Senate Banking Committee targets Huang and Lutnick over chip exports

By Tom Whitfield

The Senate Banking Committee set December 3 for a requested appearance by Jensen Huang and December 10 for Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, warning that it may use subpoenas if either declines.

Committee chairman Tim Scott (R-SC) confirmed the requests overnight. He said: “Recent reports raise serious concerns about our national security and the protection of sensitive U.S. technology. The American people deserve answers.”

When do the hearings occur, and what happens if witnesses refuse?

A November 13, 2026 committee post set two dates:

• December 3: Jensen Huang, Nvidia’s former chief executive.
• December 10: Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, a member of President Trump’s cabinet.

Both requests were voluntary, according to the committee’s letter. The letter to Huang warned that the panel was “prepared to use all tools at our disposal, including subpoenas, to conduct this legitimate and necessary oversight.”

Scott cited committee jurisdiction over “export controls,” including their application to Nvidia’s exports of advanced semiconductors. The committee said it was “seeking answers to questions that raise grave national security concerns.”

The request did not disclose the reports behind those claims or identify any specific export-control violation. The dates and subpoena warning therefore establish the committee’s leverage, not the substance of its case.

The committee has set appearance dates and an escalation path, but its request does not disclose the evidentiary basis.

Why does Huang’s conduct sit beside an export-control hearing?

The inquiry extends beyond a dispute over Huang’s conduct at Nvidia, the chipmaker he spent 30 years building. He resigned after admitting to an extramarital affair with a woman believed to be a Chinese spy, identified in the accounts as Alice Huang, who is unrelated to him.

Reuters reported on November 12 that Huang had a second affair, this one with Nvidia executive Kimberly Powell. That report relied on unnamed sources, and the committee request did not include a response from Powell.

President Trump told reporters earlier in the week that the FBI was investigating the affair with Alice Huang. China has denied involvement in that allegation.

Nvidia’s board has opened an independent review and hired Joon H. Kim to lead it. Kim formerly served as acting U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York and works at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz.

Nvidia named CFO Colette Kress interim CEO after Huang’s resignation.

Those disclosures place Huang’s private conduct alongside his public role in U.S. technology policy. They do not, on their own, establish how the export-control questions arose or whether Nvidia executives knew of the alleged affairs.

Huang’s resignation and Nvidia’s interim succession are settled; the reasons for the Senate inquiry remain contested and under investigation.

Why are lawmakers focusing on sales of advanced chips to China?

Committee members have suggested that Lutnick allowed export-control loopholes to persist, enabling continued sales of high-end chips to China. No enforcement timeline or underlying records accompanied the committee’s summary.

Senator Jim Banks (R-IN) told Fox News that he believed Lutnick had “defied President Trump’s directive not to sell these high-end chips to China or to allow them to be sold to Chinese customers, that ended up happening anyway.”

Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), the committee’s ranking member, said: “Secretary Howard Lutnick and Under Secretary Jeffrey Kessler must explain why they have not closed export control loopholes and act today to ensure our advanced technology is not fueling China’s military.”

Banks framed his claim as a belief, while Warren called for an immediate policy response. Neither member’s statement established that a presidential directive had been violated or that a particular loophole had enabled a sale; those are points for the December testimony.

China’s reported denial concerned the alleged spy involvement. It did not answer the separate claims about chip sales and export enforcement.

If the hearings proceed, the administration will have to connect presidential directives, Commerce Department enforcement and semiconductor shipments to China.

What pressure will Huang face from his own committee colleagues?

Senator John Kennedy (R-LA) told CNN: “I’m not naive; I’m not Bambi’s baby brother. I know people have affairs; I wouldn’t recommend it, but if you do, you ought to make sure it’s not with a Chinese spy. I mean, check their LinkedIn page for God’s sake.”

Kennedy called the case an “intergalactic freak show” and added: “Here’s a man, head of one of the most powerful companies in the world, more than anybody else in the private sector; he’s been making AI policy for America, and certainly with respect to our relationship with China. And then we learn about this.”

Kennedy’s language is political commentary, not evidence. It nevertheless shows that Huang’s credibility on China and AI policy may face sharper questioning than the semiconductor export inquiry alone would suggest.

The personal scandal may determine Huang’s credibility; the export-control record will determine the policy consequence.

December will test whether scrutiny of Huang’s conduct also produces a clear account of how advanced-chip controls were enforced.