Published 16 Apr.2026 11:30(KST)
Updated 16 Apr.2026 14:18(KST)
This is an excerpt from an economic news outlet article published in March 2023. Since then, this viewpoint has become the majority opinion. On April 7, Samsung Electronics announced its astounding preliminary results for the first quarter: sales of 133 trillion won and operating profit of 57.2 trillion won. If this momentum continues, some forecast that the company could become the world’s top performer based on operating profit this year. Although there is a gap of about three years, it has truly been a rollercoaster ride. Samsung Electronics, which once hit rock bottom, has now soared on the back of the AI-driven memory boom.
Beyond the external factor of the memory super cycle, questions remain about what changes Samsung Electronics has achieved in high-bandwidth memory (HBM), how much it has improved its foundry performance, the details of these remarkable results, and future prospects. Some of these questions will be addressed at the conference call Samsung Electronics will hold on April 30.
At this point, there is a mystery we need to reconsider-not Samsung Electronics, but ourselves. Why did we interpret Samsung Electronics’ slump as a crisis for Korea’s entire semiconductor industry? The semiconductor market was actually recovering in 2024. SK hynix recorded operating profit of over 23 trillion won in 2024, driven by HBM. Samsung Electronics’ semiconductor division also returned to the black. However, detailed discussions on whether government support should extend to SK hynix as well as Samsung Electronics, if direct assistance to chipmakers is necessary, never took place.
At a press conference in May 2024, Choi Sang-mok, then Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Economy and Finance, was asked about the provision of semiconductor subsidies and responded as follows: "Fiscal expenditures and tax incentives serve different roles. We should provide subsidies for areas where the private sector cannot act, but for areas where companies perform well, tax and financial support are more appropriate. Some advanced countries with weak manufacturing capabilities may give subsidies, but in our case, the weaker parts of our semiconductor industry are the ecosystem, materials, components, equipment, and infrastructure. The government should provide fiscal spending for these areas where the private sector cannot act, while tax and financial support should be provided for the areas where companies excel."
The second mystery is why, despite this reasonable explanation and even as the semiconductor market was improving, public opinion remained fixated on subsidies. When the government announced it would support the semiconductor industry in 2024 through low-interest loans and infrastructure development, many lamented the lack of subsidies. The special semiconductor act passed at the National Assembly plenary session at the end of January did not include direct subsidies for companies. If government subsidies had indeed been implemented, just imagine the criticism that would have followed these days.
The purpose of this article is not to solve these two mysteries. Rather, it is to suggest that, moving forward, we should calmly analyze the situation and find ways to respond amid the ups and downs of the semiconductor market, rather than be swayed by sentiment. When pessimism enveloped Samsung’s semiconductor business, an engineer from the company said to me, "Semiconductors are not something to be elated or despondent about every time." Perhaps this composure is the true strength of Samsung Electronics.
Baek Woojin, Economic Columnist
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.