American industrial policy is changing shape. For decades, Washington has funded strategic technologies through grants, public contracts, universities, and defense programs. In quantum, it is adding a more direct element: equity stakes in companies that receive federal backing.
On September 8, Rigetti Computing, D-Wave Quantum, and Quantinuum finalized agreements with the U.S. Department of Commerce for $100 million each under the CHIPS and Science Act. On the same day, GlobalFoundries announced a $375 million definitive agreement to expand research and manufacturing capacity related to quantum semiconductors.
The total value of the newly announced agreements therefore exceeds $675 million. But the most interesting detail is not the total. In the cases of Rigetti and D-Wave, public filings with the SEC explicitly show that the Department of Commerce is receiving equity or a non-controlling minority stake as part of the agreement. The Wall Street Journal reports a similar structure for Quantinuum as well.
This is not nationalization, and it does not mean the government will run these companies. Rather, it is an attempt to build an industrial policy in which taxpayers do not merely fund the risk, but can share, at least in part, in the value created if the technology becomes commercial.
Why quantum entered the CHIPS Act
The CHIPS and Science Act originated primarily as a response to vulnerabilities in the semiconductor supply chain. Quantum broadens the issue: funding theoretical research is not enough if the components required to build large-scale systems rely on fragile supply chains or manufacturing processes that do not yet exist at an industrial scale.
Quantum computers rely on very different architectures. Rigetti works on superconducting qubits; D-Wave combines quantum annealing systems with a gate-model roadmap; Quantinuum develops trapped-ion machines. Each approach requires specific components, packaging, control electronics, and fabrication processes.
The Department of Commerce's strategy is therefore deliberately a “portfolio” approach: funding different modalities while simultaneously bolstering companies like GlobalFoundries that can manufacture components for multiple architectures.
Rigetti: 100 Million to Scale Superconducting
Rigetti has signed a definitive $100 million agreement for three R&D projects aimed at addressing scalability bottlenecks in superconducting quantum computers.
The SEC filing also sheds light on the financial side. In connection with the agreement, Rigetti agreed to issue 7,739,938 shares of common stock to the Department of Commerce at an implied price of $12.92 per share. The shares are subject to terms and restrictions, including mechanisms tied to the actual disbursement of funds.
It is a particularly clear example of the new model: federal aid is not treated as a non-repayable grant entirely detached from the company's ownership structure.
D-Wave: Funding for Annealing and Gate-Model
D-Wave has likewise finalized an agreement for up to $100 million. The company says the funds will support both its annealing platform and the development of gate-model systems.
Stated goals include a generation of annealing systems with up to 100,000 qubits and a gate-model roadmap targeting 10,000 physical qubits and 100 logical qubits. These are company targets, not yet achieved milestones, and their true value will depend on qubit quality, error correction, and application performance, rather than raw counts.
D-Wave specifies in its release that the Department of Commerce will receive a minority, non-controlling stake as a condition of the award.
Quantinuum Focuses on Component Manufacturing
Quantinuum will use its $100 million award for research and manufacturing capacity tied to trapped-ion computers. The company named GlobalFoundries among its partners to produce ion traps and electronics on 300-millimeter wafers, while Monarch Quantum will work on lasers and optical components.
This is an important detail because it illustrates what "industrializing" quantum actually entails. The challenge is not just increasing the qubit count in a lab. It requires building repeatable components, qualified processes, reliable suppliers, and facilities capable of producing increasing volumes.
The transition is the same one that transformed classical semiconductors: an exceptional prototype is not yet an industry. An industry is born when the process can be repeated with predictable yield, quality, and costs.
GlobalFoundries is perhaps the most structural piece
The $375 million in funding for GlobalFoundries may seem less spectacular because it does not involve a complete quantum computer. In reality, it could be the most infrastructural piece of the entire program.
The company wants to expand its Quantum Technology Solutions division and establish manufacturing capacity in the United States accessible to multiple quantum architectures. The stated goal is to help companies move from research and prototyping to commercial production.
Indeed, quantum faces a problem similar to what traditional chip startups experienced: even a great idea is useless without access to a foundry capable of manufacturing it with industrial quality.
The government becomes a shareholder because the risk is enormous
Quantum is still a deeply uncertain market. There is no consensus on which architecture will win, when economically viable fault-tolerant systems will arrive, or which applications will first generate value at scale.
Funding a single technology would therefore be a fragile bet. A public portfolio spreads the risk. But equity adds a second logic: if one of the funded companies grows dramatically thanks in part to federal capital, a portion of that value can flow back to the state.
This model has recent precedents in American semiconductor industrial policy and is becoming more explicit. It is politically attractive because it addresses a classic criticism of subsidies: the public takes on the risk while all the upside remains private.
But public equity also raises difficult questions
Government ownership is not without problems. If Washington holds stakes in multiple competitors, it must avoid turning technological support into commercial favoritism. It must also establish transparent criteria for share divestment, governance, and managing potential conflicts of interest.
In Rigetti's filings, for instance, the Department accepts restrictions on voting rights and share transfer terms. These are key mechanisms designed to preserve the industrial—rather than managerial—nature of the intervention.
There is also the risk of picking winners through political selection: the government might back architectures that the market or research ultimately abandon. Yet this is precisely where a portfolio approach aims to mitigate missteps, funding diverse paths rather than crowning a single winner.
The real battle is the supply chain
The public debate around quantum almost always centers on qubit counts. The federal program reflects a different perspective: technological supremacy hinges on the ability to build the entire chain.
It requires foundries, lasers, cryogenic electronics, packaging, materials, control systems, manufacturing expertise, and specialized talent. If these components remain bespoke and handcrafted, even an extraordinary scientific breakthrough can take years to translate into a viable product.
The United States is therefore trying to avoid in quantum what it realized too late in conventional semiconductors: holding the intellectual property is not enough if industrial manufacturing capacity lies elsewhere.
Quantum enters the phase where factories must be built, not just papers
The new agreements do not prove that commercially viable quantum computing is right around the corner. They do not solve error correction, nor do they signal which technology will be the first to achieve a sustainable economic advantage.
What they do demonstrate, however, is that Washington now views quantum as a strategic industrial capability rather than merely a field of research. That is a major shift.
The next phase of the race will not be contested solely in university labs or corporate-published benchmarks. It will be decided by the capacity to mass-produce components, cultivate supply chains, increase yields, and engineer repeatable systems.
And that is why the most significant development of September 8 is not a new quantum machine. It is the U.S. government deciding to commit capital, manufacturing capacity, and even an equity stake into the very same initiative.
