The key facts

  • The investigation was launched by Richard Neal and Ron Wyden — minority leaders on the House Ways and Means Committee and the Senate Finance Committee
  • The letter to the Commerce Secretary argues that the tariff arrangement on H200 shipments to China looks like an unconstitutional export tax
  • Huang agreed to closed-door testimony before Republican committees after a subpoena threat

What Happened

Democrats in Congress have opened an investigation into how the Trump administration handled Nvidia chip sales to China. The investigation began on Thursday — the same day Nvidia removed its founder and CEO Jensen Huang from his position. He lost his post after admitting to an extramarital affair amid reports of a relationship with a woman accused of working for Chinese intelligence; he was later also accused of ties to employees of Nvidia itself. In parallel, Huang agreed to testify before another group of committees controlled by Republicans — they had previously threatened him with a subpoena if he did not appear voluntarily at a closed session.

The Essence of the Democrats' Complaints

The investigation was initiated by Richard Neal, the ranking Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee, and Ron Wyden, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee. As the minority, they can ask questions but cannot compel answers. In a letter to Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, they demand the preservation of documents related to the deal, which they consider dubious and, in their assertion, unlawful.

The 'Scheme' as the Letter's Authors Describe It

According to the letter's description, Trump agreed to sales of Nvidia H200 chips to China on the condition that the chips manufactured in Taiwan are first shipped to the US. Upon arrival, a tariff was imposed which, the letter asserts, 'effectively gave the administration a share of Nvidia's sales to China through what looks like an unconstitutional system of export taxes.' The Commerce Department under Lutnick then issued an export license. The revenue-sharing agreement itself was public: back in August 2025, Nvidia and AMD agreed to pay 15% of revenue from chip sales in China to the US government in exchange for licenses, as AP reported at the time.

Questions for the Commerce Department and the White House

The letter's authors ask why Lutnick continued to allow the company Megaspeed — a Singapore-based Nvidia customer that US officials suspect of funneling advanced chips into China — to purchase chips even after, as reported, intelligence informed him of suspicions regarding Alice Huang, the head of Megaspeed, and of Jensen Huang's connection with her. Also called into question is why the department, as reported, approved purchases by other Asian companies 'with no actual presence at the listed addresses.' Separately, the letter touches on Nvidia's donations to Trump's projects: the export deal was approved after Trump learned of Huang's 'compromising position,' and after Nvidia donated $26 million to the president's projects, including a ballroom. From this, the authors essentially ask whether Trump used knowledge of the affair to secure donations. Notably, in a '60 Minutes' interview that aired on Sunday, Trump described how he and his team threatened an unnamed AI company executive with prison, after which he 'changed completely.' The investigation is aimed primarily at the administration, not only at Nvidia and Huang.

Two Investigations and What Remains Unclear

This is already the second congressional investigation into the matter since the story of the affair with the alleged spy became known. The first is being led by a Republican group of chairs of the House committees on the Chinese Communist Party, Foreign Affairs, and Intelligence; it was to them that Huang, after his resignation, agreed to give closed-door testimony. It remains unclear whether the allegations of the scheme's unlawfulness and of pressure on Nvidia will be substantiated: the Democrats have only sent a request, and their powers as the minority are limited. The Commerce Department's response to the letter has also not been published.