What is the breakdown of TSMC's $40 billion to $45 billion capex in terms of geographic location (Taiwan, US, Japan)
n specifically on the N6-based RF transceiver. I recall that in your symposium back in June last year, you mentioned that the N6-based RF transceiver fr 5G. Can you give us more update, as we know that there's not much expansion on 16- or 12-nanometer, which is the major technology node for 5G, the RF transceiver? And with the limited supply, just curious about the N6-based 5G RF transceiver, would that become the mainstream? Or what TSMS's capacity plan in this area? And also the client engagement for the N6-based RFs?
Jeff Su
OK, Laura. Let me try to summarize. Her questions about RF transceivers for 5G. She wants to know, there doesn't seem to be any major capacity expansion.
So what is TSMC's strategy for RF transceivers for 5G and also N6? You're talking in N16 or N6, sorry, Laura?
Laura Chen -- KGI Securities -- Analyst
The N6 because right now, most of are transceiver are in 16, from my understanding.
Jeff Su
Yes.
Laura Chen -- KGI Securities -- Analyst
Yes. But there is not much difference.
Jeff Su
So she wants to update on N6 RF transceiver strategy.
C.C. Wei -- Chief Executive Officer
OK, Laura. We always are working with our customers closely, right? And the customer makes their decision to choose which technology node and to match their product design best. And you are right. Right now, transceiver is starting moving from 28-nanometer to 16, and now moving to N6.
We are expanding our capacity to meet the demand. That's all I can say. Did that answer your question?
Laura Chen -- KGI Securities -- Analyst
OK. yes. I think -- can I follow up that will we expect that N6-based RF will be the majority sometime, say, in 2023 or '24?
Jeff Su
So Laura's follow-up is, can we expect N6 RF to be the majority in -- by 2023 or '24?
C.C. Wei -- Chief Executive Officer
Well, I should not comment on that. This is between TSMC and the TSMC's customers.
Laura Chen -- KGI Securities -- Analyst
Got it. Thank you very much.
Jeff Su
OK. Thank you. Operator, in the interest of time, I think we'll take the final two questions.
Operator
Next one to ask questions, Krish Sankar from Cowen and Company.
Krish Sankar -- Cowen and Company -- Analyst
Yes. Thanks for taking the question, and congrats on the really strong results. My first question is on gross margins. Wendell, you said long-term gross margin about 53%.
The last couple of quarters, you said it will be over 50%. So is it safe to assume that the price increases are the big reason for this increase in gross margin? And are these structural? Or are they cyclical? And is there some other variable in play given in gross margin improvement, since it's interesting that capex is going up, but the depreciation is not having an impact longer term on the gross margins? That's my first question.
Jeff Su
OK. Krish, let me summarize your first question. So Krish notes that Wendell is -- and C.C. said our long-term gross margin target -- last time we said 50% and higher.
Now today, we said 53% and higher. So is this because of price? And is this a cyclical element only? Or is this something structural in terms of a higher 53% and higher long-term gross margin target?
Wendell Huang -- Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Yes. Well, let me share with you that. We're talking about long term. So several years down the road.
I think that shouldn't be a cyclical issue. So previously, it's long term, 50% and higher. Now it's long term, 53% and higher, OK? So that's the difference. And we are working closely with our customers and suppliers to both sell our value and drive our cost improvements.
So those are the -- this is the result of all these efforts together.
Krish Sankar -- Cowen and Company -- Analyst
Got it. Got it. All right. And then my second question is kind of a two-part question.
It's a capex and the opex question, you spoke about $40 billion to $45 billion capex. Can you just tell us how much of the capex is going to be split between Taiwan and US and Japan, like a geographic breakdown of that $40 billion to $44 billion? And the opex side, I understand you don't want to comment o
n specifically on the N6-based RF transceiver. I recall that in your symposium back in June last year, you mentioned that the N6-based RF transceiver fr 5G. Can you give us more update, as we know that there's not much expansion on 16- or 12-nanometer, which is the major technology node for 5G, the RF transceiver? And with the limited supply, just curious about the N6-based 5G RF transceiver, would that become the mainstream? Or what TSMS's capacity plan in this area? And also the client engagement for the N6-based RFs?
Jeff Su
OK, Laura. Let me try to summarize. Her questions about RF transceivers for 5G. She wants to know, there doesn't seem to be any major capacity expansion.
So what is TSMC's strategy for RF transceivers for 5G and also N6? You're talking in N16 or N6, sorry, Laura?
Laura Chen -- KGI Securities -- Analyst
The N6 because right now, most of are transceiver are in 16, from my understanding.
Jeff Su
Yes.
Laura Chen -- KGI Securities -- Analyst
Yes. But there is not much difference.
Jeff Su
So she wants to update on N6 RF transceiver strategy.
C.C. Wei -- Chief Executive Officer
OK, Laura. We always are working with our customers closely, right? And the customer makes their decision to choose which technology node and to match their product design best. And you are right. Right now, transceiver is starting moving from 28-nanometer to 16, and now moving to N6.
We are expanding our capacity to meet the demand. That's all I can say. Did that answer your question?
Laura Chen -- KGI Securities -- Analyst
OK. yes. I think -- can I follow up that will we expect that N6-based RF will be the majority sometime, say, in 2023 or '24?
Jeff Su
So Laura's follow-up is, can we expect N6 RF to be the majority in -- by 2023 or '24?
C.C. Wei -- Chief Executive Officer
Well, I should not comment on that. This is between TSMC and the TSMC's customers.
Laura Chen -- KGI Securities -- Analyst
Got it. Thank you very much.
Jeff Su
 OK. Thank you. Operator, in the interest of time, I think we'll take the final two questions.
Operator
Next one to ask questions, Krish Sankar from Cowen and Company.
Krish Sankar -- Cowen and Company -- Analyst
Yes. Thanks for taking the question, and congrats on the really strong results. My first question is on gross margins. Wendell, you said long-term gross margin about 53%.
The last couple of quarters, you said it will be over 50%. So is it safe to assume that the price increases are the big reason for this increase in gross margin? And are these structural? Or are they cyclical? And is there some other variable in play given in gross margin improvement, since it's interesting that capex is going up, but the depreciation is not having an impact longer term on the gross margins? That's my first question.
Jeff Su
OK. Krish, let me summarize your first question. So Krish notes that Wendell is -- and C.C. said our long-term gross margin target -- last time we said 50% and higher.
Now today, we said 53% and higher. So is this because of price? And is this a cyclical element only? Or is this something structural in terms of a higher 53% and higher long-term gross margin target?
Wendell Huang -- Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Yes. Well, let me share with you that. We're talking about long term. So several years down the road.
I think that shouldn't be a cyclical issue. So previously, it's long term, 50% and higher. Now it's long term, 53% and higher, OK? So that's the difference. And we are working closely with our customers and suppliers to both sell our value and drive our cost improvements.
So those are the -- this is the result of all these efforts together.
Krish Sankar -- Cowen and Company -- Analyst
Got it. Got it. All right. And then my second question is kind of a two-part question.
It's a capex and the opex question, you spoke about $40 billion to $45 billion capex. Can you just tell us how much of the capex is going to be split between Taiwan and US and Japan, like a geographic breakdown of that $40 billion to $44 billion? And the opex side, I understand you don't want to comment o