The core underlying premise in this article (“ASML is threatening to leave The Netherlands”) is completely wrong.
ASML has pointed out several problems with acquiring top global talent, chiefly among them the reduction of tax benefits for that talent, and the housing market (which hamstrings influx of international students whom can segue into ASML after their masters).
It’s not a threat of “do this or we will leave”, it is an indication of “we might have to relocate future growth if these roadblocks persist.”
>chiefly among them the reduction of tax benefits for that talent, and the housing market
Which is a problem everywhere around the world. Housing Market is the biggest problem if not the mother of all problems in modern economy and society. But not a single government or politician on planet earth is willing to tackle it.
I do wonder though, I assume leaving Netherland would only mean its legal HQ moved to somewhere else and not having the "whole" company including manufacturing moved?
This is written from an NL pov, so I understand why they use the word threatening. If it fit in the title here, I would have included the "national security risk" aspect as well.
> CEO Peter Wennink bluntly stated in January: “The consequences of limiting labor migration are large, we need those people to innovate."
That quote from tfa, and other pieces seem to indicate that the proposed curbs on immigration are a major driving factor.
> Such policies may appeal to voters, but ASML and other tech firms that depend on foreign staff argue that they undermine the country's future prosperity. With the rise of far-right parties across other European countries, similar concerns are being voiced in Germany, where CEOs from Infineon (IFXGn.DE), opens new tab to Volkswagen (VOWG_p.DE), opens new tab have warned about the threat of right-wing extremism to the country's economy.
I can’t speak for other countries, but the main problem it always loops back to here is housing. People wouldn’t be nearly as angry at asylum seekers, international students and wealthy tech workers if housing demand wasn’t so severely underaddressed at the moment.
Just to give two examples:
- a friend of mine is looking for single-person housing. Subsidized housing appartement have 500-700 people responding to them on each ad
- ASML has started to underwrite a housing project for subsidized housing. Homes created: 130, of which 40 in the subsidized category. Unaddressed demand for subsidized housing in Veldhoven? 25 000. Even with 20 of those projects a year it would take 31 years to address the need..
I have less knowledge of the student housing market, but I assume it is a similar bloodbath.
As far as asylum seekers go, they are a small but significant (~7%) part of the subsidized housing market.
When supply gets that constricted, and you, your elder parents or your kids can’t get any housing, crab mentality takes over. You desperately try to find housing, and any other also-lookers become adversaries.
None of this is the fault of those other people. The Dutch government basically tried to completely neo-liberate our housing market. Predictably, 15 years later it has ended up in absolute tatters, with special thanks to Stef Blok, a gaping asshole that glibly commented “I’m the only politician that can lay claim to having disbanded an entire ministry![1]”
[1] Ministerie van Volkshuisvesting (Housing)
Edit: there is a whole secondary shit sandwich of it having become virtually impossible to get a mortgage ever since the ECB raised interest. But the Dutch government has made having a mortgage financially much more attractive than renting. And our pension funds are deep into the real estate market, meaning the government can’t just decide to build massively to make housing prices implode.
> The Dutch government basically tried to completely neo-liberate our housing market.
So are the regulatory costs related to building new housing very low compared to someplace like Texas or Florida, then? If so, and if there’s clearly a lot of demand, why aren’t small Dutch businesses cashing in on the opportunity by building units at a rapid clip like their counterparts in Texas are?
Austin has a population density of 1200/km2. Amsterdam sits at 5300/km2. We also have massively higher quality urban planning than basically anywhere in the world, especially the US. Check the YouTube channel NotJustBikes, who coincidentally actually moved here from Texas.
I agree that build build build is the solution, but “just kill regulation and let the market fix it lol” doesn’t work. We tried that for the past 15 years and it has been an utter disaster. Even if we somehow stripped all but the barest safety regulations, all it would do is increase profit margin for speculators because there is a limited amount of constructions workers, and a bottleneck for training new workers.
One thing in terms of Dutch zoning regulations I do have a seething hatred for is the stymying of high rises. It might preserve the quaint old European city atmosphere for tourists but it is making a terrible housing problem even worse.
Where would they move to? I don't see them moving anywhere. The page says maybe France, but I think that's unlikely.. higher taxes there I believe and a different language.
A lot of dutch people already spend all their summer vacations here (along most of the beautiful and peaceful rivers and places of the French countryside) they know the place, the language will follow. And most educated French people talk some form of English.
Revenue Increase €27.56 billion (2023)[1]
Operating income Increase €9.042 billion (2023)[1]
Net income Increase €7.839 billion (2023)[1]
Total assets Increase €39.96 billion (2023)[1]
Total equity Increase €13.45 billion (2023)[1]
Number of employees 42,416 (2023)[1]
Realistically, is it possible for ASML to move in anything less than a decade?
I assume they have nearly as much secret sauce and know how in their processes as the chip foundries. Coupled with having to source completely new staff at another geography.
Edit: I guess if a nation state threw $X billions of dollars to bring the company to their shores, anything is possible.
> CEO Peter Wennink bluntly stated in January: “The consequences of limiting labor migration are large, we need those people to innovate. If we can't get those people here, we will go somewhere where we can grow.”
This makes no sense. If Dutch people built ASML in the first place, why do they suddenly need foreigners now? Or maybe it is just because they want to drive down the price of labor?
At the skill level ASML needs to recruit, Dutch candidates are already globally competitive. Being unable to recruit globally would cripple ASML because the Dutch people they can recruit would retain the ability to accept positions abroad. Building a company 50 years ago and staying competitive and growing half a century later are not comparable.
The complex patchwork of regulations, languages and governments makes it harder for companies like ASML to attract global talent and expand seamlessly compared to the US or China. Perhaps Europe's diversity is a liability in the global competition for cutting-edge semiconductor technology.
"ASML has expressed concerns that recent proposals to curb immigration, including limiting foreign students and ending tax brakes for highly skilled immigrants, will make it harder to attract talent."
It doesn't sound like too much diversity is what's causing ASML to want to leave.
Maybe Ive used the wrong word, if you read it with any other synonym instead of diversity it should read exactly in line with your quote. Especially the first sentence.
The problem in France is the same and the EU as a whole is exceptionally good at exporting its highly-skilled individuals while at the same time importing ultra-low-skilled workers. High-skilled foreigners? It's as if the EU wasn't interested at all by that.
So we get the worst outcome possible: making life hard for highly-skilled workers who'd like to come into the EU to work (the reason why ASML may have to move to greener pastures), non-attractive EU market for highly-skilled EU workers (many of which prefer to GTFO out of the EU) but then also opening wide-open the gates of the EU to ultra-low skilled immigrants (many of whom don't even want to work at all: they just want the benefits of the wellfare state).
It's easier to come into the EU yelling "political refugee, give me housing and monthly allowances oh and btw I don't want to work" (hundreds of NGOs are then out there to help these people get what they want) than to come into the EU saying politely "I've got two masters degrees, I want to work legally in the EU".
I agree with your comment about high-skilled individuals but your other comment about 'ultra' low skilled migrants is also 'a sad state of affair'. Refugees want to work, just as any other law abiding citizen. If you have ever met a refugee or volunteered at a shelter you would realise how difficult it is for them to obtain working rights (some are highly skilled too btw). It seems like your simpleton 'highly skilled' mind likes to roam hn to spread opinions that could have added substance, if you left out your preconceptions about 'ultra' low skilled people...
ASML has pointed out several problems with acquiring top global talent, chiefly among them the reduction of tax benefits for that talent, and the housing market (which hamstrings influx of international students whom can segue into ASML after their masters).
It’s not a threat of “do this or we will leave”, it is an indication of “we might have to relocate future growth if these roadblocks persist.”