By Kate Koger, IPC public affairs coordinator and Chris Mitchell, IPC vice president, global government relations

Amid the “chip war” tensions between the U.S. and China, Europe has found itself in a surprising transformative era in electronics manufacturing. The recent groundbreaking of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co.'s (TSMC) €10 billion plant in eastern Germany is a critical development in this effort. With Germany leading the charge, the European Union (EU) aims to position itself as a major player in the global electronics industry by addressing vulnerabilities and creating a robust electronics manufacturing ecosystem. 

This momentum aligns with the findings of IPC's recent white paper, "Securing the European Union's Electronics Ecosystem," highlighting the importance of strengthening Europe’s electronics supply chain across all levels, from silicon to systems. As Europe works to build a self-reliant and sustainable ecosystem, the TSMC investment is only the beginning of what could be a wave of industrial advancements.

The TSMC plant in Germany marks the company’s first European site, a milestone for TSMC and the EU. The timing is no coincidence. In a world reshaped by COVID-19, the global chip shortage exposed the fragility of supply chains. Semiconductor production became a top priority for governments as industries worldwide faced major disruptions. The global geopolitical climate, characterized by pressure between the United States and China, further highlighted Europe’s vulnerabilities in relying on external suppliers for critical technologies. The establishment of TSMC's German plant is a signal to other global players that Europe is serious about becoming a semiconductor hub. German carmakers such as Volkswagen AG and Porsche AG have expressed interest in boosting domestic chip production. This could lead to further investment from other tech giants and automotive leaders, accelerating Europe's path toward becoming a semiconductor powerhouse.

Europe has set its sights on a lofty target: by 2030, the EU aims to produce 20 percent of the world’s semiconductors. Achieving this will require significant investments and policy support. The strategic focus on semiconductors is part of a broader push to strengthen Europe's electronics manufacturing ecosystem across the entire value chain. As outlined in IPC's white paper, Europe’s share of global printed circuit board (PCB) production has dwindled in the last two decades, and the region risks falling behind in other critical areas of electronics manufacturing. Since 2000, global PCB production has more than doubled. However, during this time, Europe's share of global PCB manufacturing has plummeted from 13.8 percent to just 2.2 percent. This decline threatens the competitiveness of original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), original design manufacturers (ODMs), and electronics manufacturing services (EMS) companies, all of which are key drivers of innovation and economic growth.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz emphasized that semiconductors are essential for Europe’s future technologies, but the region cannot remain dependent on other parts of the world for these vital components. His government has committed €20 billion to strengthen the country’s semiconductor industry, including a €5 billion subsidy for the TSMC fab in Dresden and €10 billion in aid for Intel's planned plant in Magdeburg. While semiconductors are critical, focusing solely on them neglects other key areas of the electronics ecosystem, like PCB production, EMS, and advanced packaging. Strengthening these industry segments is essential for building a resilient European electronics industry beyond just the manufacturing of chips.

For TSMC and other companies to be successful with European operations, the region needs to adopt a "silicon to systems" perspective that covers the entire lifecycle of electronics manufacturing beyond just the chip.  At the moment, many European manufacturers lack the resources to modernize their facilities to meet the increasing complexity of semiconductor packages and electronic assembly. The EU's commitment to the semiconductor industry, supported by national governments and private sector investments, is a promising start. However, there is still much work to be done to ensure Europe’s electronics manufacturing ecosystem remains competitive and resilient in the face of global challenges.

• Read more about TSMC’s new plant here.
• Find IPC’s EU Electronics Ecosystem white paper here.
• Join our call to action.

By Kelly Scanlon, IPC lead sustainability strategist

On September 25, Anthesis Group, EarthShift Global, and IPC co-hosted a discussion with systems engineers and life cycle assessors on data challenges for circularizing electronics. We met at the annual American Center for Life Cycle Assessment (ACLCA) conference. The 90-minute session “There’s No End to a Circle…” covered several perspectives on electronics circularity challenges that stem from the lack of reliable, current, and secure industry data.

Since May 2024, IPC has engaged with stakeholders, including many electronics manufacturing industry members, on circularity for electronics. We held a webinar, “Enhancing Circularity: Opportunities for IC and Other Component Reuse,” in May with EarthShift Global, a four-hour workshop in June on circularity at the Electronics Goes Green conference in Berlin with iNEMI, webinars in July and August with several partners including iNEMI, imec, and ACLCA, and we are planning another in-person event at the eSummit in Austin at the end of October.

Collectively, IPC, Anthesis, EarthShift Global, and iNEMI have engaged with hundreds of industry stakeholders during these recent events regarding circularity challenges and issues for the electronics industry. We understand the greatest of these challenges include the lack of data, the lack of a clear definition or description of what circularity means for the electronics manufacturing value chain, the lack of economic incentives to circularize, and the lack of workforce awareness about circularity topics and related policy and technology drivers.

We hear from electronics industry members that the lack of data needed for disclosures, reporting obligations, and data exchange with suppliers and customers is of considerable concern. This lack stems from the complex electronics products manufactured using various processes by multiple tiers of suppliers and customers across many geographic regions operating with business-sensitive or proprietary information. The complexity of final products includes assembled printed circuit boards, the electronic components within them, the integrated circuits (ICs) mounted on the boards, and the materials essential for the ICs.

Electronics companies may be interested in life cycle assessment, circularity, and measuring product carbon footprint. Still, they must rely on suppliers to provide useable manufacturing data, operating data, and information about end-of-life options.

To address these data challenges, we want to understand the types of data needed by diverse electronics industry stakeholders, the availability of existing solutions to address these data needs, and ideas for new solutions that can address barriers to data generation and data gathering applicable to the circularization of electronics. During the 90-minute session at ACLCA, we hosted three break-out groups of approximately 10 participants each. We asked them to help identify existing solutions and ideas for new ones, and this is what they said is needed.

• Standards for products data sheets that support digital product passports and reporting disclosure obligations.
• Increased visibility into the mass or materials in a given product.
• Emissions data shared between users of a product to enhance allocation of emissions and incentivize reuse.
• Improved data security assurances or make it easier to delete or erase data to address a major barrier to returning electronics.
• Address software and security update cadence to ensure they do not thwart the electronics’ life.
• Design for circularity and shift practice of design for obsolescence to design with end in mind (or reuse, repair, refurbishment) in mind.
• Refurbishing centers to resell products and devices, establish a marketplace to find recoverers, and buy and sell recovered electronics (e.g., chips, boards).
• Incorporate the variations in business models for the global north and south (e.g., more costly to refurbish and reuse in the north versus south).
• Utilize software to optimize energy efficiency; software dictates to the ICs what is needed and therefore can be used to capture information about use.
• Use telemetry to collect and transmit data to a repository to analyze and monitor operations.
• Describe and document uncertainty in the industry data available for use in models, and identify the difference between data for coarse versus detailed models.

We welcome other industry members and stakeholders to participate in this ongoing conversation about solutions that help us clear the hurdles to circularity for electronics. This is a big topic that has many aspects, but we can work to define a specific problem and right-sized solution, whether as a new tool, database, industry standard, workforce education and training, or advocacy with policymakers.

What challenges do you see related to electronics' circularity? We want to hear your ideas. We are convening working groups and welcome your participation in identifying solutions and helping to create and implement them.

Contact Kelly Scanlon, IPC’s lead sustainability strategist to get involved.

Special thanks to Callan Glover and Caroline Gaudreault, life cycle assessment experts from Anthesis Group, and Lise Laurin, CEO of EarthShift Global for their collaboration and support of the session at ACLCA and continued partnership on advancing circularity for electronics industry members.

by Chris Mitchell, IPC vice president, global government relations

IPC extends its congratulations to TTM Technologies on securing $30M from the DoD's Manufacturing Capability Expansion and Investment Prioritization (MCEIP) office to equip a new 200,000+ square foot facility in Syracuse, New York. The new facility will dramatically increase domestic production of ultra-high density (uHDI) printed circuit boards (PCBs).

Those who know electronics know how significant this award is to U.S. technology leadership and national security. 

Here’s why.

1) The U.S. lacks robust domestic uHDI capabilities which undercuts the nation’s ability to arm its warfighters with the latest and greatest technologies. This is not a future concern; this is a today problem. Leading defense companies cannot easily use the most cutting-edge chips because they can't source a uHDI PCB domestically to accommodate those chips. The result: defense manufacturers are adding complexity or, more worryingly, “dumbing down” their designs to work with the PCBs that are available domestically. This TTM project is helping to solve that problem, and in so doing, it's bridging the chasm that exists in the U.S. between manufacturing chips and building systems. 

2) Kudos to MCEIP Director Anthony Di Stasio and his team. They and their colleagues across DoD continue to demonstrate they understand the electronics supply chain far better than their civilian peers. While other federal agencies seem to be stuck in a silicon-only mindset, DoD is more wisely focused on making investments that will allow the U.S. to both build the most sophisticated chips AND integrate them into the most sophisticated electronics systems. The MCEIP award to TTM is a great example of silicon-to-systems thinking, and more agencies need to follow DoD's lead.

3) This award comes on the heels of great work by IPC and its subsidiary, the U.S. Partnership for Assured Electronics (USPAE). Working with industry, USPAE helped to define the uHDI challenge facing our defense industrial base. DoD officials internalized the findings of this report, and the TTM award indicates DoD is making investments accordingly.  

Meanwhile, securing funding for PCBs in the Defense Production Act has been IPC’s highest priority in Washington, and our work is bearing fruit!

In February, Congress passed an FY24 omnibus spending bill that largely accepted the more robust House funding levels for DPA account. IPC led the advocacy in support of the DPA account with industry letters and countless Hill meetings. Without the higher funding level, the TTM award might not have been possible. 

Now we’re focused on ensuring that this award is not the last. To that end, our work continues on Capitol Hill. In August, the Senate Appropriations Committee in its FY25 defense spending bill directed DoD to allocate $45 million specifically for PCBs. IPC fought for this funding and is now leading the charge to persuade House appropriators to adopt the Senate language. These are real dollars and serve as a downpayment on renewing U.S. leadership in electronics manufacturing. Funding could drop to $0 without it. You can support these efforts; click this link to send a message to your U.S. representative. It’ll only take a minute, but it will make a difference. 

There is no one silver-bullet solution to rebuilding U.S. electronics manufacturing. Instead, the industry must be active on multiple fronts to pursue strategic wins where and when we can. Each win makes our industry more visible, creating greater opportunities in the long-term for transformational change. 

This is IPC’s approach—engagement on all fronts. I’m thrilled that we are having success, and that this success is being fueled by our collaboration with electronics manufacturers across the country.  

by Matt Kelly, IPC Chief Technology Officer

In the past, “packaging” semiconductors simply meant protecting them from stresses such as heat and vibration. Today, "advanced packaging” means putting more functional chips into unified packages that boost the power and performance of the overall system.  

"Advanced packaging” has been dubbed “the new king” of innovation in electronics -- at the heart of cutting-edge technologies like AI, self-driving vehicles, 5G and 6G, and quantum computing. 

So, what does “advanced packaging” mean in the context of semiconductors and electronics manufacturing? And why is it so important to the future of the world? Those are the questions answered in simple language and imagery in a new 90-second video released by IPC. Check it out here: www.ipc.org/advancedpackaging.

The new video lays out the need to prioritize investments in advanced packaging to drive innovation, national security, and resilience. It features easy-to-understand animations: one illustrating what advanced packaging is, and another showing how it fits into the supply chains of crucial products as varied as military jets and smartphones.  IPC thanks member company Intel – a global leader in advanced packaging – for providing some of the imagery used in the new video. 

IPC has a long record of advocating for the wider electronics supply chain, including advanced packaging, printed circuit boards, and IC substrates, without which semiconductors cannot function. Just last week, IPC's Technology Solutions group released a new white paper on "Advanced Packaging to Board Level Integration — Needs and Challenges."

Please feel free to share this video and help us educate others on the importance of advanced packaging in electronics manufacturing.