated delays violated its agreement with the state. But according to DeWine’s office, Intel is still meeting its contractual obligations. Tierney explained that Ohio’s agreement with Intel focuses on benchmarks for investment, payroll, and job creation, rather than strict deadlines for completion. “The company is upholding its end of the bargain,” Tierney said. “So why argue today over a provision that’s not in the contract?”
Legal experts, such as Case Western Reserve University business law professor Eric Chaffee, noted that while completion clauses are common, Ohio likely prioritized securing the investment over imposing rigid deadlines. “Ohio made choices in regard to what they wanted to ensure,” Chaffee explained. “There’s still incentives for Intel to get this facility completed, but there’s just not the penalties that might make them a little bit more incentivized.”
Despite concerns, Knisley remains optimistic about the project’s eventual completion. “Everybody is bullish on Intel, even with their poor performance on Wall Street and the change in leadership,” he said. “A lot of things might give people pause, but we still have all the faith that the project’s going to go on.”
For its part, Intel reaffirmed its commitment to Ohio, stating that the delay “does not diminish our long-term commitment.”