Share and Follow
Federal prosecutors have charged three individuals, including a Supermicro co-founder, with illegally transporting restricted Nvidia AI servers to China, a major strategic competitor of the United States. The indictment reveals that over $510 million worth of sophisticated AI equipment was secretly diverted to China via a Southeast Asian front company, thereby masking its actual destination.
The accused are named as Wally Liaw, a co-founder of Supermicro who currently holds a position as senior vice president and board member, Steven Chang, a sales manager based in Taiwan, and Willy Sun, identified in the indictment as a “fixer” acting as a third-party broker.
According to prosecutors, this clandestine operation involved the shell company placing orders, accepting deliveries, and then transferring the servers, effectively obscuring the connection between the American manufacturer and the Chinese recipients.
The indictment elaborates on how restricted U.S. AI technology bypassed regulatory safeguards, flowing from a U.S. company into China. These servers, engineered for AI tasks, utilized cutting-edge Nvidia chips, which require special export licenses for China, precisely the kind of technology U.S. export policies aim to restrict from Chinese access.
Prosecutors assert that the scheme extended beyond mere shipments. As compliance checks began closing in, the indictment notes that the defendants attempted to create the illusion that the servers remained in their intended locations, even after they had been relocated.
The indictment describes a system in which restricted U.S. AI technology moved through a U.S. company’s pipeline and into China anyway, despite rules designed to prevent exactly that. The servers were built for artificial intelligence workloads and powered by advanced Nvidia chips that require a license to export to China, the kind of hardware U.S. export controls are meant to keep out of China’s hands.
Prosecutors say the scheme did not stop with the shipments. Once compliance reviews began to catch up, the indictment says the defendants tried to make it appear the servers were still where they were supposed to be, even after they had already been moved.
“For example, to deceive the U.S. Manufacturer’s compliance team, which was responsible for conducting audits of Company-1’s purchases of servers to ensure adherence to U.S. export control laws, the defendants staged ‘dummy’ servers, non-working, physical replicas of the U.S. Manufacturer’s servers, for inspection at the locations where Company-1 was purportedly storing the servers it had purchased from the U.S. Manufacturer. However, the actual servers from the U.S. Manufacturer had already been unlawfully shipped to China.”
According to the indictment, the real servers were already in China while replicas were staged for inspection, with labels moved, boxes repackaged, and documentation prepared to reinforce the claim that the intermediary was the legitimate end user. Prosecutors say the goal was simple: keep the shipments moving and the destination hidden.
Prosecutors say one defendant pushed to accelerate shipments before tighter export rules took effect, while another message urged colleagues to “speed these up before May 13!” after sharing a White House announcement on new restrictions.
“We will speed up the shipment right away! Please issue the B200 [purchase order] right away!”
The indictment lays out a chain: orders routed through an intermediary, shipments under that cover, inspections met with staged hardware, and deliveries pushed through before tighter rules took effect. Each step moved restricted technology farther from oversight and closer to China.
The hardware at issue powers artificial intelligence systems used in military planning, surveillance, and advanced computing, the exact systems U.S. export controls are meant to keep out of China’s hands. Prosecutors say it reached China anyway.
Selling AI Computer Chips to China: What Could Possibly Go Wrong?
Supermicro itself was not charged, but the conduct described in the indictment ran through its sales pipeline and compliance systems. The company said the conduct violated its policies and that it is cooperating with investigators, while the two employees were placed on administrative leave and a contractor was terminated.
Investors reacted immediately. Supermicro closed at $30.79, then dropped to $23.62 in premarket trading at the time of publication, a fall of more than 23 percent, as investors reacted to the legal risk and tightening scrutiny around AI exports.
The controls are in place. The question now is whether they are being enforced before the damage is already done.
Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy RedState’s conservative reporting that takes on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.