The investigation stems from a report by The New York Times late last month, which cited US intelligence agencies concluding that Huang was the subject of a Chinese spy plot. According to the report, Alice Huang, a Chinese business executive and Nvidia chip buyer who is not related to the company’s CEO, developed a close relationship with Jensen Huang. US intelligence reportedly concluded she passed information to Beijing and was recruited to seek sensitive details and potentially push for the availability of more advanced Nvidia chips in China. Jensen Huang previously characterized his interactions with the woman as a “normal” business relationship.
President Donald Trump defended Huang on Sunday, stating that he believes the CEO is an “honourable guy” who “probably has an excuse” for the affair. When asked why he had not acted on earlier intelligence warnings regarding the relationship, Trump said he had not spoken to Huang about the matter but emphasized that Huang has done an “amazing job” for the United States. Trump added that he wishes Huang to remain as Nvidia’s CEO. The President acknowledged the intelligence concerns but framed his response as supportive of the company’s leadership.
Jensen Huang addressed his employees in a memo on Sunday, acknowledging that his actions had hurt his family. He confirmed that the board has launched the investigation into whether he was targeted by a foreign intelligence agency. While the company did not provide immediate comment on the specific allegations of data transfer, the board’s statement emphasized that no compromise of national security or corporate secrets has been identified to date.
Former CIA agent Tracy Walder described the situation as “disturbing,” noting that while it remains unclear if Huang was actively recruited by China, she believes President Trump was aware of the relationship. Huang has become a prominent figure in Washington’s debate over chip-export restrictions, arguing that strict limits on US chip sales could accelerate the growth of Chinese competitors. The outcome of the board’s inquiry will determine whether further disciplinary or legal actions are taken, though no timeline for the completion of the investigation has been provided.
