Memory Prices Soar… Is the Government Focused Only on ‘Grocery Inflati…

메모리 가격 인상을 표현한 이미지 / 사진 제미나이로 생성

While the government closely scrutinizes sugar and flour prices, it appears to be standing by as soaring memory semiconductor prices push up the cost of smartphones and laptops. Critics argue that although the essentials of modern life have changed, the government’s concept of “consumer prices” remains tied to traditional grocery items.

It is no longer unusual for premium smartphones to be priced well above 2 million won. Foldable and ultra-high-end models are approaching 3 million won, prompting complaints that replacing a phone now requires serious financial resolve.

The issue cannot be simply attributed to exchange rates. Analyzing the pricing structure of smartphones and PCs suggests that structurally higher unit prices for memory semiconductors—key components—are a major factor.

According to market research firms and industry sources, explosive demand for high-bandwidth memory (HBM) used in AI servers has led manufacturers to prioritize production lines for higher-margin HBM, reducing the supply of general-purpose DRAM. The upward trend in memory prices that began in 2024 has continued through 2025 and into early 2026, even giving rise to the term “chipflation” (chip + inflation). The fact that global equipment and component suppliers are still urging clients to secure sufficient core component inventories underscores how tight supply remains.

The beneficiaries of soaring memory prices are evident in semiconductor companies’ earnings. SK Hynix, driven by AI server memory and HBM demand, posted 97.1467 trillion won in revenue and 47.2063 trillion won in operating profit in 2025. Samsung Electronics also saw its semiconductor (DS) division in the fourth quarter of 2025 recover to one of its highest levels in recent years, centered on memory chips.

For companies, it may be a record boom. For consumers, it is a different story. As higher memory costs are embedded in smartphone, laptop, and tablet prices, consumers complain that they can no longer purchase the same specifications at previous price levels. Some global manufacturers have responded by raising prices on premium models or lowering memory capacity and specifications to maintain price points. Ultimately, consumers are left with three choices: pay more, downgrade, or extend replacement cycles.

Notably, major countries are responding differently to rising IT device prices. The Trump administration in the United States pushed forward a “reciprocal tariff” policy aimed at protecting domestic industries but decided to exclude key electronic products such as smartphones, laptops, monitors, and semiconductors from tariffs. The calculation appears to be that if flagship products like the iPhone were to surge in price due to tariffs, consumer backlash and inflationary pressure would spike quickly.

The Japanese government has poured massive subsidies into stabilizing the semiconductor supply chain. It has pledged support worth trillions of yen for the establishment and expansion of semiconductor plants in Japan by domestic and foreign firms, attaching conditions that prioritize domestic supply in times of crisis. The strategy is to anchor production capacity within the country to prevent chip price spikes and supply disruptions from directly translating into higher finished-product prices.

The European Union, through the European Chips Act, aims to boost regional production capacity while establishing early warning systems and crisis response mechanisms to reduce supply chain shocks. The approach seeks to address structural vulnerabilities that cause finished-product prices to jump when specific components are scarce.

Though the methods and pace differ, these countries share a common recognition: digital device prices are ultimately part of everyday consumer inflation.

The Korean government’s focus, however, remains close to the grocery basket. While measures targeting price collusion and distribution structures of traditional necessities such as sugar, flour, and instant noodles continue to emerge, digital essentials like smartphones, laptops, and tablets are largely absent from the scope of “price management.”

Of course, the government cannot directly lower semiconductor prices formed in global markets. However, policies such as tax benefits, purchase subsidies, and digital device support for low-income groups and young people could be designed to ease the actual burden. This is why some argue that digital prices should be managed as a separate policy axis.

While attention remains fixed on sugar and flour, what may truly be tightening consumers’ wallets are the smartphones in their pockets and the laptops on their desks. Unless the definition of essential goods expands with the times, the government’s call for “price stabilization” risks sounding increasingly detached from reality.