The chairmen of three House committees have asked Nvidia chief executive Jensen Huang to brief their panels behind closed doors on Nov. 18 about his interactions with Alice Huang, a Megaspeed executive they call "a publicly reported People's Republic of China (PRC) intelligence asset." The request also covers Nvidia's security protocols against foreign espionage, according to the Nov. 4 letter.
Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Brian Mast, China Select Committee Chairman John Moolenaar and Intelligence Committee Chairman Rick Crawford signed it. They asked Huang to accept the date, or offer another day when the House is in session, by Nov. 11.
What the chairmen asked for
The letter is short. It makes no accusation against Huang or Nvidia, and it cites "recent reports" that "raise significant national security concerns regarding the PRC's access to sensitive U.S. technology and information," and says the issue of Chinese access to advanced U.S. technology is "core to the investigative work of our three committees this Congress."
"It is vital that Congress determines the extent to which U.S. national security has been placed at risk," the chairmen wrote, a line the China Select Committee also quoted when it released the letter on Nov. 5.
The chairmen asked Huang to appear in room 2172 of the Rayburn House Office Building for a closed session. The letter is a request rather than a subpoena, and it does not say what would happen if he declines.
Nvidia's newsroom had posted no statement on the letter as of Saturday night.
What happens next
| Date | Step |
|---|---|
| Nov. 4 | Mast, Moolenaar and Crawford sign the letter |
| Nov. 5 | The China Select Committee publishes it |
| Nov. 11 | Deadline for Huang to accept or propose another session day |
| Nov. 18 | Requested closed-door briefing in Rayburn 2172 |
Because the session would be closed, any account of what Huang tells the committees would have to come from the members or from Nvidia afterward. The letter names only Alice Huang and her employer, Megaspeed. It does not describe the reports it cites, and it does not say whether any committee has opened a formal investigation of the company.
