Nexperia and Chinese Owner Wingtech Fight for Control in Dutch Court

Chipmaker Nexperia and Chinese Owner Wingtech Clash Over Control in Dutch Court

A high-stakes legal battle between semiconductor manufacturer Nexperia and its Chinese parent company Wingtech Technology has reached a critical stage in a Dutch court, drawing international attention and raising broader questions about technology, national security, and foreign ownership in Europe. As of 14 January 2026, the dispute highlights growing tensions between economic globalization and government efforts to protect strategic industries.

Nexperia, headquartered in the Netherlands, is a major producer of semiconductors used in automobiles, industrial equipment, and consumer electronics. The company plays a vital role in global supply chains, particularly for Europe’s automotive sector, where reliable chip supplies are essential. Nexperia is wholly owned by Wingtech Technology, one of China’s largest electronics manufacturers.

The conflict escalated after the Dutch government raised concerns over national security, arguing that Chinese ownership of a strategically important semiconductor company could pose long-term risks. Authorities expressed fears that sensitive technology, expertise, or production capacity could be transferred outside Europe, potentially undermining the region’s technological independence.

These concerns led to judicial intervention in Nexperia’s management structure. Dutch authorities supported temporary measures that limited Wingtech’s control over the company, citing governance issues and strategic vulnerabilities. As a result, parts of Nexperia’s leadership were placed under increased oversight, triggering a legal challenge from Wingtech.

During the latest court hearing, lawyers representing Nexperia’s European management argued that internal governance problems and shareholder pressure had disrupted operations. According to court submissions, uncertainty over control negatively affected production planning and contributed to supply chain disruptions. Industry analysts note that such instability worsens existing semiconductor shortages, particularly affecting European car manufacturers already struggling with chip availability.

Wingtech, however, strongly rejected these claims. The Chinese firm told the court that it had invested billions of dollars in Nexperia and that restricting its control violated fundamental investor rights. Wingtech maintained that the company operates as a global business and should not be penalized due to geopolitical tensions. Its legal team argued that political interference has damaged Nexperia’s competitiveness and delayed strategic decision-making.

Beyond the courtroom, the case has broader implications for Europe’s technology policy. Governments across the continent are increasingly scrutinizing foreign ownership in sensitive sectors such as semiconductors, artificial intelligence, and defense-related manufacturing. The Nexperia case is seen as a test of how far European states are willing to go to protect strategic industries while still promoting open investment.

The dispute has also affected relations between Europe and China. Business groups warn that excessive restrictions could discourage future investment, while security analysts counter that semiconductor production is too critical to leave vulnerable to external influence. This debate reflects a global trend in which chips are no longer viewed merely as commercial products but as strategic assets.

The Dutch court did not issue an immediate ruling on 14 January 2026, but observers expect the decision to have lasting consequences. The outcome could shape Nexperia’s future governance and set a precedent for how European courts handle similar cases involving foreign control of critical technology firms.

As the world becomes increasingly dependent on advanced semiconductors, the Nexperia-Wingtech dispute underscores how technology, law, and geopolitics are now deeply intertwined. The final verdict may influence not only one company’s future but also Europe’s broader approach to safeguarding its technological sovereignty.