‘Extortionary’ Intel Deal With US Must Be Voided, Suit Says (1)

Intel Corp.'s sale of a 10% stake to the federal government amounted to little more than an “extortionary” seizure on the orders of President Donald Trump, according to a lawsuit unsealed Wednesday that seeks to void the transaction.

A shareholder suing the chipmaker in Delaware’s Chancery Court called the deal illegal, saying CEO Lip-Bu Tan and other board members succumbed to “well-founded fears over their personal and professional relationships” when they signed off on the sale for “no meaningful consideration.” The suit names US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and his department as additional defendants.

Intel declined to comment on the lawsuit. The Commerce Department didn’t respond to requests for comment Wednesday or when the complaint was originally filed under seal March 5.

The unsealed filing also sharply criticizes Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, the white-shoe law firm that advised Intel on the transaction after reaching its own $100 million pro bono deal with the Trump administration in an effort to head off a punitive executive order. Skadden, which isn’t named as a defendant, didn’t respond to requests for comment.

“In extraordinary and expedited fashion, the board, operating under the shadow of the president’s threats, and advised by legal counsel that itself was conflicted due to its pro bono promises to the president, caved to the government’s extortion,” the suit says. “The resulting contract is therefore void for illegality and must be cancelled.”

The unorthodox stock sale in August reflected the increasingly heavy-handed economic approach deployed by President Donald Trump, whose boasts about dealmaking prowess have long formed a centerpiece of his political identity. The US Supreme Court last month rejected his declaration of an economic emergency justifying broad import tariffs, prompting the president to swiftly seek other means of imposing them.

At the time of the Intel transaction, the Trump administration characterized a stake in the beleaguered semiconductor firm—America’s largest—as a matter of national security. The Pentagon later moved to designate Anthropic PBC a “supply-chain risk” after the AI giant pushed for some guardrails around military use of its technology.

‘I PAID ZERO’

Public filings submitted alongside the sealed complaint last week previewed its allegations. Like the suit itself, they cited Trump’s online post stating that “I PAID ZERO FOR INTEL, ITS WORTH APPROXIMATELY 11 BILLION DOLLARS.”

The supposed deal price allegedly came from billions the government was already set to pay Intel in connection with preexisting research and development grants. But even if there had been a valid payment, the transaction would have been illegal anyway, according to the partially redacted complaint.

“In a country based on private enterprise, only Congress may authorize the president or a federal agency to become a partial owner of a publicly traded company, and Congress has not done that,” the suit says.

It also targets sections of the stock agreement pledging the government’s support for Intel’s sitting directors in any board election. Those provisions created a further conflict of interest by giving Intel’s directors a unique benefit not shared by other shareholders, according to the complaint.

In addition to an order canceling the deal, the lawsuit seeks “damages in an amount to be proved at trial.”

The Intel shareholder, Richard Paisner, is represented by Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hirzel LLP and GM Law.

The case is Paisner v. Tan, Del. Ch., No. 2026-0307, 3/11/26.