3 ms·

So, my interpretation is not the same as yours. It does not appear that there is any consideration in this list for something along the lines suggested by the G

So, my interpretation is not the same as yours. It does not appear that there is any consideration in this list for something along the lines suggested by the GP. Namely, I don't see "Company agrees to bring production of some other product into the US" as grounds for granting the waiver. Is there any evidence that this was a quid pro quo sort of arrangement?

wyldfire 7y ago
That's the vibe I got from the Apple PR. "Yay, still made in USA. This wouldn't have been possible without the exemption we got from the govt for us to import these parts w/o high tariffs." (Simultaneously prostrating ourselves and indicating our resolve to move production if necessary) [1] https://mobile.twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1154774656861257732 https://mobile.twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1154774656...
- lonelappde 7y ago
  The point is that Apple tried to build a Mac in Texas, but would have to pay a tariff on some component X. So Apple said maybe it's better to build a the whole thing in China since we're paying tariff anyway. And the administration said OK, you can import X without tariff to enable the assembly in TX. It's not Apple's that the tariff pricing structure had perverse incentives.
  - hoseja 7y ago
    Except material/component cost and Apple margins are utterly unrelated.