# Apple works around the global chip shortage by turning to China

> Apple plans to launch as many as five new iPhone models between the second half of 2026 and the first half of

- Author: Maxime Marquette
- Publisher: MadMax (https://mad-max.co)
- Section: Analysis
- Published: 2026-07-06
- Canonical URL: https://mad-max.co/en/article/apple-contourne-la-penurie-mondiale-de-puces-en-misant-sur-la-chine

## Key takeaways

- Apple plans up to five new iPhone models between the second half of 2026 and the first half of 2027, but a DRAM and NAND shortage threatens production.
- DRAM contract prices reportedly rose 55 to 60 percent in Q1 2026, as Samsung, SK Hynix and Micron shifted output toward AI high-bandwidth memory.
- Tim Cook reportedly called the shortage a "hundred-year flood," and the Mac mini reportedly rose from 599 to 799 US dollars in May.
- The talks reportedly cover only devices for the Chinese market, but lawmakers fear the line would blur, and Rep. John Moolenaar called the approach a "serious mistake."
- CXMT is reportedly preparing a large IPO, and the columnist notes the two firms hold only 5 to 10 percent of the global memory market and lack advanced HBM capacity.

## Introduction: how a memory shortage is rewriting Apple's strategy

### An announcement that speaks volumes about the state of the semiconductor market

Apple plans to launch as many as **five new iPhone models** between the second half of 2026 and the first half of 2027, a particularly aggressive release cadence for the Cupertino giant. According to information reported in early July by **CNBC**, this ambitious strategy is running into a major industrial obstacle: a **global memory chip shortage** hitting the entire tech sector.

To work around this supply crisis, **Apple** is reportedly negotiating directly with two Chinese semiconductor manufacturers, **CXMT** and **YMTC**, both of which appear on a Pentagon list identifying companies deemed linked to the Chinese military. If confirmed at scale, this decision would mark a significant turning point in the supply chain of the world's most valuable company.

### Why this story deserves a close read

This isn't a simple logistical adjustment between suppliers. It's a **concrete illustration** of Western tech industry's persistent dependence on **China**, at the very moment Washington is trying to limit strategic transfers to Beijing. Total iPhone production for 2026 is expected to exceed **220 million units**, a figure that gives a sense of the industrial stakes involved.

This situation also illustrates a broader tension between the commercial imperatives of a publicly traded company and America's **national security** priorities. **Apple** has to deliver products to its customers, but it does so in a geopolitical context where every sourcing decision can potentially become a political matter.

*Watching Apple, the ultimate symbol of Western capitalism, negotiate with Chinese suppliers blacklisted by the Pentagon says a lot about the real technological balance of power today. The West likes to think it holds the upper hand against China, but the industrial reality tells a more nuanced, more uncomfortable story.*

## The memory shortage: a crisis born of AI's insatiable demand

### An unprecedented price spike in a single year

The current **shortage** of DRAM and NAND chips didn't come out of nowhere. According to data reported by **TechWireAsia** in mid-June, contract prices for DRAM memory jumped **55 to 60 percent** in the first quarter of 2026 alone. This sharp rise stems from a now-familiar phenomenon: the global rush toward artificial intelligence infrastructure, which consumes massive quantities of high-performance chips.

The world's three memory giants, **Samsung**, **SK Hynix**, and **Micron**, which together control more than **90 percent** of the DRAM market, have gradually redirected their production toward high-bandwidth memory, or HBM, destined for AI data centers. This strategic reallocation has mechanically shrunk the supply available for consumer products like smartphones and computers.

### Tim Cook calls it a historic crisis

**Apple** CEO **Tim Cook** reportedly described this shortage as a **"hundred-year flood,"** a striking phrase to describe a supply shock he considers exceptional in both scale and duration. The fallout is already visible in prices: the Mac mini reportedly went from 599 to 799 US dollars in May, an increase directly attributable to the cost of memory components.

**Apple** has not yet passed this increase on to the price of the **iPhone** itself, unlike the Mac, iPad, and Vision Pro, whose prices have climbed by as much as **20 percent**. But the new models expected in September 2026 should, according to several analysts, be more expensive to produce, which suggests upward pressure on future retail prices.

*Let's put it plainly: the global race for artificial intelligence has very concrete consequences for ordinary consumers' wallets. Every giant data center built to train an ever more powerful AI model takes away memory that could otherwise go into the phone in your pocket.*

## CXMT and YMTC, two names that make Washington uneasy

### Companies under scrutiny for years

**CXMT**, which specializes in DRAM memory, and **YMTC**, which specializes in NAND memory, both appear on the so-called **Section 1260H** list maintained by the US Department of Defense, which catalogs Chinese companies deemed linked to Beijing's military apparatus. This listing does not constitute a legal ban on private transactions with these companies, but it represents a considerable reputational risk for any Western company that publicly associates with them.

YMTC reportedly holds about **13 percent** of the global NAND memory market, while **CXMT** controls close to **8 percent** of the DRAM market. These market shares, though minority stakes compared to the Korean and American giants, are enough to make them unavoidable players in a shortage where every available chip counts.

### Tim Cook reportedly lobbied Washington personally

According to information relayed by **Bloomberg** and picked up by **Yahoo Finance** on July 1, Tim Cook personally pressed US Treasury Secretary **Scott Bessent** for regulatory assurances before finalizing any negotiation with the two Chinese manufacturers. This move shows just how much Apple is trying to secure political cover for a commercial decision that could otherwise be perceived as a breach of American national security priorities.

**Apple's** main fear is reportedly that Washington could escalate the situation by adding **CXMT** and YMTC to the Commerce Department's so-called **Entity List**, which would impose a total and binding trade ban, far more severe than the current Pentagon listing.

*A company the size of Apple having to beg Washington for an informal green light before dealing with Chinese suppliers says a great deal about the lingering ambiguity of American policy toward Beijing. You can't claim to be containing China technologically while leaving the door open to this kind of accommodation.*

## Negotiations reportedly limited to the Chinese market, but the line stays blurry

### A strategic distinction between the domestic Chinese market and the global market

According to available information, **Apple's** negotiations with **CXMT** and **YMTC** would exclusively concern devices intended for the domestic Chinese market, not models sold in North America or Europe. This distinction would, in theory, let Apple limit the political exposure of its decision while still meeting massive demand from the Chinese market, one of the largest and most competitive smartphone markets in the world.

The specialized outlet **9to5Mac** corroborated this information on July 1, citing converging sources from the **Financial Times** and **Bloomberg**. This convergence of several respected financial outlets lends real weight to these revelations, even though Apple has made no official public comment on the negotiations.

### A trade line that's hard to hold in practice

In a globalized **supply chain** like **Apple's**, the line between chips destined for the **Chinese market** and chips destined for the rest of the world remains, in practice, difficult to guarantee airtight. Components purchased for one product line can, depending on production needs, get reallocated to other markets, which complicates any promise of strict separation.

It's precisely this ambiguity that worries some American lawmakers, who fear that even a limited opening to monitored Chinese suppliers could gradually spread across **Apple's** entire **production** chain, including devices sold to American **consumers**.

*Claiming that an airtight trade wall will exist between chips destined for China and those destined for the rest of the world strikes me as wishful thinking more than a realistic industrial guarantee. Supply chains don't operate like sealed compartments.*

## The political reaction in Washington was swift

### A member of Congress calls it a "serious mistake"

Republican Representative **John Moolenaar**, who chairs the House select committee on strategic competition with the Chinese Communist Party, called **Apple's** approach a **"serious mistake."** This public criticism illustrates the growing tension between the commercial interests of major American tech companies and the security priorities championed by certain lawmakers in Washington.

This reaction isn't isolated. Secretary of State **Marco Rubio**, back when he still sat in the Senate in 2022, had already publicly opposed American companies sourcing from **YMTC**, citing national security risks tied to **China's** semiconductor manufacturing capabilities.

### A structural dilemma for the entire American industry

This dilemma isn't unique to **Apple**. The entire American tech industry finds itself caught between two contradictory imperatives: reduce its strategic dependence on **China**, as many **national security** officials demand, while still having to work with an industrial reality in which China remains an unavoidable player in global semiconductor manufacturing.

This structural contradiction is likely to repeat itself with other Western tech companies facing similar shortages, as long as alternative **production** **capacities**, particularly in the United States and Europe, remain insufficient to meet demand.

*We can't demand that Apple single-handedly solve a structural problem that Western governments let fester for years by failing to invest massively in their own semiconductor production capacity. The responsibility is widely shared.*

## The industrial scale of the 2026-2027 iPhone plan is staggering

### As many as five distinct models in under a year

The product roadmap revealed by CNBC is particularly ambitious: Apple plans to launch a **foldable iPhone**, with a production target revised upward to around **10 million units** for this year, compared to an initial forecast of 7 to 8 million. Also expected in the first half of 2027 are a classic **iPhone 18** as well as a new model called the **iPhone Air**.

**Apple** has reportedly already secured the components needed for roughly **80 million smartphones** for the second half of 2026, a figure that speaks to the company's ability to mobilize its supplier relationships even during an acute **shortage**, at a time when other manufacturers are struggling to secure their supplies.

### Apple's Chinese rivals, meanwhile, must scale back their ambitions

A telling sign of the balance of power created by this crisis: rival Chinese manufacturers like **Xiaomi**, **Oppo**, and **Vivo** reportedly had to cut their combined production targets below **100 million units**, unable to secure enough memory components. This confirms that Apple's size and negotiating power give it a major competitive edge in managing this global shortage.

Total iPhone **production** for 2026 is thus expected to exceed **220 million units**, a volume that, given today's supply constraints, represents a remarkable industrial achievement and confirms **Apple's** dominant position in the global high-end smartphone market.

*Apple's ability to secure components where its Chinese rivals fail illustrates a simple reality: purchasing power and supplier relationships built over decades matter as much, if not more, than geographic proximity to semiconductor plants.*

## CXMT prepares a historic stock listing amid the turmoil

### An IPO that could be the biggest in years

Amid an already tense backdrop, **CXMT** is reportedly preparing what could become the largest initial public offering in mainland **China** in several years. This major financial move would come precisely as the company finds itself at the center of sensitive negotiations with **Apple**, potentially strengthening its financial and industrial position at a pivotal moment.

Such a listing would let **CXMT** raise substantial capital to accelerate its research and development investments, aiming to close the technological gap with the Korean and American giants of **memory**, particularly in the most advanced segments like high-bandwidth memory.

### A technological gap that nonetheless remains real

The scale of the threat posed by **CXMT** and **YMTC** deserves some nuance. According to available analyses, these two Chinese companies collectively hold only **5 to 10 percent** of the global memory market, and more importantly, they still lack advanced manufacturing capacity in high-bandwidth memory, the most strategically important segment for artificial intelligence.

This technological limitation means that, for now, **CXMT** and **YMTC** aren't a full alternative to the established giants, but rather a stopgap that lets companies like **Apple** fill occasional needs during an acute shortage, particularly for mid-range components.

*We shouldn't give in to easy alarmism: China hasn't yet closed its technological gap in the most strategic memory segments. But it would be equally unwise to underestimate the speed at which Beijing is investing to close that gap.*

## The concrete consequences for Western consumers

### Prices likely to climb on upcoming models

For the North American or European consumer, this **memory** crisis will very likely translate into price increases on the next **iPhone** models expected in September 2026. While **Apple** has so far avoided passing the rising cost of components on to the iPhone itself, several industry analysts believe this restraint won't be able to last indefinitely given the ongoing pressure on production costs.

This situation illustrates a broader phenomenon: the global race for **artificial intelligence**, which seems to unfold in data centers and research labs, has very tangible repercussions on the **price** of everyday tech products, from smartphones to laptops.

### A structural dependence that raises questions about Western resilience

Beyond device prices, this affair raises a more fundamental question about **Western industrial resilience** in the face of globalized supply chains. If even **Apple**, the best-capitalized and most influential company in the tech sector, has to work with Chinese suppliers under **Pentagon** scrutiny to keep production running, that reveals a structural vulnerability that goes well beyond Apple's case alone.

This vulnerability reinforces the growing calls, in **Washington** and European capitals alike, to invest massively in **semiconductor** **production** capacity on Western soil, in order to reduce this dependence over the long term rather than managing it case by case with every new supply crisis.

*This crisis should serve as a definitive wake-up call for the West: you can't claim to want technological sovereignty while continuing, year after year, to depend on the very suppliers you officially claim to be strategically containing.*

## The broader context of the tech rivalry between the West and China

### Semiconductors, the nerve center of twenty-first-century tech warfare

This affair fits into a broader context of technological rivalry between the United States and **China**, where **semiconductors** occupy a central place. **Washington** has, in recent years, multiplied export restrictions on advanced chipmaking technology to China, seeking to slow Beijing's technological and military ambitions.

But this **Apple** affair demonstrates the limits of that containment strategy: as long as Western demand for affordable electronics remains this strong, and as long as alternative production **capacities** remain insufficient, Western companies will keep turning, even partially, to Chinese suppliers to meet their needs.

### China, a systemic rival the West cannot ignore

Let's not mince words: **China** remains today one of the greatest strategic challenges for the **West**, alongside Russia, Iran, and North Korea. Its ability to mobilize colossal industrial resources, including through companies formally linked to its military apparatus, must remain front and center in Western concerns about economic and technological security.

This vigilance, however, must not turn into a complete paralysis of legitimate trade, at the risk of hurting Western companies more than their Chinese competitors, who continue to enjoy near-total access to the **global market** for electronic components.

*The rivalry with China won't be won through indignant press releases in Congress, but through massive, sustained investment in Western production capacity. As long as that industrial effort is missing, situations like Apple's will keep repeating themselves.*

## What this affair reveals about the fragility of global supply chains

### A lesson from the pandemic that wasn't fully learned

The COVID-19 pandemic had already revealed, several years ago, the extreme fragility of globalized **semiconductor** supply chains. Yet this new **shortage** driven by **artificial intelligence** demand shows that the lessons of that crisis have not been fully absorbed by Western governments, which continue to depend heavily on a small number of suppliers concentrated in Asia.

This extreme geographic concentration of **semiconductor** production, spread across South Korea, Taiwan, and **China**, constitutes a major systemic risk for the entire Western tech economy, a risk that the current **memory** crisis only makes more visible and more urgent to address.

### Ongoing Western investments remain insufficient given the urgency

Despite initiatives like the American CHIPS Act or European **semiconductor** revival programs, Western production **capacities** will still need several years before they can truly compete with current Asian production scale. This industrial reality demands a form of strategic patience, while maintaining pressure to accelerate these structural investments.

Until then, companies like **Apple** will keep navigating between immediate commercial imperatives and longer-term **national security** demands, a balancing act that will only grow more complex as tech rivalry between the West and **China** intensifies.

*We're paying today the price of decades of careless industrial offshoring. Rebuilding Western technological sovereignty will take time, but every additional year of delay only deepens our collective vulnerability to strategic rivals.*

## Western tech companies face an increasingly difficult strategic choice

### Between commercial pragmatism and geopolitical responsibility

**Apple's** case illustrates a dilemma other Western tech giants will also have to confront in the months and years ahead: how far can commercial pragmatism go before it becomes a form of complacency toward a systemic rival designated as such by its own government?

There's no simple answer to this question. It requires an ongoing dialogue between companies, which must answer to their shareholders and customers, and governments, which must defend **national security** interests that are sometimes hard to reconcile with the realities of the **global market**.

### A precedent that could set the tone for the industry

If **Apple** manages to finalize its negotiations with **CXMT** and **YMTC** without facing major regulatory sanctions from Washington, this precedent could encourage other Western tech companies facing similar shortages to follow the same path, further deepening interdependence between Western and Chinese supply chains.

Conversely, if **Washington** decides to sanction this move harshly, it would send a clear signal to the entire industry that tolerance for this kind of commercial accommodation with monitored Chinese suppliers has now reached its limit.

*This Apple case will become, whether we like it or not, a textbook example. How Washington chooses to respond will shape the rules of the game for the entire Western tech industry as it confronts China.*

## Internal governance challenges at Apple amid growing pressure

### A board under shareholder scrutiny

**Apple's** leadership has to manage contradictory pressures coming from multiple directions: its shareholders demand continued growth and rigorous cost management, its customers expect innovative products delivered on the announced timeline, while certain American policymakers scrutinize every one of its sourcing decisions through the lens of **national security**.

This situation places **Apple's** board and executive leadership, led by **Tim Cook**, in a particularly delicate position, where every commercial decision now carries a geopolitical dimension that goes well beyond the usual purely financial considerations.

### Transparency, a balancing act for the company

**Apple** has made no official public comment confirming the exact scope of these negotiations with **CXMT** and **YMTC**, leaving a degree of uncertainty about the precise details of this potential deal. This discretion, typical of Apple on supply-chain matters, nonetheless fuels speculation and criticism from those who believe the company should be more transparent about its relationships with sensitive suppliers.

This relative opacity is in itself a legitimate concern for observers closely following national technology security issues, independent of the precise content of the ongoing negotiations.

*Apple's silence on this matter reassures no one. A company of this scale, whose sourcing decisions carry real geopolitical consequences, should in my view show more transparency toward the public and regulators.*

## What this story teaches us about the future of the semiconductor industry

### A shortage that could last longer than expected

Nothing suggests, at this stage, that the global **memory** chip **shortage** will ease quickly. As long as demand for **artificial intelligence** infrastructure keeps growing at its current pace, pressure on high-bandwidth memory production capacity will remain intense, continuing to divert industrial resources away from consumer products.

This reality suggests that situations similar to **Apple's**, where Western companies must work with controversial Chinese suppliers to keep **production** running, could multiply in the coming months, potentially affecting other consumer electronics giants.

### A wake-up call for the entire Western tech ecosystem

This affair should serve as a wake-up call for the entire Western tech ecosystem, from governments to private companies, about the urgency of building more resilient supply chains that are less dependent on a small number of suppliers geographically concentrated in high-risk geopolitical zones.

Western technological **resilience** won't be built through a single spectacular announcement, but through an accumulation of patient, sustained investment in research, skilled workforce training, and advanced manufacturing **capacities** on Western soil.

*This memory crisis is probably just a preview of what awaits us if the West doesn't take seriously, starting now, the need to rebuild genuine industrial sovereignty in critical technologies.*

## The murky role of middlemen and brokers in this strained supply chain

### A gray market for memory that thrives during shortages

Beyond the direct negotiations between **Apple** and Chinese manufacturers, this global **DRAM** and **NAND memory** shortage has also fueled a gray market of brokers and middlemen who resell components at heavily inflated prices. This phenomenon, well known in the electronics industry from previous shortages, further complicates the real traceability of components that end up in devices sold to Western consumers.

Several industry analysts worry that this secondary market's opacity could allow chips made by companies like **CXMT** or **YMTC** to end up, indirectly and without clear labeling, in devices sold outside the **Chinese market**, which would make any promise of strict geographic separation largely theoretical.

### Western distributors, also caught in the middle

Major Western electronics distributors and assemblers, beyond Apple's case alone, must also cope with this **shortage** by diversifying their sources of supply, sometimes at the cost of similar compromises on the exact origin of the **memory** components integrated into their finished products.

This industrial reality, rarely exposed in the open, deserves greater attention from Western regulators, who are still struggling to enforce **full traceability** of **semiconductor** supply chains, despite it being presented as a strategic priority for years.

*This gray zone of the supply chain deserves more public attention than it currently gets. As long as component traceability remains this murky, promises of geographic separation between markets will remain largely theoretical.*

## Conclusion: an affair that goes far beyond Apple's case alone

### A revealing look at Western contradictions toward China

The affair surrounding **Apple's** negotiations with **CXMT** and **YMTC** illustrates, with rare clarity, the deep contradictions running through the economic and technological relationship between the West and China. On one side, firm political rhetoric about the need to contain China's technological rise; on the other, commercial realities that push even the world's most powerful companies to work with suppliers their own government deems sensitive.

This contradiction won't be resolved through rhetorical posturing, but through concrete, sustained investment in Western industrial **resilience**, the only durable path to reducing this structural **dependence** without sacrificing the competitiveness of Western tech companies on the global stage.

### What to watch in the coming weeks

The coming weeks should bring more clarity on the outcome of these negotiations, particularly on whether Washington will choose to sanction this move or tolerate it implicitly. The US Commerce Department's response, particularly regarding any potential addition of **CXMT** and **YMTC** to the Entity List, will serve as a key indicator of just how firm American policy toward technological **China** really is.

The launch of new **iPhone** models in fall 2026, with their potentially higher **prices**, will also offer an early concrete glimpse of the final impact of this **memory** crisis on Western consumers' wallets.

*This story of iPhones and Chinese chips sounds technical, almost anecdotal. It isn't. It tells, better than many political speeches could, the real state of the technological balance of power between the West and China in this year of 2026.*

**By Maxime Marquette, columnist**

## Columnist's transparency note

### Editorial stance

I am not a journalist but a **columnist and analyst**. My expertise lies in observing and analysing the geopolitical, economic and strategic dynamics that shape our world. My work is to take political strategies apart, to understand global economic movements, to put the decisions of international actors in context and to offer analytical perspectives on the changes that are redefining our societies.

I do not claim the cold objectivity of traditional journalism, which stops at reporting facts. **I claim analytical clarity**, rigorous interpretation and a deep understanding of the complex issues that concern us all. My role is to give meaning to the facts, to place them in their historical and strategic context, and to offer a critical reading of events.

### Method and sources

This text keeps the basic distinction between **verified facts and interpretive analysis**. The rule never changes: a factual claim is published only when a verifiable source supports it, and the sources this article actually used are listed under **Sources**, never here.

**Primary source families** used by the publication, when the story has them: official statements from governments and international institutions, public statements by political leaders, reports from intergovernmental organisations, dispatches from recognised international news agencies.

**Secondary source families**: specialised publications, internationally recognised news media, analyses from established research institutions, reports from industry organisations.

When an article cites statistical, economic or geopolitical data, it comes from the institutions that produce it (intergovernmental organisations, central banks, national statistics offices), and the exact institution is named under **Sources**.

### Nature of the analysis

The analyses, interpretations and perspectives in the analytical sections of this article are a **critical, contextual synthesis** based on the information available, the trends observed and the expert comments cited in the sources consulted.

My role is to interpret these facts, to set them in the context of today's geopolitical and economic dynamics, and to give them a coherent meaning within the larger story of the changes shaping our time. These analyses reflect expertise built through continuous observation of international affairs and an understanding of the strategic mechanisms that drive global actors.

This article describes a documented state of affairs on its publication date, not a prediction: later developments may shift its outlook. No update is promised in advance; when an article is corrected or completed, the change is dated in the text.

## Sources

### Primary sources

- CNBC — Apple foldable iPhone production, memory shortage, China chipmakers CXMT YMTC, 2 juillet 2026

- Yahoo Finance / Bloomberg — Apple negotiates with blacklisted Chinese chipmakers, 1er juillet 2026

- 9to5mac — Apple in negotiations with two banned Chinese RAM firms after price increases, 1er juillet 2026

### Secondary sources

- TechWireAsia — Memory chip shortage in Asia and China, 19 juin 2026

- Forbes — complementary industrial and security context, 1er juillet 2026

- Foreign Policy — analysis of the technological rivalry between the West and China

---

Source: Maxime Marquette, MadMax. When citing, name the author and link https://mad-max.co/en/article/apple-contourne-la-penurie-mondiale-de-puces-en-misant-sur-la-chine