Lockheed Martin Could Be the Next “Intel”? U.S. Weighs Equity Stakes to Share in Defense Profits

TradingKey - Following former President Donald Trump’s high-profile claim that “owning Intel is a great deal,” Commerce Secretary Lutnick suggested on Tuesday (U.S. Eastern Time) that defense giants like Lockheed Martin (LMT.US) could be next in line for government equity investment. By market close, Lockheed Martin shares rose 1.7%, with other defense stocks like Boeing (BA.US) also posting gains.

In an interview, Lutnick stated that Lockheed Martin is “essentially an extension of the U.S. government,” noting that 73% of its revenue comes from federal contracts — yet it continues to earn high profits from arms manufacturing. He questioned: “They build precision weapons — what’s the economic rationale behind that?” and revealed that the Department of Defense is actively studying how the government could take equity stakes in defense firms to allow taxpayers to share in their long-term returns.

This idea reflects the Trump administration’s emerging strategy of “capital for strategic control.” Earlier, the U.S. government converted $8.9 billion in unpaid CHIPS Act subsidies into a 9.9% equity stake in Intel — a move seen as direct intervention in a critical industry. Now, the same logic may be expanding into the defense sector.

As the world’s largest defense contractor, Lockheed Martin is a prime candidate. Its flagship F-35 fighter jet program continues to see rising orders and strong profitability — making it an attractive target for what could become a strategic government investment.

However, the proposal has sparked intense debate. Critics warn that government ownership could politicize corporate decisions and undermine free-market principles. Intel has already disclosed in regulatory filings that its government stake may harm international sales and dilute shareholder value. Conservative economist Scott Lincicome cautioned that such a model could push companies to serve political interests over commercial efficiency.

If this model extends to the defense industry, it could fundamentally reshape U.S. public-private relations. While the government could potentially lower procurement costs and earn capital returns, the independence of the defense industrial base would be weakened — fueling growing concerns about the rise of “state capitalism” in America.