8 ms·

Going to be watching closely - but cynically, a promise of investment (for avoidance of tariffs) only needs to last one news cycle until tariffs are no longer t

Going to be watching closely - but cynically, a promise of investment (for avoidance of tariffs) only needs to last one news cycle until tariffs are no longer top of mind. Then it can be walked back without tariffs being imposed. Maybe instead of saying the t-word tariff, US gov can charge Apple a special fee on each iPhone. They can call it something catchy, like say, a Core Technology Fee.

matwood 2y ago
Sounds like a throwback lol https://edition.cnn.com/2019/09/23/tech/apple-mac-pro-united-states/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2019/09/23/tech/apple-mac-pro-united...
- le-mark 2y ago
  This should be the top comment. Apple are doing business the way business is done, just like last time. Results don’t matter, it’s economic policy via press release. Form over substance.
  - tesch1 2y ago
    Results matter, it's not hard to imagine that Apple considers the real risk of its promise and market position of being the privacy option being undermined by their supply chain risks, and leverage being used against them by privacy unfriendly actors.
    - jajko 2y ago
      Results don't matter as much as PR, this is time when this is unfortunately valid. Just look at US elections. Measurable results affect rational aspects of our minds, PR attempts to attacks directly emotions bypassing the former, ie to induce impulsive shopping. Also, what actual security? Apple is as vulnerable as cheap chinese phones against state actors using 0days. Apple devices are still being stolen for spare parts, Apple doesnt secure each component AFAIK and thieves know this (very recent case with friend of a friend, they even knew how to bypass that built in airtag tracking). I haven't seen anything but very well crafted PR statements on this topic. All money-accessing apps on absolutely any phone are a security risk. But folks love convenience above all.
    - themacguffinman 2y ago
      What's the added risk here? It's fine to "risk" almost the entire iPhone itself to be manufactured in China but the servers for some random AI features need to be pure? Sounds more like technical marketing and the company will treat any decisions around it as a marketing exercise.
      - roughly 2y ago
        Apple's commented previously on why they build in China, and it's beyond just the pricing - the supply chain for every single part they use is in China and mostly in the same geographic region, so there's a level of flexibility there they couldn't get in the US. It wouldn't surprise me if it was genuinely a goal for Apple to manufacture more in the US - they're a notoriously privacy-focused (corporate, not end-user) company, and China's known for IP wandering its way off campus. They're not going to sacrifice the iPhone economics until the US option is actually viable, but I'm not surprised they keep kicking the tires on US manufacturing.
        Reason077 2y ago
        > "the supply chain for every single part they use is in China" Not entirely true. Some of the highest value components in an iPhone, including the CPU/SoC, baseband, and the majority of OLED displays, are sourced from countries that are not mainland China.
        lttlrck 2y ago
        You clipped off > and mostly in the same geographic region
        tooltalk 2y ago
        It's mostly about cost and market access to China. Most smartphone supply-chain for Samsung and Apple exist outside China -- primarily in Japan (camera, sensors), South Korea (DRAM/NAND, OLED), and the US (various ICs fabbed at TSMC in Taiwan). There are quite a few reliable estimates/teardowns showing that these three countries account for close to about 90% of iPhone BOM (bill of materials). That's one reason why Samsung's smartphone unit was able to pull out of China without much disruption back in 2019 -- ie, low dependence on China. I feel that Apple has pushed this misleading narrative a bit too long to defend their massive China outsourcing.
  - catlover76 2y ago
    [dead]
  - palmotea 2y ago
    > This should be the top comment. Apple are doing business the way business is done, just like last time. Results don’t matter, it’s economic policy via press release. Form over substance. If the Trump administration has any competence, they will rub those old promises in Apple's face until Cook actually does something meaningful.
    - kergonath 2y ago
      The whole Trump administration is all about form over substance, though. I would not expect Trump to do anything actually productive about it, as long as Tim Cook sings his praise (and pays his dues).
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
rayiner 2y ago
Maybe the next administration should keep up the tariffs (as Biden did to a degree). Cheap trade with China distorts the tech sector too. Jobs and Wozniak were the products of a system in which americans had to build products at home. Tim Cook is the product of a system where you can become a trillion company by hyper-optimizing foreign supply chains. Which is better?
- ipaddr 2y ago
  Apple went bankrupt under Jobs and Wozniak and was saved by hyper optimizing foreign supply chain company Microsoft only to rise 10 years later by focusing on hyper optimizing foreign supply.
  - relistan 2y ago
    There was a lot more than that going on and I think you've pretty generally mischaracterized the main problem with the mid-80's era Apple—which had nothing to do with domestic manufacturing and everything to do with not delivering new products that people wanted, at a reasonable price. You can claim overseas manufacturing solved the pricing component of that, but that's not at all clear: other companies were manufacturing in the US at the time and still out-competing Apple.
  - bluedino 2y ago
    All of the big PC companies had factories in Texas in the 80's and early 90's, didn't they? And Dell became a case study of outsourcing everything (and sending your stock and profits soaring the whole time), until you have nothing.
  - coliveira 2y ago
    I don't know about Microsoft, but I'm very clear that the "miracle" operated by Apple was exactly to perfect foreign supply chain at a time when Intel/Dell/HP and others were still heavily focused on the US. The quality of Apple products was already there since the beginning, but they had no way to compete with the PC market until they figured out Asian supply chains.
  - 2y ago
Evidlo 2y ago
I don't understand. Can companies curry government favor to get tariff exceptions? Aren't the tariffs in place already?
- runjake 2y ago
  Apparently, yes. I saw mention of discussion around the Trump administration potentially giving Apple a tariff waiver. And I believe in Trump’s last term, Apple did have some sort of waiver. I’m on mobile but Googling for “Apple tariff waiver” and “Apple tariff exemption” will point you to several news items.
  - runjake 2y ago
    A couple (from a pool of many) citations: From the 45 presidency: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/apple-escaped-tariffs-last-time-this-time-it-may-have-to-raise-prices-958d50fa https://www.marketwatch.com/story/apple-escaped-tariffs-last... Now: https://9to5mac.com/2024/12/17/analyst-trump-will-waive-apples-china-tariffs-so-it-doesnt-lose-to-samsung/ https://9to5mac.com/2024/12/17/analyst-trump-will-waive-appl...
- teaearlgraycold 2y ago
  You can when the president is corrupt.
  - slt2021 2y ago
    Its not corruption when the president creates US jobs It is corruption when president outsources and offshores US jobs, though
    - stetrain 2y ago
      Neither of those fit the definition of corruption.
    - simonh 2y ago
      There is no jobs problem in the US though. Unemployment is at 4% which is mostly just job churn. Long term unemployment is only 1%. US consumers, that’s all of you, are being hammered with taxes on imported goods most of which can’t realistically be produced in the US anyway, to solve a problem you don’t have. A commitment like this takes years to plan. It can’t possibly be a response to tariffs announced weeks ago. This is all optics.
grahamj 2y ago
My first thought was payment to avoid sanctions for being "woke" (read: anti-discrimination)
monero-xmr 2y ago
I am a free trader in principle. However you have a country (China) with an authoritarian government that makes favored industries subsidized. Of course the standard economic argument is that China using its GDP to make goods cheaper for our own citizens to purchase is better for us - they are subsidizing our economy. However it ignores the strategic disadvantage by our country losing its manufacturing capabilities. The graphs may show economic advantage. It’s hard to quantify the long term strategic and militaristic disadvantage to not being able to make anything yourself if a world war occurs.
- curt15 2y ago
  >However you have a country (China) with an authoritarian government that makes favored industries subsidized. If things keep going the way they are going, that could describe the US just as well in a few short years.
  - dsr_ 2y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Fruit_Company https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Fruit_Company "The company responded by intensively lobbying the U.S. government to intervene and mounting a misinformation campaign to portray the Guatemalan government as communist.[18] In 1954, the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency armed, funded, and trained a military force that deposed the democratically elected government of Guatemala and installed a pro-business military dictatorship.[19]" This is not a one-time aberration.
  - jay-barronville 2y ago
    > If things keep going the way they are going, that could describe the US just as well in a few short years. Why do you think so?
- ThinkBeat 2y ago
  The US subsidizes a hell of a lot themselves already.
- myrmidon 2y ago
  > However you have a country (China) with an authoritarian government that makes favored industries subsidized. This is overlooking the forest for one tree. The thing is, mean chinese manufacturing wages are $25k/year (purchasing parity adjusted! $15k unadjusted) for a 49h week. That is the reason that so much manufacturing/industry has shifted there, not some nebulous "Chinese government subsidies" (not saying those are not a thing, just that they don't really matter all that much). > It’s hard to quantify the long term strategic and militaristic disadvantage to not being able to make anything yourself if a world war occurs. Certainly. But forcing low-skill industry to stay at a relevant size in a high-wage country is expensive business (compare agriculture, which is subsidized basically for exactly this reason) and not straightforward (see Jones act). Presenting tariffs as a viable alternative to taxation is just beyond ridicule, but that has not stopped people so far either...
luxuryballs 2y ago
there’s also the “national security aspect”, government often wants certain hardware not to be made offshore at all
napierzaza 2y ago
[dead]
PeterStuer 2y ago
Let's go with 'Genius Tax'. Your average Apple fanboi will be lining up around the block for the prestige to pay that twice :D.
dunham 2y ago
Gruber suggests Apple already had these plans and simply packaged the up as a win for the current administration: https://daringfireball.net/linked/2025/02/24/mission-accomplished https://daringfireball.net/linked/2025/02/24/mission-accompl... I don't pay enough attention to Apple's plans to judge if he is right.
- rco8786 2y ago
  This is inline with what other entities (Canadian and Mexican governments) have done when threatened with tariffs.
- aSithLord 2y ago
  [dead]

matwood 2y ago

Sounds like a throwback lol https://edition.cnn.com/2019/09/23/tech/apple-mac-pro-united-states/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2019/09/23/tech/apple-mac-pro-united...

le-mark 2y ago
This should be the top comment. Apple are doing business the way business is done, just like last time. Results don’t matter, it’s economic policy via press release. Form over substance.
- tesch1 2y ago
  Results matter, it's not hard to imagine that Apple considers the real risk of its promise and market position of being the privacy option being undermined by their supply chain risks, and leverage being used against them by privacy unfriendly actors.
  - jajko 2y ago
    Results don't matter as much as PR, this is time when this is unfortunately valid. Just look at US elections. Measurable results affect rational aspects of our minds, PR attempts to attacks directly emotions bypassing the former, ie to induce impulsive shopping. Also, what actual security? Apple is as vulnerable as cheap chinese phones against state actors using 0days. Apple devices are still being stolen for spare parts, Apple doesnt secure each component AFAIK and thieves know this (very recent case with friend of a friend, they even knew how to bypass that built in airtag tracking). I haven't seen anything but very well crafted PR statements on this topic. All money-accessing apps on absolutely any phone are a security risk. But folks love convenience above all.
  - themacguffinman 2y ago
    What's the added risk here? It's fine to "risk" almost the entire iPhone itself to be manufactured in China but the servers for some random AI features need to be pure? Sounds more like technical marketing and the company will treat any decisions around it as a marketing exercise.
    - roughly 2y ago
      Apple's commented previously on why they build in China, and it's beyond just the pricing - the supply chain for every single part they use is in China and mostly in the same geographic region, so there's a level of flexibility there they couldn't get in the US. It wouldn't surprise me if it was genuinely a goal for Apple to manufacture more in the US - they're a notoriously privacy-focused (corporate, not end-user) company, and China's known for IP wandering its way off campus. They're not going to sacrifice the iPhone economics until the US option is actually viable, but I'm not surprised they keep kicking the tires on US manufacturing.
      - Reason077 2y ago
        > "the supply chain for every single part they use is in China" Not entirely true. Some of the highest value components in an iPhone, including the CPU/SoC, baseband, and the majority of OLED displays, are sourced from countries that are not mainland China.
        lttlrck 2y ago
        You clipped off > and mostly in the same geographic region
      - tooltalk 2y ago
        It's mostly about cost and market access to China. Most smartphone supply-chain for Samsung and Apple exist outside China -- primarily in Japan (camera, sensors), South Korea (DRAM/NAND, OLED), and the US (various ICs fabbed at TSMC in Taiwan). There are quite a few reliable estimates/teardowns showing that these three countries account for close to about 90% of iPhone BOM (bill of materials). That's one reason why Samsung's smartphone unit was able to pull out of China without much disruption back in 2019 -- ie, low dependence on China. I feel that Apple has pushed this misleading narrative a bit too long to defend their massive China outsourcing.
- catlover76 2y ago
  [dead]
- palmotea 2y ago
  > This should be the top comment. Apple are doing business the way business is done, just like last time. Results don’t matter, it’s economic policy via press release. Form over substance. If the Trump administration has any competence, they will rub those old promises in Apple's face until Cook actually does something meaningful.
  - kergonath 2y ago
    The whole Trump administration is all about form over substance, though. I would not expect Trump to do anything actually productive about it, as long as Tim Cook sings his praise (and pays his dues).

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

rayiner 2y ago

Maybe the next administration should keep up the tariffs (as Biden did to a degree). Cheap trade with China distorts the tech sector too. Jobs and Wozniak were the products of a system in which americans had to build products at home. Tim Cook is the product of a system where you can become a trillion company by hyper-optimizing foreign supply chains. Which is better?

ipaddr 2y ago
Apple went bankrupt under Jobs and Wozniak and was saved by hyper optimizing foreign supply chain company Microsoft only to rise 10 years later by focusing on hyper optimizing foreign supply.
- relistan 2y ago
  There was a lot more than that going on and I think you've pretty generally mischaracterized the main problem with the mid-80's era Apple—which had nothing to do with domestic manufacturing and everything to do with not delivering new products that people wanted, at a reasonable price. You can claim overseas manufacturing solved the pricing component of that, but that's not at all clear: other companies were manufacturing in the US at the time and still out-competing Apple.
- bluedino 2y ago
  All of the big PC companies had factories in Texas in the 80's and early 90's, didn't they? And Dell became a case study of outsourcing everything (and sending your stock and profits soaring the whole time), until you have nothing.
- coliveira 2y ago
  I don't know about Microsoft, but I'm very clear that the "miracle" operated by Apple was exactly to perfect foreign supply chain at a time when Intel/Dell/HP and others were still heavily focused on the US. The quality of Apple products was already there since the beginning, but they had no way to compete with the PC market until they figured out Asian supply chains.
- 2y ago

Evidlo 2y ago

I don't understand. Can companies curry government favor to get tariff exceptions? Aren't the tariffs in place already?

runjake 2y ago
Apparently, yes. I saw mention of discussion around the Trump administration potentially giving Apple a tariff waiver. And I believe in Trump’s last term, Apple did have some sort of waiver. I’m on mobile but Googling for “Apple tariff waiver” and “Apple tariff exemption” will point you to several news items.
- runjake 2y ago
  A couple (from a pool of many) citations: From the 45 presidency: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/apple-escaped-tariffs-last-time-this-time-it-may-have-to-raise-prices-958d50fa https://www.marketwatch.com/story/apple-escaped-tariffs-last... Now: https://9to5mac.com/2024/12/17/analyst-trump-will-waive-apples-china-tariffs-so-it-doesnt-lose-to-samsung/ https://9to5mac.com/2024/12/17/analyst-trump-will-waive-appl...
teaearlgraycold 2y ago
You can when the president is corrupt.
- slt2021 2y ago
  Its not corruption when the president creates US jobs It is corruption when president outsources and offshores US jobs, though
  - stetrain 2y ago
    Neither of those fit the definition of corruption.
  - simonh 2y ago
    There is no jobs problem in the US though. Unemployment is at 4% which is mostly just job churn. Long term unemployment is only 1%. US consumers, that’s all of you, are being hammered with taxes on imported goods most of which can’t realistically be produced in the US anyway, to solve a problem you don’t have. A commitment like this takes years to plan. It can’t possibly be a response to tariffs announced weeks ago. This is all optics.

grahamj 2y ago

My first thought was payment to avoid sanctions for being "woke" (read: anti-discrimination)

monero-xmr 2y ago

I am a free trader in principle. However you have a country (China) with an authoritarian government that makes favored industries subsidized. Of course the standard economic argument is that China using its GDP to make goods cheaper for our own citizens to purchase is better for us - they are subsidizing our economy. However it ignores the strategic disadvantage by our country losing its manufacturing capabilities. The graphs may show economic advantage. It’s hard to quantify the long term strategic and militaristic disadvantage to not being able to make anything yourself if a world war occurs.

curt15 2y ago
>However you have a country (China) with an authoritarian government that makes favored industries subsidized. If things keep going the way they are going, that could describe the US just as well in a few short years.
- dsr_ 2y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Fruit_Company https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Fruit_Company "The company responded by intensively lobbying the U.S. government to intervene and mounting a misinformation campaign to portray the Guatemalan government as communist.[18] In 1954, the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency armed, funded, and trained a military force that deposed the democratically elected government of Guatemala and installed a pro-business military dictatorship.[19]" This is not a one-time aberration.
- jay-barronville 2y ago
  > If things keep going the way they are going, that could describe the US just as well in a few short years. Why do you think so?
ThinkBeat 2y ago
The US subsidizes a hell of a lot themselves already.
myrmidon 2y ago
> However you have a country (China) with an authoritarian government that makes favored industries subsidized. This is overlooking the forest for one tree. The thing is, mean chinese manufacturing wages are $25k/year (purchasing parity adjusted! $15k unadjusted) for a 49h week. That is the reason that so much manufacturing/industry has shifted there, not some nebulous "Chinese government subsidies" (not saying those are not a thing, just that they don't really matter all that much). > It’s hard to quantify the long term strategic and militaristic disadvantage to not being able to make anything yourself if a world war occurs. Certainly. But forcing low-skill industry to stay at a relevant size in a high-wage country is expensive business (compare agriculture, which is subsidized basically for exactly this reason) and not straightforward (see Jones act). Presenting tariffs as a viable alternative to taxation is just beyond ridicule, but that has not stopped people so far either...

luxuryballs 2y ago

there’s also the “national security aspect”, government often wants certain hardware not to be made offshore at all

napierzaza 2y ago

[dead]

PeterStuer 2y ago

Let's go with 'Genius Tax'. Your average Apple fanboi will be lining up around the block for the prestige to pay that twice :D.

dunham 2y ago

Gruber suggests Apple already had these plans and simply packaged the up as a win for the current administration: https://daringfireball.net/linked/2025/02/24/mission-accomplished https://daringfireball.net/linked/2025/02/24/mission-accompl... I don't pay enough attention to Apple's plans to judge if he is right.

rco8786 2y ago
This is inline with what other entities (Canadian and Mexican governments) have done when threatened with tariffs.
aSithLord 2y ago
[dead]