Because the money isn’t a bailout, it’s to incentivize intel to do a financially suboptimal thing that the US finds strategically desirable. If building and ru

Because the money isn’t a bailout, it’s to incentivize intel to do a financially suboptimal thing that the US finds strategically desirable. If building and running the fab in Arizona versus Ireland is going to cost intel $8b more, the options are do nothing and don’t get the fab, or pay the difference. Even if they are doing stock buybacks it doesn’t mean you can force intel’s shareholders to take a $8b loss without compensation - that’s a clear takings clause violation.