In the U.S. push to reshore semiconductor manufacturing, what is most visible is money and factories.
From Arizona to Texas, from Ohio to New York, wafer fabs, packaging plants, and material bases have been announced one after another. According to the latest report from the U.S. Semiconductor Industry Association (SIA), since 2020, the U.S. has announced over $770 billion in semiconductor industry chain investments, involving 30 states and 160 projects.
Factories can be built with capital expenditure, and equipment can be purchased from global suppliers. The real trouble is, when production lines are ready to start up, whether there are enough people to tune equipment, run processes, maintain yields, and keep the factory running stably 365 days a year.
SIA stated in its "2026 State of the U.S. Semiconductor Industry Report" that the U.S. semiconductor industry currently directly employs approximately 342,000 people, while supporting nearly 2 million indirect and induced jobs. One semiconductor job, on average, supports about 5.7 jobs in other industries; the industry's average wage is over 30% higher than similar positions in other fields. Despite this, the U.S. could still face a shortage of about 67,000 semiconductor technicians, engineers, and computer science professionals by 2030.
Sixty-seven thousand people is close to one-fifth of the current direct semiconductor employment in the U.S. This proportion is enough to elevate the talent problem from a daily headache for corporate recruiting departments to an industrial issue concerning whether the manufacturing reshoring can be fulfilled.
However, first we need to look at how this number came about.
This is not a fresh talent census completed in 2026. It comes from a forecast model released by SIA and Oxford Economics in 2023, which the latest report continues to cite. Its assumption is that, based on the degree completion rates and talent supply trends at the time, the U.S. semiconductor industry would add about 115,000 new jobs by 2030, with about 67,000 of these positions at risk of going unfilled.
Therefore, the 67,000 is not already vacant positions, nor is it a number that will happen precisely. Factors like AI efficiency improvements, factory investment adjustments, increased automation, market cycle changes, and expansion of training programs could all alter the final outcome. But the contradiction it reveals is not outdated: the speed of the U.S. expanding semiconductor production capacity may outpace the rate at which the talent cultivation system can replenish personnel.
The Shortage Isn't Just Chip Design Engineers
When people talk about a semiconductor talent shortage, many first think of top-tier engineers who can design CPUs and GPUs.
This is only part of the problem.
According to the breakdown by SIA and Oxford Economics, among the expected shortage of 67,000 people, about 26,400 are technicians, accounting for 39%; about 27,300 are engineers, accounting for 41%; the remaining 13,400 come from computer science-related positions, accounting for 20%.
There are also clear distinctions within the engineer category. The expected shortage includes about 9,900 requiring a bachelor's degree, 12,300 requiring a master's degree, and about 5,100 requiring a doctorate. In other words, the U.S. lacks both technicians who can enter cleanrooms to operate and maintain equipment, and high-degree engineers in areas like process, materials, devices, and chip design.
The training methods for these two types of talent are completely different.
Advanced process R&D, transistor structures, EDA algorithms, and materials research often require master's or even doctoral training. It's difficult for companies to cultivate an engineer capable of independently undertaking critical R&D tasks through a few months of crash courses.
Technician positions have relatively lower academic barriers to entry. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics states that semiconductor processing technicians can typically start with a high school diploma; some positions may require vocational certificates or an associate degree, followed by on-the-job training within the company. This entry point appears wider, but it doesn't necessarily mean personnel are easy to replenish.
A wafer fab is not just a few engineers in cleanroom suits adjusting parameters on computers. The production line requires a large number of equipment, production, quality, automation, facility, and maintenance personnel. Once a process enters mass production, these positions determine equipment utilization, production cycle time, and product yields.
Top engineers determine how far the process can go, while technicians determine whether the factory can operate normally every day. Both sides are lacking; the problem just manifests differently.
Why Technicians Are Still Hard to Hire Despite Low Academic Barriers
Data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that in 2024, there were about 31,900 semiconductor processing technicians in the U.S. Employment in this occupation is projected to grow 11% by 2034, significantly higher than the 3% average growth for all U.S. occupations. Over the next decade, there will be an average of about 3,900 job openings annually, stemming from both new demand and replacement demand due to retirements, career changes, etc.
In terms of compensation, this is not a typical low-wage manufacturing job either.
In 2024, the median annual wage for semiconductor processing technicians was $51,180, higher than the $45,960 median for production occupations in the U.S. Within the semiconductor and electronic component manufacturing industry, the median annual wage for such positions is about $52,230; the top 10% earn over $87,000.
But salary is only one condition of recruitment.
Wafer fabs typically operate continuously; shift work, night shifts, and weekend work are not uncommon. Newly built fabs are often located in specific industry clusters, so job seekers must not only decide whether to work in semiconductor manufacturing but also consider whether they are willing to relocate to the factory's location, and whether they can cope with local housing, transportation, education, and childcare conditions.
This is also why the U.S. Department of Commerce requires companies applying for CHIPS funding to submit workforce development plans. Companies applying for larger direct subsidies also need to provide plans for employees to access affordable childcare services. This requirement may seem far removed from chip technology, but it's actually quite practical: if factories require shift work but surrounding public services can't match, even the best training programs may fail to retain workers.
Therefore, the technician shortage cannot be simply attributed to "young people not wanting to work in factories," nor can it be assumed that opening a few vocational training classes will solve it.
Companies also need to answer: Are there clear career progression paths for the positions? Will certificates be recognized across different companies? Who bears the costs during training? Are employees willing to stay in the area long-term? For a wafer fab costing tens or hundreds of billions of dollars, these questions may seem trivial, but they directly impact staff turnover rates and production efficiency.
For High-End Engineers, the Problem Isn't Insufficient Salary
The engineer market is a different story.
The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics projects that from 2024 to 2034, employment of electrical and electronics engineers will grow by 7%, with an average of about 17,500 job openings annually. In 2024, the median annual wage for electronics engineers in the semiconductor and electronic component manufacturing industry reached $142,760.
Computer hardware engineers earn even more. In 2024, the national median annual wage for this occupation was $155,020, with a median of about $162,460 in the semiconductor and electronic component manufacturing industry; employment is also projected to grow 7% over the next decade, with about 4,700 positions needing to be filled each year.
These salaries are already quite attractive, yet shortages persist because companies are competing not for general labor, but for people who already possess specific experience.
A process engineer capable of leading yield improvement for an advanced node cannot be simply replaced by a general mechanical engineer; talent familiar with HBM stacking, hybrid bonding, and thermal management for packaging is even more out of reach for fresh graduates.
A more realistic issue is that semiconductor companies are not the only destinations for these talents. Artificial intelligence, cloud computing, software, aerospace, automotive electronics, and the defense industry are all competing for electrical engineering, computer science, and materials professionals. Chipmakers offer good salaries, but other industries are also capable of offering high pay.
Therefore, the U.S. engineer shortage is both a quantity issue and a specialization matching problem. Universities can increase enrollment in electrical engineering and computer science majors, but it often takes years from student enrollment to completion of master's or doctoral training, and then gaining industry experience. The peak hiring periods for new factories, however, may be concentrated in the next three to four years.
The $770 Billion Investment is Also Redrawing the Talent Map
The existing U.S. semiconductor talent is not evenly distributed.
Chip design, wafer manufacturing, equipment, and materials companies have long developed around a few industry clusters. The new projects now cover 30 states, expanding traditional bases while also bringing some large factories to areas with relatively weaker historical semiconductor industry foundations.
This creates a mismatch that is easily overlooked: having a sufficient number of engineering graduates nationally does not mean a project location can recruit enough people locally.
A company can recruit dozens of senior managers and core experts nationwide, but a wafer fab's mass production requires thousands of local employees who can work stably long-term. If it primarily relies on relocation from other states, the company incurs not just salaries, but also relocation expenses, housing subsidies, and costs associated with settling employees' families.
This is also why community colleges are playing an increasingly important role in the U.S. semiconductor talent strategy.
As of the release of SIA's 2024 workforce policy blueprint, over 50 U.S. community colleges had announced new or expanded semiconductor-related programs. Unlike universities, which primarily cultivate R&D and engineering talent, community colleges are better suited to train equipment technicians, production technicians, and engineering assistants for local wafer fabs. The U.S. CHIPS and Science Act also established a $200 million Semiconductor Workforce and Education Fund, administered by the National Science Foundation (NSF) to advance related training.
This model—"companies specify job needs, community colleges provide targeted training, students enter local factories"—is theoretically more sustainable than competing for people nationwide.
The difficulty lies in that the curriculum cannot just teach generalized semiconductor knowledge. Different factories use different equipment, process platforms, and automation systems; schools need access to corporate involvement, practical training facilities, and continuously updated curricula. Semiconductor equipment is expensive, and many schools cannot afford to build full-scale cleanrooms on their own. When discussing future semiconductor talent cultivation, the NSF has already identified the lack of expensive cleanrooms and advanced equipment as a practical obstacle facing school-based training.
This means talent cultivation itself is also an infrastructure investment, not as simple as printing a few textbooks.
Domestic Cultivation and International Talent: Not an Either-Or Choice
Among SIA's policy recommendations, besides expanding STEM education, vocational training, and apprenticeships, it specifically mentions high-skilled immigration reform.
The reason is not complicated. The technician gap can be addressed more through community colleges, vocational education, and on-the-job training; it's much harder to significantly increase the number of master's- and doctoral-level engineers in the short term. U.S. universities have long attracted international students to pursue engineering and computer science degrees, some of whom have already completed the required training in the U.S. Having these graduates enter the industry is indeed one way to supplement near-term advanced talent.
But international talent is not a panacea either.
Immigration policy uncertainties mean companies cannot base their entire talent strategy on overseas recruitment; many positions in advanced manufacturing also require employees to be stationed long-term at specific factory sites, which not all international talent are willing to choose. In the long run, the U.S. still needs to expand its domestic engineering education, vocational education, and industrial training system.
Pitting these two paths against each other doesn't make much sense.
Domestic cultivation addresses long-term supply and industry coverage, while international talent alleviates near-term tightness in high-level engineering positions. A mature industrial policy inherently needs to address both short-term and long-term issues simultaneously.
Implications for China's Semiconductor Talent Policy
The U.S. approach to addressing the semiconductor talent shortage offers some lessons for China as well. What's truly noteworthy is not how much money the U.S. invests in training programs, but that it treats talent supply as part of the semiconductor industry's infrastructure, planning it in tandem with factory construction, R&D, and industry subsidies.
This also has practical significance for China.
In recent years, China's semiconductor project footprint has continuously expanded, with different regions building wafer manufacturing, packaging and testing, materials, and equipment industry bases. However, the landing of industrial projects and talent supply are not always perfectly aligned. Some regions have capital, land, and policies but lack a mature engineer workforce; some universities produce a large number of graduates in related fields, but gaps remain between their curricula, training conditions, and actual enterprise job requirements. An increase in the national talent pool does not guarantee that every industry cluster can find suitable people in a timely manner.
One direction worth learning from in U.S. policy is requiring companies receiving industrial support to also submit workforce development and employment plans. For China, the evaluation of semiconductor projects could further extend from "how much is invested, how much capacity is built" to "what positions are needed, where will the talent come from, how will they be trained, and how will they be retained." Especially for large wafer fabs and advanced packaging projects, stable cooperation with local universities, vocational colleges, and training institutions should be established during the project approval phase, rather than concentrated recruitment just one year before production.
The importance of vocational education also needs to be re-recognized.
Semiconductor talent does not equate to needing master's and doctorates entirely. Advanced process R&D, chip architecture, EDA, and key materials research indeed rely on highly educated talent; but the manufacturing floor also requires a large number of equipment maintenance, production control, quality management, and automation technicians. These positions are more suitable for cultivation through vocational colleges, application-oriented undergraduate programs, and enterprise training systems. For schools cultivating semiconductor talent, besides opening more integrated circuit-related majors, it's also necessary to examine whether courses can get close to real R&D and production environments, whether students can have contact with equipment, processes, and quality management workflows, and whether companies are willing to participate long-term in teaching.
Talent policy must also address practical issues related to regional mobility and career development.
Semiconductor factories are typically located far from the core urban areas where traditional internet and finance talent concentrate. Whether employees are willing to stay long-term depends not only on salary but also on housing, education, healthcare, commuting, and career advancement opportunities. An industry base can attract projects with preferential policies, but it's difficult to form a stable talent ecosystem relying solely on one-time subsidies. For local governments, building schools, training centers, and public services may be less eye-catching than signing a large project, but it's more decisive for the operational quality of the project after production begins.
Furthermore, China also needs to avoid equating semiconductor talent policy simply with "poaching talent." Luring people with high salaries from other companies and regions can alleviate the immediate needs of a single project, but it does not increase the overall industry's talent supply. Instead, it may drive up costs and exacerbate personnel turnover. A more sustainable approach remains expanding the scale of cultivation, improving the quality of engineering education, and having enterprises shoulder more responsibility for on-the-job training.
The predicted 67,000 talent gap in the U.S. may not fully materialize, and it's also difficult for China to accurately summarize future talent demand with a single number. AI and automation may reduce demand for some positions, and industry cycles and project adjustments will also change hiring scales. But regardless of the final size of the gap, one thing is quite clear: as the semiconductor industry moves towards advanced manufacturing and systemic competition, talent cultivation must not lag behind capacity building.
For China, the true hallmark of a mature semiconductor industry is not just how many factories are built, nor just how many pieces of equipment are imported, but whether it can continuously cultivate engineers and technicians locally, keep factories running stably, processes improving, and form a generational talent pipeline. The completion of production lines is just the beginning; only when talent supply can self-sustain can the industry's foundation be considered truly established.
This article is from the WeChat public account: TechSugar , author: Tanxin
