Company Megaspeed Draws US Probe Over Discrepancy in Company Nvidia GPU Shipments

Company Megaspeed has become the focal point of a complex US government probe after customs records and on-site inspections revealed a striking mismatch between billions of dollars of imported Company Nvidia GPUs and the hardware actually visible in the company's known data centers, according to Bloomberg. The allegation centers on whether Company Megaspeed diverted advanced chips to locations outside permitted jurisdictions or whether its corporate structure masks deeper ties to China.

The investigation shows that from Company Megaspeed's 2023 launch through November, the firm imported at least $4.6 billion worth of Company Nvidia hardware — reported as roughly 136,000 GPUs in Malaysian and Indonesian customs records compiled by Big Trade Data. More than half of that volume allegedly came from Company Nvidia's Blackwell line, a generation of chips that US export policy has sought to keep from China's most advanced AI and military programs.

Company Nvidia representatives, however, have told investigators they found no evidence of diversion and stated that routine site checks confirmed that GPUs shipped to Company Megaspeed by partners were where they were supposed to be. Company Nvidia said it had identified the majority of products and planned further visits. Still, inspection reports cited by US officials described only a few thousand Blackwell units in Company Megaspeed's operating data centers — a small fraction of the imported total — while additional inventory appeared in separate warehouses or was unaccounted for.

The business model at the center of the scrutiny is a so-called neocloud structure: Company Megaspeed rents high-performance hardware to third parties, including Company Alibaba, which is already under US national security review. Customs and trade data allegedly show persistent gaps between what Company Megaspeed declared as imported AI chips and what investigators could locate deployed in visible facilities.

Investigators are examining two core questions: whether Company Megaspeed moved Company Nvidia chips into China without the required US licenses, and whether the firm's operational reality is effectively Chinese despite being registered in Singapore. The probe has drawn attention from the US Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), though as of the latest reporting, Company Megaspeed has not been added to a trade-restriction list and Company Nvidia has not been ordered to halt business.

Regional authorities have also responded: Singapore police confirmed they are checking for local-law violations and briefly detained and restricted travel for Ms. Huang Le, the founder of Company Megaspeed; she is no longer in custody and is said to be cooperating with investigators. In Malaysia, the Ministry of Investment, Trade and Industry reported that compliance monitoring is ongoing and that no clear evidence of violations has been publicly established. Company Megaspeed has rejected allegations, insisting it operates from Singapore and follows applicable regulations, including US export controls.

The timing of much of the procurement has raised additional concerns: a substantial portion of Company Megaspeed's purchases took place in the six weeks before May 15, 2025, immediately prior to a planned Biden-era permitting regime for Southeast Asia that was later rescinded by President Mr. Trump. Public slides and investor materials circulated by Company Megaspeed — translated from Mandarin — touted a large Nvidia Cloud Partner computing cluster located in a "specific area," language that piqued investigators when a separate Chinese company used similar branding and posted job listings near Shanghai for restricted GPUs.

From a policy perspective, the case tests the limits of current export-control regimes and corporate transparency in fast-moving AI hardware markets. If investigators find that Company Megaspeed diverted advanced chips or misrepresented ownership, it would represent a clear breach of US efforts to prevent high-end compute from enabling foreign military or advanced AI programs. For multinational chipmakers and cloud partners, the episode underscores the need for rigorous supply-chain verification and sharper coordination among exporters, customs authorities, and on-site inspectors.

Implications: the probe could trigger new compliance scrutiny across Southeast Asian cloud operators and hardware lessors, complicate supply chains for Company Nvidia and other chip suppliers, and accelerate policy debates in Washington about how to police cross-border transactions involving next-generation AI processors. Observers should expect more on-site inspections, deeper customs forensics, and potential regulatory actions if concrete evidence of diversion or concealed ownership emerges.