Slashdot Mirror


Apple Says New China Tariffs Would Boost Prices On Some Products (bloomberg.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Bloomberg: Apple, the world's most valuable company, said proposed U.S. tariffs on $200 billion worth of products imported from China will raise prices for some of its popular consumer goods such as the Apple Watch and AirPods headphones. The Mac mini desktop computer, Apple Pencil stylus accessory for iPads, various chargers and adapters and tooling equipment used to manufacturer and design some products in the U.S. will also be affected, the Cupertino, California-based company told the Office of U.S. Trade Representative in a letter dated Sept 5.

The company said the tariffs would "show up as a tax on U.S. consumers" and "increase the cost of Apple products that our customers have come to rely on in their daily lives." Beyond the core products, Apple said accessories like the HomePod speaker, some Beats speakers, AirPort and Time Capsule internet routers, the Magic Mouse and Magic Trackpad, and leather cases for the iPhone, iPad, MacBook and Apple Pencil would be affected. It said some of the parts it relies on for product development, including processors and research equipment, would also be hit by the tariffs.
On Friday, President Trump said he's prepared to impose tariffs on an additional $267 billion in Chinese imports, which would affect almost every category of consumer goods, according to analysts. He cites unfair trade practices as a reason for the tariffs.

240 comments

  1. Guess what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    People will still buy them at the same rate they do now.

    1. Re:Guess what by drnb · · Score: 1

      People will still buy them at the same rate they do now.

      Imagine the horror if they did not, upgrading their iPhone every three years instead of two.

    2. Re:Guess what by kenh · · Score: 2

      I am shocked, SHOCKED I tell you, to learn that Apple has to raise prices to maintain traditional profits on their devices. Apparently there is no room in the price of an iPhone.

      --
      Ken
    3. Re:Guess what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple devices arent for everybody, Just because you have to say things like "would you like fries with that", or "would you like that supersized" doesn't mean that more successful people should be deprived of the opportunity to spend more. I appreciate the work you do, you're doing a great job, don't let anyone tell you otherwise. Now back to my macs/iphone/ipads.

    4. Re: Guess what by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      You do understand that most smart phones are manufactured in China right? A tariff on China will affect your Samsung, HTC, Huawei, or LG phone the same if it is manufactured in China.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    5. Re:Guess what by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      Um, isn't the whole point of this tariff to try to push companies like Apple to manufacture stuff in the USA instead of China?

      Maybe Trump should tweet somebody at Apple and tell them.

      --
      No sig today...
    6. Re:Guess what by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Um, isn't the whole point of this tariff to try to push companies like Apple to manufacture stuff in the USA instead of China?

      That is the point. But it is not the result. Tariffs lead to retaliation. It makes no sense for companies to set up separate manufacturing in every country where they do business, rather than in a single efficient factory. Doing so raises prices. The only question is if it is cheaper to just pay the tariff instead.

      Apple may decide to assemble some phones in America, but with automation this will create few jobs. Meanwhile, other companies will move operations OUT of America, as Harley-Davidson is already doing. Boeing will likely move some manufacturing to China, to avoid losing the entire Asian market to Airbus. Many semiconductor companies will do the same. Brazilian soybeans have already gone up in price while American soybeans are falling.

      All of this leads to inefficiency, fragmentation, despecialization, higher prices, lower wages, and lower living standards.

    7. Re:Guess what by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      All of this leads to inefficiency, fragmentation, despecialization, higher prices, lower wages, and lower living standards.

      The horrors! You mean that globalists, and people who hitch their wagon to the globalism cart, won't make the maximum possible return on their effort?!?

    8. Re:Guess what by dryeo · · Score: 1

      Globalist companies like Apple will do fine just jacking up their prices. I do see lots of small companies having to eat the tariffs though.
      Then there is the cost for subsidies but I guess borrowing a few trillion is fine.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    9. Re:Guess what by sjames · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's NOT what happened when tariffs were applied to Japanese cars. Lo and behold, they opened factories in the U.S. As a knock-on effect, Detroit auto makers had to up their game.

    10. Re:Guess what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have to be a really dumb kind of shit to look at Apple, one of the most successful companies in American history, and think "I'd like to damage their business in the name of US economic nationalism". But then, you think Trump has your interests at heart, so clearly, you are indeed a dumb shit

    11. Re: Guess what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And out of all these companies and others; apple gets exactly none of my sympathy.
      All the other companies are producing great product at reasonable prices.

    12. Re:Guess what by default+luser · · Score: 2

      Yea, but cars are large goods that are already expensive to ship overseas. Like Alcohol. In a global make, it was just a matter of time before they moved h e factories here. The tarrifs only protected Detroit automakers from going under,until they could copy the Japanese on business methods..

      Most of the goods produced by Silicon Valley in China are of the sightly more portable variety. And since these OEMs are producing products for the entire world, the US is only a very small piece of that pie, so the companies will either just raise prices here in the US (like Apple will).

      So yeah, this may bring home production of washers and dryers, but not the small stuff that's dirt-cheap to ship in-bulk. And it just so happens those are the most lucrative manufacturing jobs.

      In a global economy, the best thing for everyone i to put the factories where they are he most efficient. Moving production of everything to China has lowered the cost of living in the US significantly, and we've been able to replace the lost manufacturing jobs with globally-compatitive software and services.

      --

      Man is the animal that laughs.
      And occasionally whores for Karma.

    13. Re:Guess what by sjames · · Score: 2

      Yes, I'm sure the guys assembling the washing machines all transitioned to lucrative software development jobs!

      As for service jobs, they pay less typically. So for them, the standard of living is going down, not up.

      But on the bright side, we do burn a lot more polluting bunker oil shipping those washers and dryers to the U.S. and we get to be economically dependent on a sort-of communist country that is only sometimes friendly with us.

    14. Re:Guess what by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      People will still buy them at the same rate they do now.

      Imagine the horror if they did not, upgrading their iPhone every three years instead of two.

      I am still rockin' my 6 Plus. With 93% capacity still left on my original battery, I see no reason yet to upgrade.

    15. Re:Guess what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I prefer an automated society rather than one run by low paid exploited worker. So, I welcome maximum automatisation..

    16. Re:Guess what by martinX · · Score: 1

      I got a A$39 battery swap for my iPhone 6 so I am rocking a 100% capacity.

      --
      When they came for the communists, I said "He's next door. Take him away. Goddam commies."
    17. Re:Guess what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People will still buy them at the same rate they do now.

      Imagine the horror if they did not, upgrading their iPhone every three years instead of two.

      But Apple already expects first users to keep their iPhones for 3 years. https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-expects-people-to-use-their-iphones-for-3-years-on-average/

    18. Re:Guess what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One could argue that exploiting low wages and artificially keeping the exchange rates low against the USD would lead to retaliation in the form of tariffs. But such a move would take balls.

    19. Re:Guess what by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      Good for you.

      I will likely take advantage of that offer, too; just because...

    20. Re: Guess what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In asia where typcially the latest apple is 3 to 4 months minimum wage, yes usa has alot of catching up to do before reaching a point people will stop buying it.

  2. Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple's products are already too expensive as it is and then even more expensive than that with the current exchange rates, this can only mean even fewer Mac users in the future, which means even less software available for them.

    Since Windows is a console OS, what's the best Linux/BSD alternative to macOS?

    1. Re: Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm kind of partial to Gentoo

    2. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the one that works best for YOUR needs, not someone elses on slashdot.

    3. Re: Great by dbialac · · Score: 1

      Apple products are just going to continue to get worse. The last good (read: customer focused) iPhone was the 6S. Nobody was asking for the headphone jack to be removed. It was a move that was motivated solely by profit. Bluetooth sounds awful if you have a half way decent stereo or set of headphones. The UI has been ugly since iOS 7 and Macs are about to become far less useful when they switch to ARM processors, again a move solely focused on profits and not the interests of the customer. Appleâ(TM)s only saving grace on mobile is the current CEO respects privacy. If he leaves, they potentially lose that as well. On the desktop, demand will fall because few want a computer that doesnâ(TM)t do anything particularly well, and Intel CPUs can already get you through 12 hours of normal use.

  3. Can you feel the greatness! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Great increases in cost!

    Someone's got to pay for that tax break.

    1. Re: Can you feel the greatness! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple products should be taxed like cigarettes.

    2. Re: Can you feel the greatness! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All taxes and tariffs affect consumers. Tariffs are meant to protect producers. The two countries are competing to have jobs and production capacity, where China is trying to focus on finished goods and design across many industries. When you have a great deal of economic theft and espionage, a tariff is a means to stop that behavior since the tariffs are used to negotiate on many fronts, not just one.

  4. Trump would like that by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    He gets a twofer in his mind: Look strong on Chin and punish silicon valley who he sees as his enemy.

    --
    I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    1. Re: Trump would like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Silicon valley did cast the first stone, after all. How are you supposed to view an entity who treats you like an enemy?

    2. Re:Trump would like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Look strong on Chin

      What about Wang?

      Trump's strategy is sound and it takes a guy like him execute against it. Someone who can do truly amazing things like trade a difficult near term of taxing his people for the long term prize of breaking China's economy in half. That takes the kind of guy who is a master of manipulation, the sort who can get make his critics look like fool by getting them to lose their minds over how many scoops of ice cream to take attention away from his real work.

      So far 100% on pace for Greatness and I am so thankful we have him.

    3. Re:Trump would like that by Curtman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And incase Murricans haven't figured it out yet: tarrifs are taxes.

      Yay Trump! More taxes!

    4. Re: Trump would like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is correct

    5. Re:Trump would like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "He gets a twofer in his mind: Look strong on Chin and punish silicon valley who he sees as his enemy."

      He has already 7 billion enemies, including most, if not all his employees.

    6. Re:Trump would like that by Striikerr · · Score: 1, Informative

      I was going to say something similar.. The companies just pass the cost along to consumers who are the ones paying this. So, the last tax cuts significantly benefitted the most wealthiest in America with the average American seeing a very minor increase in take-home pay. Now, to pay for that tax cut (because it is really screwing the country over with a massive debt), a new tax is implemented via the tariffs which places the bulk of the onus upon the 99% of Americans who now lose their very minor increase in take-home pay AND lose even more of their pay to pay for the increased cost of goods. So, the tax burden was placed directly upon those who can least afford it. This isn't just Trump, it's the Republicans in Congress who allow, and and defend him. When the dust settles, they will all blame Trump but they should be held accountable for their tacit (and often explicit) support of all he has done and said.

    7. Re:Trump would like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >And incase Murricans haven't figured it out yet: tarrifs are taxes.

      So Democrats should be loving all these tarrifs...

    8. Re:Trump would like that by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Make more sense to tax the work of people in other countries rather than those in your own.

      Which it ends up being.
      If you tax their work by import taxes your own workers become more competitive and more work / purchase of services and products may happen from your own country.
      If you tax your own workers well... that doesn't have any positive effects whatsoever beyond whatever you spend the taxed money no but that you can do with both of them. It only mean your own workforce become less competitive whatever for native consumers or for exports too.

    9. Re:Trump would like that by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      And incase Murricans haven't figured it out yet: tarrifs are taxes. Yay Trump! More taxes!

      Exactly, they are a dead weight cost and simply raise prices for everyone. Un competitive industries get to raise prices and in the end all government is doing is picking winners and losers. Unfortunately, may people I know think they will have no impact on prices and hey, we are hurting China.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    10. Re:Trump would like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      For the record, imports from China are up and US exports to China are down. How much if that is due to "the master of manipulation" is up to you to decide.

    11. Re:Trump would like that by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      If only Silicon Valley hadn't proved this by rampant political bias, censorship, and heavily penalizing conservative websites in search results.

      People who buy Apple products aren't sensitive to price. They can easily afford another a few extra bucks for their next purchase. Especially as that money will be going to the US government to be used for worthy causes like Medicaid and liberating Arab countries from oppression (the McCain doctrine).

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    12. Re:Trump would like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I agree 100%, everyone should have access to the kinds of drugs you are on so we can all feel this happy.

    13. Re:Trump would like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've got it wrong. Trump doesn't have any strategy. He's just swinging wildly. That's it! It's the same dick-measuring contest he uses in everything. Just take a big giant swing at people and hope they back down.

      It's the same strategy he's always used, and it's worked up until now. It doesn't really work with international politics and trade though.

    14. Re:Trump would like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And then they tax your workers etc.
      You put up more trade barriers to stop them. They put up more to stop you. Pretty soon no one has any competition and they get fat and lazy. Everything gets more expensive. It doesn't usually turn out as well as people imagine.

    15. Re:Trump would like that by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      People who buy Apple products aren't sensitive to price.

      What Apple will likely do (there's precedence for when the UK changed VAT a few years ago), is add the exact cost to the purchase price. So if a phone for $799 has additional cost of $28, then the new price will be an unusual $827. Which makes it very visible for everyone that they are paying an extra $28 for something else than their phone.

    16. Re:Trump would like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Five the record. Six! Seven! Eight! Oooooh I hate that Trump! Trump trump trumpery! Hatez, hatez hatez!

    17. Re: Trump would like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      No. This isnt about taxes. It is about intellectual property theft on a massive scale that China has continued for a long time. Tariffs are a way to start curbing that by forcing a discussion.

    18. Re:Trump would like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a tax on people who send money to foreign countries instead of supporting their own countrymen. Fuck 'em. If you want to give away money to foreign countries, you should be taxed. We should be buying and supporting our own country instead of selling it out to foreigners.

    19. Re:Trump would like that by kenh · · Score: 1

      China imposes tarrifs on US-made goods, the US imposes tarrifs on Chinese-made goods, but are the tarrifs even? Last I heard they were not, China's are much higher than the US and most of the threatened tarrif increases approach parity with China.

      --
      Ken
    20. Re:Trump would like that by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      If only Silicon Valley hadn't proved this by rampant political bias, censorship, and heavily penalizing conservative websites in search results.

      People who buy Apple products aren't sensitive to price. They can easily afford another a few extra bucks for their next purchase.

      Except it won't just be Apple; tariffs will impact companies across the board. Some have already announced layoffs or closings as a result because tariffs have made it unprofitable to manufacture in the US.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    21. Re:Trump would like that by nnet · · Score: 1

      why? what proven economic model exists to substantiate your claim?

    22. Re: Trump would like that by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Only if you don't understand that most smart phones are made in China and this basically raises the prices on all of them. So the only people really being punished is the average consumer.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    23. Re:Trump would like that by Kohath · · Score: 1, Informative

      And? Cut taxes $100, raise them $10. Net taxes, $90 lower.

      Response to cuts: complaints about cuts — "people will die because taxes were cut!!!!”

      Response to increases: complaints about increases.

      Response to anything: complain about it, seek political advantage by spreading negativity and trying to divide people. (Then freak out when one of the groups you divided people into has more electoral votes than you expected.)

    24. Re: Trump would like that by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      Only if you don't understand that most smart phones are made in China and this basically raises the prices on all of them. So the only people really being punished is the average consumer.

      Agreed. Apple is just getting press but the tariffs will impact goods and industries all across the country; leaving the average consumer, as well as perosn who loses a job because tariffs cause lost sales, holding the bag.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    25. Re:Trump would like that by kenh · · Score: 1

      For the 2018 mid-terms the Democrats are running on a platform that included rolling back the Trump Tax Cuts, because Americans desperately want to pay more taxes, but can't figure out how to give more money to the government without it being demanded.

      --
      Ken
    26. Re: Trump would like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Trump is adding in 4 years almost as much national debt as Obama added in 8.

      https://www.thebalance.com/us-debt-by-president-by-dollar-and-percent-3306296

    27. Re: Trump would like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The gov holds us back. If only they could print more money and give it to us free, we'll all be rich.

      I'm voting for anyone that will give me free everything. It's the millennial way.

    28. Re: Trump would like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The blue wave isn't a myth, it will happen!. Yes, the majority in America really are that stupid!

    29. Re:Trump would like that by gtall · · Score: 1

      Name one group Trump doesn't see as an enemy. Hell, he even denigrated Southerners. Aren't those the same crew that voted for him. Why yes, yes it is. The man creates enemies so that he can claim to defend the rest of us from his newly created enemies.

    30. Re:Trump would like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It really is impressive how many people would rather see America fail than Trump succeed. The economy is booming under President Trump by every metric

      Nobody I know wants to see America fail.

      The economy was booming under Obama too, by all the same metrics that it's booming now. And a large part of it is undoubtedly just a continuation of the previous eight years.

      But you don't want to acknowledge that?

      You think there's some pixie dust Trump has sprinkled that has made the last year and a half of growth different than the previous eight years of growth? You believed Trump Jr. when he crowed about 4.1% GDP growth last quarter, but have forgotten all the quarters growth under Obama, including the 4.1%, 4.7%, 4.9%, and 5.1% quarters. I'd wait and see what the next two-and-a-half years bring before doing any victory laps.

      Yeah, nobody I know want to see America fail. but given Trump's long track record of failing, a lot of us are genuinely concerned that he's going to take us down the drain with him in his biggest failing yet.

      Go grab some bitches by the pussy and MAGA.

    31. Re:Trump would like that by AmiMoJo · · Score: 0

      Except that the $100 cut isn't applied to everyone evenly, and neither is the $10 increase. And the $100 cut means some people lose services they were relying on to live, while others just pocket $100+.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    32. Re: Trump would like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's nice when greedy capitalists hide behind the country's flag to get your money.

    33. Re:Trump would like that by Curtman · · Score: 1

      I wonder how this trade war will end, given that the US borrows a trillion dollars a year from China and others every year just to function.

    34. Re: Trump would like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The blue wave isn't a myth, it will happen!.

      My Democratic friends were quite sure about that too in 2016.

    35. Re:Trump would like that by aliquis · · Score: 1

      China already have the unfair demands.

      The reason to add them against China is likely to make China loosen up and help make trade and business more equal and unrestricted rather than the other way around.

      As far as with Europe I assume the idea is to get better deals not worse deals too. But of course everyone may want to play tough and raise the bar further rather than surrender and make a deal they feel they lose on.

    36. Re: Trump would like that by shilly · · Score: 2

      It's the wrong tool, and it won't work. It will, however, make America poorer. Congratulations!

    37. Re:Trump would like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Christ, but you people are dumb. Most products you buy are made of a mix of domestic and foreign components, and often cross back-and-forth across borders many times. Planes, cars, clothes, toys, electronics, saucepans... not to mention services. You can't avoid sending money abroad unless you don't participate in the economy at all.

      Actually -- could you do that? You know, fuck off in to a hole and just trade American rat shit with other stupid economic nationalists, while you suck the fantasy cock of Trump? It would really make life better for the rest of us.

    38. Re:Trump would like that by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Products were already being made overseas. Tariffs make our own domestic industries viable. Without a gargantuan market to dump their low quality products on, China is screwed. Why didn't we do this 30 years ago? After the Tiananmen Square Massacre? Why did we let them rip off our technology, put our working class out of work, and become a global competitor that we will regret creating long after 2024?

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    39. Re:Trump would like that by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      So Apple buyers will be proud to contribute to a worthy cause, the US government? I'm not sure if I understand your point. They can well afford it, and anyway local sales taxes always make the final total a weird number.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    40. Re: Trump would like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And what is the right tool?

    41. Re:Trump would like that by Kohath · · Score: 0

      Except that the $100 cut isn't applied to everyone evenly, and neither is the $10 increase. And the $100 cut means some people lose services they were relying on to live, while others just pocket $100+.

      And therefore, no one should ever do anything. Because someone will imagine a story where an imaginary person might have imaginary problems as a result.

    42. Re: Trump would like that by shilly · · Score: 2

      A trade agreement. Every time trade agreements are instituted, they increase the quantum of trade that is conducted within the bounds of what the trading parties consider acceptable. They also enrich the parties.

      It used to be that folks on the right of politics understood these basic facts of economics, and scorned folks on the left for not understanding it.

    43. Re: Trump would like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The economy was booming under obama? Seriously? By what metric? The market didnt made it back to where it started when you include multiple QE. It's up huge now. Probably a bubble, but seriously, this wasnt Obama. I like him, and he did a lot, but this isnt his.

    44. Re:Trump would like that by Kohath · · Score: 0

      You don't know any Democrats? Lucky you. Because they literally want America to fail. They hate this country. They want to see it fail by any means they can.

      Come on, that’s not fair. Mostly they just want to spend money other people earned, and use government to bully those who wouldn't let them spend other people's money in the past. Also to punish people for climate sins and other sins against "progress" — so, so many sins must be punished.

    45. Re:Trump would like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Threefer. You're overlooking the social effect, which is to increase prices on "luxury" items, thus lowering living standards for the great majority of Americans.

      This too is a feature, not a bug. Americans have been living far beyond their means for the past 50 years or more, and some downward adjustments are going to happen. Trump is implementing them in such a way as to impact the lower classes, while protecting his own.

    46. Re: Trump would like that by deathguppie · · Score: 2

      If that were the direction they wanted to go then they would have worked with our allies who are having the same issue with China rather than make enemies of everyone all at once. Don't get me wrong, sure we have trade issues with Europe, but it would have been much easier to get everyone on the same train of thought, then dealt with China, and then moved to other areas. This is more like a cartoon character skipping along and throwing taxes in the air.

      --
      once more into the breach
    47. Re:Trump would like that by Powercntrl · · Score: 1, Informative

      The companies just pass the cost along to consumers who are the ones paying this.

      That's the point missed by most of the red-hat-wearing, "Build the wall! / Lock her up!" shouting crowd. Tariffs might not create/save any jobs, but it is with absolute certainty that tariffs will reduce the buying power of every dollar in your wallet.

      I suppose they just don't teach this shit in schools anymore.

      --

      ---
      DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
    48. Re:Trump would like that by Powercntrl · · Score: 1

      Mostly they just want to spend money other people earned

      The idea behind making the rich pay their fair share in taxes, is that money does more economic good when it is spread around. Otherwise G.W.B.'s stimulus act would've just involved giving one lucky American a surprise $152 billion and calling it a day.

      --

      ---
      DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
    49. Re:Trump would like that by Powercntrl · · Score: 1

      If only Silicon Valley hadn't proved this by rampant political bias, censorship, and heavily penalizing conservative websites in search results

      I'm sorry, I wasn't aware domain registrars weren't allowing right-leaning website to register their domains. Or, perhaps you're implying backbone providers are throttling/not delivering packets from right-leaning sites?

      Oh right, this is the gay wedding cake argument, except now it's flipped around on conservatives who are mad that Google/Facebook/Twitter/Whatever won't always bake their cake. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

      --

      ---
      DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
    50. Re:Trump would like that by Powercntrl · · Score: 1

      Tariffs make our own domestic industries viable.

      Except when "Made in the USA" means "assembling Chinese parts into a completed product". Example: Bob is a licensed solar installer. He employed American workers to install Chinese-made photovoltaic panels on American homes. Bob now has to raise prices or look for other areas (possibly laying off workers) to make up the increased costs of Trump's tariff. If Bob voted for Trump, Bob is an idiot.

      --

      ---
      DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
    51. Re:Trump would like that by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Historians will look back on those China tariffs and call them the 'Wallmart Sales Tax' all targeted at the poor to specifically fund tax cuts for the rich. They are really choking the chicken now though, can't last much longer, infrastructure is already collapsing, pollution has gone insane and blowing money on faked up wars like there is no tomorrow. Really quite sad to watch, all that screaming about nothing as the empire crumbles and eats itself.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    52. Re:Trump would like that by Kohath · · Score: 1

      The idea behind making the rich pay their fair share in taxes, is that money does more economic good when it is spread around.

      1. Someone paying taxes doesn't equal money being "spread around". When person A pays taxes, person B doesn't receive a check. And the rich guy was already spreading it around — money is spent and invested, not kept in stacks in a big cartoon vault.

      2. Lots of people can think of lots of good and happy things they want money for. If you want to "do more good" with some money, earn the money yourself. "Do more good" doesn't justify stealing from people. And if you think it does, then go out and do your own robberies rather than hiring a politician to steal for you.

    53. Re:Trump would like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tariffs are a special sort of tax that targets the poor. Much like sales taxes "consumption taxes" they really only get paid directly out of the end consumer's pocket and don't significantly influence the middlemen other than by offset of demand.

      The wonderful American heritage is all about believing that if you're poor you're a scum-bag who deserves what you get while at the same time being one of those scum-bags (pointing in the mirror) in denial.

    54. Re: Trump would like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He is the enemy - of all people.

    55. Re: Trump would like that by erp_consultant · · Score: 1

      And this is what our friends on the left are unable to come to terms with. The job of the President is not to be everyone's buddy. Nor is it to go on the nightly talk show circuit and woo everyone with his (or her) smooth rhetoric. The job of the President is to get the economy moving and keep the country safe.

      Obama - by every rational and honest measure - did an absolutely shitty job of that. Oh sure he inherited the mess from Bush...blah, blah, blah. Every President inherits the crap from the previous administration. Yes, he's smooth and slick and talks a good game. But as far as what a President is actually tasked with he left the country in a mess.

      Trump is a jerk. There, I said it. I'm not under any illusion that he's a nice guy. He is a hard nosed businessman. He is not unlike any other rich person. But none of that matters to me. Why? Because he has, by nearly every measure, done a fantastic job of getting the economy moving in the right direction. And done it without the help of hardly any of the Republicans in congress.

      The Chinese have been ripping us off for years by stealing our trade secrets and manipulating their currency to their benefit. Clinton, Bush and Obama did nothing about it. At least Trump is doing something about it. You can argue whether it is the right approach or the wrong one but at least he's doing something.

      But the media is so fixated on Trump the Jerk that they can't see past any of that to give him credit where credit is due. Like him or not, the economy is in far better shape than Obama could ever dream of.

      One other thing - if Trump wasn't President we would have Hillary Clinton as President. Does anyone seriously think we would be better off with that crook in office? She is the absolute epitome of the crooked, entitled, corrupt insider that has invaded Washington.

    56. Re:Trump would like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Five the record. Six! Seven! Eight! Oooooh I hate that Trump! Trump trump trumpery! Hatez, hatez hatez!

      Great impression of Trump mocking people smarter than him.

    57. Re: Trump would like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Euro weenies never stand up to anyone anymore.

      Missed the fact the "Euro weenies" answered Trumps tariffs tit for tat in a heartbeat? You Trumptards are soooo dumb. The hilarious thing is that Apple will be the next company they'll put tariffs on - see Trump cry when their sales in the EU drop.

    58. Re:Trump would like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      China already have the unfair demands.

      The reason to add them against China is likely to make China loosen up and help make trade and business more equal and unrestricted rather than the other way around.

      Yeah, and by putting taxes (sorry "tariffs") on goods imported by American companies, you will convince the Chinese to be nicer to American companies. Gagagoogoo, President Trump has spoken.

    59. Re: Trump would like that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Original AC here, this isn't right or left, it is superpower (super punching bag) vs aspiring super power. Couple the entirety of issues between China and the world (militarization of South China Sea, nuclear triad development, hypersonic missile development, aircraft carrier, stealth technology, new silk road, Made in China, mandating a chinese partner when foreign companies want access to the market, etc) and you get where we are. This isn't singularly a trade issue of wanting a better deal on the next WTO round, it is a strategic development issue to leap technology and capability forward by stealing the capabilities of trade partners through outright force, coercion and theft. So again, I ask, what is the right tool?

    60. Re: Trump would like that by Curtman · · Score: 1

      No. This isnt about taxes. It is about intellectual property theft on a massive scale that China has continued for a long time.

      Sure it is. And the tariffs on Canada are about milk. Sorry to break this to you, but it's a tax hike disguised as a means to help the working class poor.

    61. Re:Trump would like that by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Without doing anything they will unlikely change things.

    62. Re: Trump would like that by shilly · · Score: 1

      You know what's naive? Thinking that China is at material risk of mass starvation in the event of a trade dispute with America. You know what's childish and ignorant? Not only thinking this is the case, but thinking it's an effective lever to win a trade dispute. You know what's even more naive than that? Thinking that China would respond proportionately to the imposition of mass starvation, when other options are plainly on the table and it possesses the world's largest standing army, very capable cyberwarfare units, and a strategic nuclear defence. I mean, have you really never ever read a Tom Clancy? What you're proposing is how really nasty shit starts, if it were actually possible, which it's not.

      Just a reminder: the last time you tried to reach a trade agreement with China, your blessed Trump said no. Your other options included renegotiating. So I wouldn't worry about the other side saying no just yet. You've got to wipe the shit off your own arse first.

    63. Re: Trump would like that by shilly · · Score: 1

      If you want to solve all those issues, tariffs aren't going to help either. Trade agreements and tariffs are tools that are useful, unsurprisingly, for trade. They may have some minor value in addressing other issues, but that's going to be limited.

    64. Re:Trump would like that by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      Products were already being made overseas. Tariffs make our own domestic industries viable.

      All tariffs due is force buyers to subsidize unprofitable industries through higher prices; and those workers will see their purchasing power erode as prices rise.

      Why didn't we do this 30 years ago? After the Tiananmen Square Massacre? Why did we let them rip off our technology, put our working class out of work, and become a global competitor that we will regret creating long after 2024?

      Price. People want the lowest prices, as evidenced by the growth of WalMart and other big box stores at the expense of local stores. We have met the enemy, and he is us.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
  5. If not tariffs then what?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Iâ(TM)ve heard since I was in high school in the late 90s that China has been behaving poorly in international affairs. In my adult life Iâ(TM)ve observed both Bush and Obama do next to nothing about it. Trumps tariffs may not be the best solution but I have yet to hear anyone propose an alternative method to dis the issue. The WTO clearly didnâ(TM)t make things better for the USA. So if not tariffs then I ask what do we do?

    1. Re: If not tariffs then what?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get rich outsourcing jobs, and buy the DNC. It worked great for wall Street bankers

    2. Re:If not tariffs then what?? by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      The Trans Pacific Partnership was supposed to deal with China's stealing intellectual property, but of course Trump killed that deal, didn't he?

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    3. Re: If not tariffs then what?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go look up the slashdot reaction to trans pacific partnership TPP when it looked like Obama was going to pass it - tldr- it was ALL Negative, a tool of the elite to squeeze the masses

    4. Re:If not tariffs then what?? by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 2

      The display cabinet purpose of the TPP was to 'deal with China stealing IP.' The actual purpose was to ratchet down environmental and worker protection laws in the U.S. to 'level the playing field.'

    5. Re:If not tariffs then what?? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 0

      The worst part is that the more you try to stop China "stealing" your IP, the fewer American made parts they will buy and the more money they will invest in developing their own technology. After Trump came to power there was a big investment in developing Chinese high end cellular chips for phones, for example, because suddenly there is good business case for investing those billions.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    6. Re: If not tariffs then what?? by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      I think much of the negative reaction to the TPP was due to them trying to keep the actual text of the treaty secret. Openness and transparency would have helped. None of us really had a chance to analyze the pros and cons of the agreement, and uncertainty triggers fears. I don't know enough about it personally to say whether it would have been good or bad, but my understanding is it would have given us some tools to use against IP theft.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  6. Courage! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I thought Apple toy's point /was/ being expensive?

    1. Re:Courage! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is one of the things the isheep like to bleat about. "Look how much i overpaid for my phone. Moar profits for apple!"

  7. The mac mini is very old and at an high price now by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    The mac mini is very old and at an high price now if they jack the price up it better get new hardware

  8. 1400% profit margin is not enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple are already getting skinned by selling their $5 dongles for $75. The whole board of directors would end up in poverty on the street if they had any smaller profit margins on their products.

    1. Re:1400% profit margin is not enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you crying yet? I'll try harder: Apple sell premium products at hugely inflated triple premium prices because their followers are willing to pay. Are you crying now?

    2. Re:1400% profit margin is not enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I didn't know they let @lieingDonaldTrump post on /. Learned something new.

      Doofus poster needs to learn something new, such as how to spell!

  9. Apple's prices are unrelated to cost or tariffs by ffkom · · Score: 1

    ... they are only related to the rate of Mana the believers of that cult can supply. I've seen hungry believers share one pizza because their money would not allow to buy one, each, while casually discussing how they save up for the new iPhone, even while their existing one still works fine.

    1. Re:Apple's prices are unrelated to cost or tariffs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple's prices are unrelated to cost or tariffs

      Exactly. This is a case of "never let a bad situation go to waste." Apple has a bit of an agenda and they'll use whatever they can to further it. They have "enough" money and have shown that under the right leadership, they can be successful even in tough times. They pretty much started amassing their piles of cash during the great recession when everyone was out of jobs and nobody had money. They did great in that environment. If slapping tariffs on products that have a gross margin of ~60% is going to mess up Apple, then they're a broken company and need new leadership (or they can just blame future failure on tariffs I guess).

    2. Re:Apple's prices are unrelated to cost or tariffs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple's prices have always been about charging a premium to set their products apart, and surely not based on the cost of production. The only way Apple's prices are going up is if they've suddenly decided the market will pay a higher price.

      This announcement by Apple serves two goals that I can see. One, it puts pressure on Trump to not inflict the tariff, which helps maintain Apple's bottom line. Two, it gets the consumer prepped for a price increase if point one fails, which the typical consumer will grudgingly pay because they blame the tariff, not Apple's greed.

    3. Re:Apple's prices are unrelated to cost or tariffs by fermion · · Score: 1
      Apple is a mid market luxury brand. As such they do not design to a price point, but rather to a quality specification. While the goal is not always met, the point is that they are not going to sell products primarily based on price.

      That said,their price is indeed not always related to production costs. To go further, the price is not always just high due to development and administrative costs. Apple stores can be spacious because the profit margins are high.

      We have evidence that apple customers, however, are not just going to accept arbitrary pricing. We see this specifically in the accessory market where they had to reduce the price of dongles from their customer $20 for a piece of plastic.So the question is are they going to risk sales of some items in hopes of maintaining profits, or are they going to cut profits.

      The base of the capitalist economy is profits, and while there are some cult items, such as people high prices for cheap SUV, what apple and the customers are doing is simply exchanging goods for services. The opposite of that is a controlled economy like Russia where you all you have to junk to buy, and not other choices, which exist widely in the market Apple occupies.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  10. Truthfully by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple could maintain the same price in the US, it just would cut into their profit margin.

    though Trump would profit from it.

    passphrase === 'scornful'

    1. Re:Truthfully by olsmeister · · Score: 1

      Maybe. You know who would pay for it? People who own Apple stock, which would be pummeled when lower profit numbers were released. And yes, this probably includes you whether you know it or not through funds you may have in retirement plans.

  11. Stupid. by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The company said the tariffs would "show up as a tax on U.S. consumers"

    It's not a mere appearance, tariffs are a tax.

    "increase the cost of Apple products that our customers have come to rely on in their daily lives."

    If you specifically rely on Apple products for your daily life then you have really fucked up by "putting all your eggs in one basket".

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re:Stupid. by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      Pretty sure it's not just Apple products that will be affected. Apple is just the first to make an announcement.

    2. Re:Stupid. by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      I bought my new cellphone last week. It was $199.00 which to me seemed like quite a bit. But now I don't expect I'll need to spend more on mobile device hardware for two or more years.

    3. Re:Stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Other products dont have the ridiculous markups apple has. Its apple problem if they would rather stick it to their customers.

    4. Re: Stupid. by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      This tariff doesn't only affect Apple so how is this "putting all my eggs in Apple's basket"? Or is the fact that most if not all smart phones from all manufacturers are made in China have no impact on other manufacturers?

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    5. Re:Stupid. by ThosLives · · Score: 1

      Yes, tariffs are a tax. But they are a consumption tax - consumers only pay them if they buy the affected products. I thought we were all for consumption taxes instead of income taxes?

      That said - "local" companies that cannot afford to stay in business due to a tariff on some of their material inputs means they are producing a good with a very elastic demand curve and these businesses would have had trouble if there was an input price shock due to any cause, not just a tariff. So the tariff in this case weeds out economically tenuous businesses. I don't have a metric for determining if that is good or bad.

      --
      "There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
    6. Re:Stupid. by Kohath · · Score: 1

      If you specifically rely on Apple products for your daily life then you have really fucked up by "putting all your eggs in one basket".

      Everyone should have 6 or 8 bizarrely patched baskets that they have to regularly troubleshoot and repair, and that periodically drop a few of your eggs on the ground.

    7. Re:Stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its only a tax if you build in China.

      Apple has a *choice* to build in another country with a fair balance of trade. Perhaps, another country would be providing the US with goods we do not have and need and we take a loss on an iPhone made in that country. But it balances out. China is *not* balancing out in trade.

      So, in an idealistic world where there is only China and US, the whole bogus tax argument might be true. But there are many other countries.

      Your looking pretty stupid imo.

    8. Re:Stupid. by gtall · · Score: 1

      Yep, okay people, please go out and buy at least two smartphones from different manufacturers. Oh, and be satisfied with the CrapWare MS produces.

    9. Re:Stupid. by dryeo · · Score: 1

      Some of those small businesses go out of business not because they can't afford the tariff-ed goods, but because the goods just aren't available. Think of a shortage of aluminum creating a shortage of beer cans with the big breweries locking up the supply. Lots of small breweries go out of business.
      Tariffs are great for tilting the playing field.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    10. Re:Stupid. by ThosLives · · Score: 1

      Why would a tariff make a good no longer available at all? This is an honest question - if consumers of goods to which a tariff apply are willing to pay the higher cost to have it imported, why would there be a shortage? If there are shortages due to an imposed tariff, what causes the shortage? Is the assumption that the reduction in demand for affected goods will cause the foreign suppliers to simply close up shop?

      --
      "There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
    11. Re:Stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The world should be kept simple enough for the average hick and out-of-it, orange geriatric to understand.

      For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong - HL Mencken

    12. Re:Stupid. by shilly · · Score: 1

      I thought we were all for consumption taxes instead of income taxes?

      Why would you think that? Consumption taxes are notorious for hitting the poor hardest, for multiple reasons, including that one of the benefits of being rich is that you can save a larger proportion of your income than poor people, who need to spend nearly everything they earn on the basics of daily living.

    13. Re:Stupid. by shilly · · Score: 1

      Which country that has the capacity and capability to build iOS devices at volume is Trump *not* targeting with increased tariffs?

      Also: if you're going to accuse people of looking stupid, it really helps to not use the phrase "idealistic world".

    14. Re: Stupid. by deathguppie · · Score: 1

      Apple is simply letting people know that the coming cost increases are not due to Apple raising their prices but rather because of government interference in the supply chain.

      --
      once more into the breach
    15. Re:Stupid. by dryeo · · Score: 1

      Good question. I did see that there was a shortage of beer cans after the tariffs went in. I think there, the aluminium was being shipped across the border so often that the tariffs became way too high. There's been a lot of problems like that, both with aluminium and steel. Steel is interesting as it can cross the border quite a few times which is why Canada is both the biggest exporter and importer of steel with America.
      There's also the shock value when unexpected tariffs happen, companies and shippers slow down the shipping at first. Eventually prices will increase to reflect the new order but it takes a while.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    16. Re:Stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes choice is bad. Conformity to apple is good.

    17. Re:Stupid. by Powercntrl · · Score: 1

      I thought we were all for consumption taxes instead of income taxes?

      I thought we were all for understanding basic mathematics.

      Lunch at a fast food joint costs $10. I have $30 in my wallet, while you have $15. In this example, the meal costs 66.6% of your money, while it only costs me 33.3% of my money. If the restaurant has to raise prices by $2 to recoup losses due to increased costs, you're now paying 80% of your money, an increase of 13.4%. I'm paying 40%, which only requires 6.7% more of my cash on-hand.

      This is specifically why sales/consumption taxes are inherently unfair - because the amount of tax you pay, expressed as percentage of your income, is inversely proportional to the amount of your income.

      --

      ---
      DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
    18. Re:Stupid. by ThosLives · · Score: 1

      Sad times when readers cannot detect sarcasm without it being made explicit...

      My personal view is that we should have a wealth-based income tax, not a consumption, income, VAT, or property tax. What I mean by that is income is taxed, but at a rate determined by total asset value owned, not by the income rate. So if you have property but no income, you have no tax (so you don't "lose your house" if you have no income and can't pay property tax); if you have no property but suddenly have income, no tax (so you can afford to buy property).

      There are implementation details, of course, like the pesky definitions of how you compute property value, what tax rates to assign, and how to prevent "hiding" property ownership like one company owning the property and the other having the income but not owning anything.

      --
      "There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
    19. Re:Stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The world should be kept simple enough for the average hick and out-of-it, orange geriatric to understand.

      And yet the orange geriatric is President of the USA and you are nothing, probably not employed and living in your mother's basement.

      Thanks to the orange geriatric, we have record low unemployment, a booming economy, a record stock market, a more peaceful world, reduced government intrusions, and, for the first time since 2008, a hope for continued freedom and prosperity for all.

      What have you accomplished for the good of the country?

    20. Re:Stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Other products dont have the ridiculous markups apple has. Its apple problem if they would rather stick it to their customers.

      You realize that those products will be hit much harder by the tariffs? No? See, like Trump, his supporters suck at math.

    21. Re:Stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet the orange geriatric is President of the USA and you are nothing, probably not employed and living in your mother's basement.

      You are right: America is doomed because most Americans are crazy.

  12. YAY! Trade war! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its a new source of income for the defense industry. They put a little something extra on everything we get from china and use that money to buy more weapons to replace older weapon that they can donate to local police. Its the circle of death and it can't be bad if it help out the man.

  13. Re:The mac mini is very old and at an high price n by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All apple computers are pretty 'old' although tbh generation to generation perf increases haven't been that awesome. may as well wait for designs w more hw Spectre etc. hw mitigations .

    Prices: Yeah it'd absolutely destroy apple to have slightly lower profit margins.

  14. Of course they must by Walter+White · · Score: 5, Funny

    We all know that Apple is operating on the thinnest of margins.

    1. Re:Of course they must by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      We all know that Apple is operating on the thinnest of margins.

      We all know a tax on business is a tax on consumers, except these ones should come out of their profits because loyalty to King Trump?

  15. greed by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

    i find it rediculous that a company with a bazillion dollars in the bank cant eat most of the impact. geez, how much is enough for these companies?

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    1. Re: greed by makerfixer · · Score: 1

      Yeah, my college professor told me they just keep it in a giant Scrooge-McDuckian vault... just sitting there doing nothing, 100% liquid capital. Please learn basic economics, it will bring you happiness in life.

    2. Re:greed by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      What's the problem ? It increases the exclusivity of Apple products. Everybody's happy.

    3. Re: greed by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      In the same way that I find it ridiculous that if you made money last year so why don't you pay more for everything you buy.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    4. Re:greed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why should they have to pay Trump's tax? I've never bought an iPhone and I never will but I still don't think Apple should have to pay for this tax out of their profits. American consumers choose whether to buy American made or Chinese made goods. So American consumers will feel the additional financial pain for their decisions.

    5. Re:greed by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Ok then if it's not a problem for them to up all their prices and they feel it won't hurt their bottom line in reduced sales, then I don't understand why they are even coming public about this now? Just raise prices when the tariff comes into affect and let the chips fall where they may.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    6. Re: greed by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      I'd be totally fine with that, except it isn't feasible without some central clearing house for prices. I've always said I'm prepared to pay taxes (or prices) proportionate to the money I make. It wouldn't be fair to the rest of the country to do otherwise.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    7. Re: greed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the same way that I find it ridiculous that if you made money last year so why don't you pay more for everything you buy.

      You do. It's called a progressive income tax. When you earn more money, you pay more in absolute terms, but you also pay more in a percentage of your income that gets taken by the Government for redistribution.

    8. Re: greed by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      I'd be totally fine with that, except it isn't feasible without some central clearing house for prices. I've always said I'm prepared to pay taxes (or prices) proportionate to the money I make. It wouldn't be fair to the rest of the country to do otherwise.

      Except that is entirely your choice. If you choose not to do so, what then?

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    9. Re:greed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i find it rediculous that a company with a bazillion dollars in the bank cant eat most of the impact. geez, how much is enough for these companies?

      The bazillions are in accounts that are not, for tax purposes, tangibly related to Apple Inc, U.S. If Apple wanted to pay the U.S. tariffs out of their off-shore money pools, they'd probably run afoul of money laundering laws.

    10. Re:greed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok then if it's not a problem for them to up all their prices and they feel it won't hurt their bottom line in reduced sales, then I don't understand why they are even coming public about this now? Just raise prices when the tariff comes into affect and let the chips fall where they may.

      I fear that Apple customers will just delude themselves in to thinking that their iDevices just got even more exclusive at the prices go beyond their current ridicoulus point and move up to an improbable price point....

      If Douglas Adams were still alive, he would have devised an engine that was fueled by a reality distortion field by now!

  16. Re:The mac mini is very old and at an high price n by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You haven't been paying attention. Apple has announced that hardware refreshes are coming.

  17. A Tax on apple? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It could not have happened to a more deserving company!!

    C'mone people this only affects fan boi's and the "rich" who support this single vendor abusive company anyway. the rest of us avoid this "new tax" people comp[lain about.
    It's not like apple and apple users cannot afford a few more dollars for their shimmery NEW toys.
    Ignore the apple and go android!!!

  18. crap from Apple by NikeHerc · · Score: 2

    What a load of Apple crap: "... increase the cost of Apple products that our customers have come to rely on in their daily lives." Apple, stop buying from the ChiComms! Buy American!

    --
    Circle the wagons and fire inward. Entropy increases without bounds.
    1. Re: crap from Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Profit is more important than ethics. Apple already sold out to the Chinese government to buy market share there. They don't dare lose that profit source.

    2. Re: crap from Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple lost marketshare because China forced them to store their data in China. After that,there was no reason to buy an Apple product versus a China brand product.

    3. Re: crap from Apple by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Please show Apple which American plant where they could source their manufacturing?

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    4. Re: crap from Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple has enough money to build manufacturing plants in any country they desire.

    5. Re:crap from Apple by gtall · · Score: 1

      Yeah, every country should build and consume their own stuff. None of this trade mumbo-jumbo to reduce duplication. What the hell are you people thinking? Only buy American!! Now, about all that electronic equipment built in the U.S. surely you can find it. If not, wait 10 years until the U.S. duplicates China's manufacturing in the U.S. Make America Stupid Again.

    6. Re: crap from Apple by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      So your point isn't that there are no American manufacturing plants that can make Apple products but Apple and only Apple has to make a plant when Dell, HP, etc. and everyone else who uses the exact same manufacturer as Apple doesn't because . . . Apple has money.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    7. Re:crap from Apple by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Apple, stop buying from the ChiComms! Buy American!

      I'm sure they'd be happy to but first:
      Americans, Build American
      Americans, Pay for American.

      You can't get what you want without those two in place. It's the fundamental reason for your industry's downturn in the first place.

    8. Re: crap from Apple by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Perhaps they'll have to open one. That's the entire point of these policies. Buy American and hire American. The proper role of the US government is to give our people an advantage. Not to make horrible deal after horrible deal and put our people out of work and empower a vile communist country.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    9. Re: crap from Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow...you do realize that all Apple has to do is take some of their Billions of dollars and invest in building a manufacturing plant right here in America.
      First thing is, it will boost the local economy where that plant is going. Second, good jobs will come around because of it. Third, those who consume Apple Products are already use to paying out the nose for the products so they wont notice one bit of a difference.

      So tell me if these companies and customers are that worried about the tariff's, then why are they not doing this already? Seems to me the logic is, if tariff's are that bad, then just move the production back here. 1. you have more control over the quality of the product. 2. No tariff...gee...what a great concept. 3. China no longer is a super power like they want. They want to control the world. Yet everyone claims Trump is Hitler. All Trump wants to do is make our country better. Gee, buy American made product and support your people. The more people that have jobs, that get paid, the better our economy is. Not that difficult to do.

  19. Hands up everyone who is surprised by CaffeinatedBacon · · Score: 1

    What exactly did you think tariffs would do?
    Raise tariffs, raise taxes, increase regulation, they all get passed on to the consumer.

  20. Luxury Apple Tax + Chinese Tariff tax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple makes luxury items. These are not "essentials" like baby formula or milk or veggies. It is called discretionary spending for a reason. You don't NEED it to live.

    People buying Apple already pay about 50% more for the privilege. They are not cost sensitive, as proven by sales of the iPhoneX.

    Apple will always get their 50% profit and 30% on App-Store crap.

    I see no difference in taxing Apple stuff as taxing large boats over 20ft. Both are luxuries.

    And taxing Google stuff would be fine too. All there stuff is a luxury.

  21. Tell it to China by Kohath · · Score: 1

    Apple would be better off talking to Chinese officials about the need for a trade deal. Or Apple will have to shift some production out of a China.

    Apple customers won't be freaking out and calling their congressman about paying an extra $10 to cover tariffs.

    1. Re: Tell it to China by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Why is it on Apple to try to fix a political situation that they didn't cause? Also what are the Chinese manufacturers suppose to do other than blanket lower their prices unilaterally as Apple is not the only company affected. The companies that make Apple stuff makes stuff for many American and international companies.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    2. Re: Tell it to China by Kohath · · Score: 1

      Why is it on Apple to try to fix a political situation that they didn't cause?

      They can either help try to fix it or surrender to it and be a victim of whatever happens.

      Also what are the Chinese manufacturers suppose to do other than blanket lower their prices unilaterally as Apple is not the only company affected. The companies that make Apple stuff makes stuff for many American and international companies.

      Chinese manufacturers might want to suggest to the government that they negotiate a deal.

    3. Re:Tell it to China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whatever additional price on Apple products is a small price to pay to undermine the current tariffs and induce the administration to up the ante. After all, it is his base that will be hit hardest.

      For Apple customers, this is an inconvenience. The generally donâ(TM)t have to worry about selling enough soy beans to keep the heat on this winter.

    4. Re:Tell it to China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple would be better off talking to Chinese officials about the need for a trade deal. Or Apple will have to shift some production out of a China.

      Apple customers won't be freaking out and calling their congressman about paying an extra $10 to cover tariffs.

      The notion that Apple can just “shift” production out of China is absurd. So many people have no idea how the world works or why it works that way.

      Whatever additional price on Apple products is a small price to pay to undermine the current tariffs and induce the administration to up the ante. After all, it is his base that will be hit hardest.

      For Apple customers, this is an inconvenience. They generally don’t have to worry about selling enough soy beans to keep the heat on this winter.

    5. Re:Tell it to China by Kohath · · Score: 1

      The generally donâ(TM)t have to worry about selling enough soy beans to keep the heat on this winter.

      Soy beans are a commodity. If China doesn't buy from US, China buys from Brazil. Europe then can't buy from Brazil, who does Europe buy from? Who has soy beans to sell? US does.

      If there's no huge worldwide surplus of soy beans, someone will buy them. Ultimately it doesn't matter who it is. It's like pumping water from the south end of the lake to the north end: the water level stays the same.

    6. Re:Tell it to China by Kohath · · Score: 1

      Apple can move small amounts of production around quickly and large amounts of production around slowly. No one should have illusions about it being simple or cheap. Nor should anyone have illusions about it being impossible given enough time.

    7. Re:Tell it to China by dryeo · · Score: 1

      There is a surplus of soybeans, mostly due to subsidies. It's hard to find numbers but this site, https://farm.ewg.org/progdetai... says $35.6 billion over the last 20 odd years. Seems Brazil also subsidizes their soybeans as well. While small compared to other farmers like dairy, who get 73% of their income from subsidies ($22.2 billion in 2015), it still makes a screwed up market with countries like America needing to dump their produce on other countries, countries that are often more fiscally conservative and don't want to borrow large sums of money to compete in the race to the bottom of who can subsidize more.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    8. Re: Tell it to China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd argue that Apple did cause the problem. For decades now, these big multinational corporations have been lobbying for more free trade, open borders, lower tariffs, and so on. The problem is that some countries are losing out on this arrangement, either via a trade imbalance or for Apple's tax scheme in which they set up dummy corps that make no profit in most regions.

    9. Re: Tell it to China by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      They can either help try to fix it or surrender to it and be a victim of whatever happens.

      So then you'd argue Dell and HP and other do the same then? They use some of the same plants Apple uses.

      Chinese manufacturers might want to suggest to the government that they negotiate a deal.

      So now you're saying is that Chinese manufacturers have to give in to whatever a foreign power says because . . .

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    10. Re: Tell it to China by Kohath · · Score: 1

      So then you'd argue Dell and HP and other do the same then? They use some of the same plants Apple uses.

      Yes.

      So now you're saying is that Chinese manufacturers have to give in to whatever a foreign power says because . . .

      They should talk about a deal. Because not talking is working out worse than talking. And a deal might work out better than the alternative situation of not making a deal.

      If they don't want to pay tariffs, how else can they avoid paying tariffs?

    11. Re: Tell it to China by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      They should talk about a deal. Because not talking is working out worse than talking. And a deal might work out better than the alternative situation of not making a deal.

      . There are deals in place. With this President, no deal is ever safe as he changes his mind on a whim.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    12. Re: Tell it to China by Kohath · · Score: 1

      There are deals in place. With this President, no deal is ever safe as he changes his mind on a whim.

      That's an interesting perspective, but how does it lead to a course of action?

    13. Re: Tell it to China by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      It's like dealing with a toddler. Any deal or plans that anyone will try to make may be useless. For now companies have to plan for two contingencies: 1. Nothing will change. 2. Everything will change.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    14. Re: Tell it to China by Kohath · · Score: 1

      Good luck with that. And you will need it, because you have abandoned cause and effect decision-making in favor of name-calling and surrender to the tide of events. The rest of us who haven’t given up will continue to try to improve by making good choices.

  22. Define "unfair trade practices" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fixing "unfair trade practices" is a common and vague request from Trump. I wish he'd define exactly what practices he feels are unfair and what would be acceptable solutions to him. This would be a great starting point for real discussions.

    That said I doubt he wants to do that. As shown with his NAFTA re-negotiations he is just looking for a few changes he can make to a trade treaty and then claim victory. If he defined what was unfair to him that wouldn't work into his plan of just changing a few things for his voting based to believe he had given them.

    So far it looks like China isn't being bullied like Mexico.

    1. Re:Define "unfair trade practices" by drnb · · Score: 1

      A short list:

      Currency manipulation.
      Forced technology transfers.
      Forced local partnerships.
      Predatory pricing.
      IP theft.
      Industrial espionage.
      Subsidized state-owned enterprises.
      Export subsidies.
      Regulations designed to bar foreign products.
      etc...

    2. Re: Define "unfair trade practices" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Easy.

      Fair: Anything that gives an advantage to the US.

      Unfair: Everything else.

    3. Re:Define "unfair trade practices" by shilly · · Score: 1

      This list is an excellent example of how a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

      At least five of those practices are not only not unfair trade practices per se, they are also practised extensively by the US, which understandably regards the ability to do these things as the rightful exercise of power by a sovereign nation.

    4. Re:Define "unfair trade practices" by drnb · · Score: 1

      This list is an excellent example of how a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. At least five of those practices are not only not unfair trade practices per se, they are also practised extensively by the US, which understandably regards the ability to do these things as the rightful exercise of power by a sovereign nation.

      Yes, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, as you just demonstrated by failing to consider the scale of the practices involved. Plus you also fail to consider that the sovereign nature of China's actions do not justify keeping our policies open, and that we are talking about a reciprocal response not bombing them.

      Reciprocity is at the core of Trump's approach. If you are open to us we will be open to you, if you erect barriers we will erect barriers.

    5. Re:Define "unfair trade practices" by shilly · · Score: 1

      The scale of the practices involved?? Are you shitting me? The scale of US subsidies for its industries vastly exceeds the scale of subsidies in China (and every other country in the world).

      You listed a bunch of things you said were "unfair trading practices"; now you appear to be describing China's use of them as unfair, but America's as fair because you do it less, and they did it first. This is no way to work through an argument.

      You and I didn't discuss whether it was sensible for Trump to do these things. The OP did that, to a degree. You just listed a bunch of things you claimed were unfair trading practices and I disagreed.

    6. Re:Define "unfair trade practices" by drnb · · Score: 1

      The scale of the practices involved?? Are you shitting me? The scale of US subsidies for its industries vastly exceeds the scale of subsidies in China (and every other country in the world).

      You are woefully ignorant.
      "The local government has proved instrumental, doling out more than $1.5 billion to Foxconn to build large sections of the factory and nearby employee housing. It paved roads and built power plants. It helps cover continuing energy and transportation costs for the operation. It recruits workers for the assembly line. It pays bonuses to the factory for meeting export targets. All of it in support of iPhone production."
      https://www.nytimes.com/2016/1...

      You listed a bunch of things you said were "unfair trading practices"; now you appear to be describing China's use of them as unfair, but America's as fair because you do it less, and they did it first.

      Nope. I'm saying that a checklist perspective is a naive and inadequate perspective. The magnitude also needs to be gauged when considering whether a "predatory" line has been crossed of not.

    7. Re:Define "unfair trade practices" by shilly · · Score: 1

      You think 1.5bn is a significant subsidy? Seriously? You are so sweetly naive. Go check out the level of support for, say, Boeing or Exxon. Or the last Detroit bailout.

      Sheesh.

    8. Re:Define "unfair trade practices" by drnb · · Score: 1

      That is just one example and it demonstrate that China is going far beyond tax breaks and is involved in ongoing operations and is assigning production quotas to meet a larger national goal. This is a scale and a level of coordination far beyond anything going on in the US.

    9. Re:Define "unfair trade practices" by shilly · · Score: 1

      You're right on one count: it's just one example. You're wrong to say it "demonstrates ... a scale and level of coordination far beyond anything going on in the US". I mean, you are so badly, badly wrong it's hilarious. Just as a little reminder, the Bush and Obama administrations lent the US auto industry $80bn to prevent bankruptcy. From 1950 to 2010, the US has spent $837bn in direct subsidies for the energy industry (obviously, this doesn't include the cost of wars to keep oil flowing). On a much much smaller scale I personally remember, when I worked for a global professional services firm, a healthcare engagement for the state where the team being staffed had to be all American because of procurement requirements it imposed. (It was quite clear to us as a firm that this meant the team was substantially less strong than it would otherwise have been, because there were non-US people with much more experience that was relevant. But the firm was OK to jump through that particular hoop to win the business)

      My point here is this: China may be doing all the things you say it is, and more besides. Many of these things may be bad things from a political, moral or economic perspective. But it does your analysis no good at all if you deny the obvious, which is that the US (along with just about every other country in the world) has done and is doing many of the same things, as the same scale and intensity. Because sovereign nations often run industrial and trade policies that are activist.

    10. Re:Define "unfair trade practices" by drnb · · Score: 1

      The ongoing Chinese involvement in operations and the participation in a national plan of action is far grander, more integrated (govt/priv), and more supervised that in the US. Its taking things to an entirely new level.

      That one example is not an outlier. Such actions are part of a national plan of action and common. The US auto bailout was a one off event, unlike the Chinese actions with respect to this one Foxconn plant.

      Plus we haven't event gone near the forced partnerships, the forced technology transfers, the state owned enterprises, etc. Your assertion the US is similar in operations is ludicrous. China takes things to a higher level. The US Congress giving their contributors in the oil industry tax breaks is something far different. Get back to me when the US gov't builds the oil platforms, staffs the private company that will operate the platform, directly monitor operations, set production quotas and reward/punish as quotas are met or missed.

    11. Re:Define "unfair trade practices" by shilly · · Score: 1

      Um. Are you actually suggesting US gov't involvement in oil is less extensive than Chinese gov't in tech? Did you miss the wars fought to protect oil supplies? etc

      Look we are obviously not going to convince each other. I suggest we end this, it's fruitless

    12. Re:Define "unfair trade practices" by drnb · · Score: 1

      And now that China has external supply lines they are reorganizing and rebuilding their military so that they can defend those supply lines. Plus they are engaging in quite a bit of neocolonialism in the acquisition of those resources.

      The fact that you have to conflate such national security interests with trade policy is a great example of how vacuous your position on trade is. Yes, a fruitless conversation with respect to convincing you, but in case another is reading there is value in not letting your misrepresentations stand.

  23. Re:The mac mini is very old and at an high price n by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

    Has Apple trademarked the phrase 'hardware refreshes'? Because it's another example of slick terminology and they should get right on it.

  24. Profit Margins by tuppe666 · · Score: 1

    My understanding of Apple product pricing is clearly flawed. Apple have always priced their products on maximising product margins; Not focused on market share. How can this possibly raise the price of any of Apple's hardware? All I can see is successfully taxing Apple who have worked tirelessly to pay tax nowhere in the world. Taxies that should have been going towards America's and others infrastructure; schools, roads, medical etc etc

    I am also not sure why the iPhone is missing from the list of products, as its really its main profit centre. The accessories talked about are less technical(seriously cases), and could be made in America Trivially. Exactly what you want tariffs to do.

    I notice that xiaomi don't have the same problem with market share/Tarrifs in India sine they now manufacture 95% of phones there...maybe Apple should follow suit. They laughed at Obama for suggesting manufacturing in America...They don't laugh at Trump.

    1. Re:Profit Margins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It makes perfect sense that tariffs would raise prices on lower margin peripherals. There is less of a markup for the market to bear, and less reason for Apple to absorb losses.

      It also makes perfect sense for Apple to tell jingoistis to go pound sand. The future of their market is global. Why would they allow the US govt. or US anything else push them around?

    2. Re:Profit Margins by shilly · · Score: 1

      In the nicest possible way, I don't think it's only your understanding of Apple product pricing that's flawed.
      1. Apple commentators sometimes argue that Apple pricing is designed to maximise margins rather than market share. Unsurprisingly, Apple doesn't state its pricing strategy in public. Why would it?
      2. In any event, the logical chain between "Apple prices for margin rather than share" and "therefore tax increases shouldn't lead to price increases" doesn't exist. Obviously, input costs affect final prices, even though final prices are affected by more than just input prices. This is Pricing 101.
      3. Apple is the largest corporate taxpayer in America. Maybe you want it to pay more, but if that's the case, what the fuck was the point of giving American corporations including Apple a massive tax cut earlier this year, which is going to balloon your deficit to unheard of levels?
      4. The American economy may benefit from more Apple accessories that are sold in America being made in America, but it will also lose out when Apple margins and shares decline, which will happen when American consumers buy fewer Apple accessories because they are more expensive due to tariffs and worse economies of scale for the manufacture of Apple accessories in America and worse economies of scale for the manufacture of ex-US Apple accessories in China and poorer sales overseas due to rising prices etc. How difficult is it, really, to think of second order and third order effects?

      That'll do for now.

    3. Re:Profit Margins by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      My understanding of Apple product pricing is clearly flawed. Apple have always priced their products on maximising product margins; Not focused on market share.

      Are you faulting Apple for not trying to monopolize the entire market on smart phones and instead trying to earn as much profit as they can on the market share they have?

      How can this possibly raise the price of any of Apple's hardware?

      You do understand how basic accounting works right? If the cost of a good increases, either profits fall or prices get increased.

      All I can see is successfully taxing Apple who have worked tirelessly to pay tax nowhere in the world.

      Well this is a bold faced lie. Apple does pay taxes. They just pay little taxes in some parts of the world. For example, I would consider the US a part of the world. Do you want to know what Apple paid in corporate taxes in the US?

      I notice that xiaomi don't have the same problem with market share/Tarrifs in India sine they now manufacture 95% of phones there...maybe Apple should follow suit.

      And that is irrelevant to Apple who is facing problems with US/China tariffs?

      They laughed at Obama for suggesting manufacturing in America...They don't laugh at Trump.

      Please show me where they "laughed at Obama". Under Jobs, Apple stated to Obama that they were not moving the majority of their manufacturing to the US. I don't see anywhere where Jobs "laughed".

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  25. Mouldy Money by tuppe666 · · Score: 1

    Yeah, my college professor told me they just keep it in a giant Scrooge-McDuckian vault... just sitting there doing nothing, 100% liquid capitall

    They absolutely don't, ignoring the fact they created bond's against it so Americans couldn't benefit from Hospitals and Schools. They will have an army of Accountants on phones lending large sums of money out against it, often for hours.

  26. We were already in a trade war. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You got the timing backwards. China has had barriers keeping out American products for decades. We were already in a trade war. We are only now starting to fight back.

    We accepted the one sided nature of trade with China with the hopes of liberalizing China through interaction. That failed. Its far past time to realize this and to stop tolerating the one sided nature of our trade relationship.

    Trump may be an idiot, but he's having a broken clock moment and is correct here.

    1. Re:We were already in a trade war. by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 1

      We accepted the one sided nature of trade with China with the hopes of liberalizing China through interaction. That failed.

      No, we turned a blind eye to it because of the seemingly unlimited access to dirt-cheap labor.

      Now that we better understand the true costs of this: rampant IP theft, corporate and military espionage, China as an emerging semi-hostile superpower to rival the US, and yes, a decades long one-sided trade war.... yeah, it's probably time to attempt to rectify the situation. But let's not paint a pretty picture about what the true reasons for opening up factories in China was all about.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    2. Re:We were already in a trade war. by KonoWatakushi · · Score: 1

      "IP theft" is oxymoron. "Theft" implies that the owner was deprived of the "property", which is impossible with an idea. This line of reasoning is also highly hypocritical considering how much imaginary property America "stole" from England.

      The free sharing of ideas benefits everyone and lubricates progress. People believing that it is possible or beneficial to maintain a monopoly on ideas are deluded. The bill will come due, yet it won't be the result of "rampant IP theft", but of your own greed and stupidity, in believing that your ideas have more value than the manufacturing infrastructure to realize them.

  27. Nope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They'll find away to exempt some tech. Especially stuff like phones and TVs. Otherwise when our food prices are crazy and most people can't find a nutritious diet they'll be like but look they have iPhones and TVs that's the pinnacle of wealth

  28. Re:The mac mini is very old and at an high price n by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    HA "hardware refreshes" to apple means more glue and solder holding down this years parts. We made least years parts too easy to replace.

  29. Fuck you apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    apple will raise the price of phones to cover the tariff and add their 60% profit on the tariff as well. If you are stupid enough to buy apple products you deserve whatever you get.

  30. I have a solution for you Americans by Gabest · · Score: 1

    How about working for half the money, like the rest of the world, and normalizing your prices. A phone with the same specs is $200-500 everywhere else, but cost $500-1000 in the USA. Same can be said for everything else, rent, healthcare, internet. Of course Apple will never produce at you, wages are ridiculously over-inflated.

  31. So Apple is finally paying taxes after all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I mean, apart from their overall 0.2% tax rate or what it was after juggling their business through tax heavens and whatnot. They'll probably find a way of weaseling around the tariffs as well while raising end user prices nevertheless.

  32. Tariffs imposed by Trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think with Trumps genius it wonâ(TM)t be long till we will have coal fired cars , using up that unused trunk space. Inovation has always separated America from the rest of the world , that and making friends thruout the world. China currently is helping the S hole countries with over 60 billion going to Africa as they progress and develop who do you think they will prefer to do business with.

  33. The cost of everything government does by oldgraybeard · · Score: 1

    whether it is our government or another government Will be passed directly through to the end user Whether that end user is another business or the consumer.
    Taxes, Tariffs, the Cost of Fees, Laws and Regulations, etc Why? because a business without a positive profit margin may not have a future.
    A business can not manage a cash burn rate forever.

    A business will try to keep it's profit margin stable or better yet growing!

    Next point, why should Americas markets be open! If a trading partner does not keep their market open?

    Why would anyone think that "We are free traders here in America so do what ever you want in our markets. And you can close, partially close, tariff away any of our goods in your market and we will just take the hit in our country?" Which is just what the American government has been doing for 50+ years.

    Our current trading partners are shocked the issue is even coming up! They have been screwing segments of Americans for so long they even forgot someone was sitting on the other side of the table.

    Just my 2 cents ;)

  34. Who gives a flying donkey turd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good! Keep raising the prices so the turnover rate goes down. We donâ(TM)t need new phones so often and Apple and suck it. They can afford it. Just cause their margins wonâ(TM)t be so gaping huge doesnâ(TM)t mean they have to raise prices.

    And what is this liberal left wing horse shit. Every possible way to spin every story into your political view is exhausting.

  35. Sale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tsk-tsk-tsk. So, here I am, patiently waiting for Apple's going-out-of-business sale. Hurry it up, bitches.

  36. Apple could always lower profit margins... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...ah-HA-HA-HA! Who am I kidding. 50% margins on phones isn't good enough for Apple. They'll try to get it to 100% by 2020.

    Apple should choose a different country to make its phones. All the cheap labor has never caused the lowering of prices. If it had, the price of housing in California would be the cheapest in the country due to the all the illegal labor.

  37. China buys US Bonds to manage currency exchange by drnb · · Score: 1

    I wonder how this trade war will end, given that the US borrows a trillion dollars a year from China and others every year just to function.

    China needs to buy those US Bonds to manage its currency exchange rate. China is awash in dollars due to the trade imbalance. This would normally depress the value of the dollar in China and increase the value of the yuan. That would increase the price of their services and exports, decrease the price of US imports. Keep in mind, the savings experienced by manufacturing in China is not simply labor costs. It is basically everything is on sale due to the currency manipulations, raw materials, services, etc. A weaker yuan is needed to support this export friendly situation.

    To keep the yuan low compared to the dollar China needs to get their dollars "of their books". Buying US Bonds does this. Its an accounting gimmick, but a legal and long established one.

  38. Not Even Remotely True by tuppe666 · · Score: 1

    You do understand that most smart phones are manufactured in China right? A tariff on China will affect your Samsung, HTC, Huawei, or LG phone the same if it is manufactured in China.

    Phones are manufactured all over; famously to avoid tariffs Xiaomi manufacture 95% of their phones in India...Apple only have 1% and complain about tariffs there.

    1. Re:Not Even Remotely True by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Phones are manufactured all over; famously to avoid tariffs Xiaomi manufacture 95% of their phones in India...Apple only have 1% and complain about tariffs there.

      Please tell me how your one example means that Samsung, LG, HTC, Huawei, and others do not manufacturer their phones in China.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    2. Re:Not Even Remotely True by tuppe666 · · Score: 1

      Phones are manufactured all over; famously to avoid tariffs Xiaomi manufacture 95% of their phones in India...Apple only have 1% and complain about tariffs there.

      Please tell me how your one example means that Samsung, LG, HTC, Huawei, and others do not manufacturer their phones in China.

      Samsung is South Korean
      LG Electronics Inc. is South Korean
      HTC Corporation is Taiwanese ...Huawei is the only Chinese manufacturer on the list, and although very popular in Europe is shunned in America.

      Sorry my example was about avoiding tariffs by Chinese Apple manufacturing locally to avoid tariffs. To the benefit of the local economy, market share.

    3. Re:Not Even Remotely True by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Sorry my example was about avoiding tariffs by Chinese Apple manufacturing locally to avoid tariffs. To the benefit of the local economy, market share.

      You understand what a "tariff" is, right? The US is proposing a tariff on China made goods that is imported into the US. The tariff is not only US companies. All companies that import goods into the US is affected. Which affects Samsung, LG, HTC, Dell, HP, basically everyone. You Xiaomi example is irrelevant since they don't import into the US.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    4. Re:Not Even Remotely True by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Phones are manufactured all over; famously to avoid tariffs Xiaomi manufacture 95% of their phones in India...Apple only have 1% and complain about tariffs there.

      Double dummy-whammy. Ignoring you idiotic claim on Apple's marketshare, your claim about Xiaomi is even dumber. Hard to imagine, but there you go, breaking your own record.

  39. yay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    cheaper Apple shit for Canadians. Great!

  40. Who Cares? by DMJC · · Score: 1

    America is the largest consumer market in the world. All this does is open the door for another American tech company to come in and beat Apple only this time they can use American tech workers to do it.

  41. Good. by Tailhook · · Score: 2

    Not much else to say there.

    Except that perhaps the future is not jeopardized in the least if tech bros buy new phones at a lower frequency and China has less revenue to build a blue water a navy. The cheap stuff from China model — enabled by disposable workers and piratical regulation-free manufacturers — is a shitty way to do things and any impedance we can offer is good. We can't trust China, Indie, et al. to perform our manufacturing without filling the oceans with plastic and emitting tons of illegal CFCs and all the other heinous shit they do, so let us unwind this sad, shameful arrangement.

    Just more winning as far as I am concerned.

    --
    Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
  42. Only For the USA by sit1963nz · · Score: 1

    Any price increases will only impact the USA, the rest of the world will continue with no changes.

  43. Raise price, then move by manu0601 · · Score: 1

    They will raise prices so save margins. Then move production to US to save costs. Then if price hike had no impact on sales... do nothing.

  44. Show us the cost by jtgd · · Score: 1

    I wish Apple had the balls to show us what the tarriffs actually cost. They should show their prices like:
    Phone price: $999
    Tariff: $100
    Price you pay: $1099

    --
    J
  45. Made in 'Merica ;) by tuppe666 · · Score: 1

    I wish Apple had the balls to show us what the tarriffs actually cost.

    They have spent years marketing "Designed in California" they would never promote "Made in China"

    1. Re:Made in 'Merica ;) by jtgd · · Score: 1

      Why? One does not preclude the other. Some would call them smart for designing here and building there. How do you think they got to being worth $1 trillion?

      --
      J
  46. USA $ = UK £ by tuppe666 · · Score: 1

    Any price increases will only impact the USA, the rest of the world will continue with no changes.

    In the UK they do a $ for £...whatever you think of that, so if their was any price hike well be in the UK. I think it is dangerous for them especially as more people are buying off contract phones.

    1. Re:USA $ = UK £ by sit1963nz · · Score: 1

      Correction they CURRENTLY do a $ for a £. The US population is 4% of the worlds population. I really doubt Apple would impose a "tariff" on the rest of the world simply because the US government has imposed one on the USA bound products. Its also looking more and more likely that Trump will be a 1 term president (if he even finishes the first term) , no company is going to spend billions in building factories in the USA when they can simply ride out the next 2 years.

  47. Me a liar...NO by tuppe666 · · Score: 1

    Are you faulting Apple for not trying to monopolize the entire market on smart phones and instead trying to earn as much profit as they can on the market share they have?

    No. It does mean that its market share in massive markets like China ita share small and dropping, and in India is non existent.

    You do understand how basic accounting works right? If the cost of a good increases, either profits fall or prices get increased.

    Yes, as an accountant. I am saying profits will fall.

    Well this is a bold faced lie. Apple does pay taxes. They just pay little taxes in some parts of the world. For example, I would consider the US a part of the world. Do you want to know what Apple paid in corporate taxes in the US?

    lol, stop spreading fake news, and calling people liars, Apple deliberate do not pay for hospitals, and welfare...because they legally(sic) can...Ireland was famously forced to collect €13bn in tax from Apple. I hope they Apple pay you. Because their anti American policies are everywhere.

    And that is irrelevant to Apple who is facing problems with US/China tariffs?

    A company who has become the market leader when faced with the same problem with tariffs by manufacturing in that country is a working example it is possible to not only avoid tariffs, but benefit the local economy, and make it successful. You are saying Apple cannot do it...and I am fine with that.

    Please show me where they "laughed at Obama". Under Jobs, Apple stated to Obama that they were not moving the majority of their manufacturing to the US. I don't see anywhere where Jobs "laughed".

    Apple still sell their users to Google, so why is it so hard to find examples? I like this one

    Why can’t that work come home? Mr. Obama asked.
    Mr. Jobs’s reply was unambiguous. “Those jobs aren’t coming back,”

    1. Re:Me a liar...NO by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Yes, as an accountant. I am saying profits will fall.

      There's a huge difference between WILL fall and CAN fall.

      lol, stop spreading fake news, and calling people liars, Apple deliberate do not pay for hospitals, and welfare...because they legally(sic) can...Ireland was famously forced to collect €13bn in tax from Apple. I hope they Apple pay you. Because their anti American policies are everywhere.

      Try to follow me here: 1. Apple HQ is in the US; therefore Apple is under IRS rules . 2. Apple has paid US taxes for its entire existence. 3. The US is part of world. Therefore Apple has paid taxes in the world. As an accountant I find it hard to believe that you haven't read Apple's 10K. Thus YOU LIED.

      A company who has become the market leader when faced with the same problem with tariffs by manufacturing in that country is a working example it is possible to not only avoid tariffs, but benefit the local economy, and make it successful. You are saying Apple cannot do it...and I am fine with that.

      Again try to follow me here: You are using the example of Xiaomi as an example of a company avoiding tariffs. 1. The tariff situation is between the US and China. Not China and India. Not US and India. 2. Xiaomi manufactures in India. 3. Xiaomi does not sell or import phones to the US and sells mostly in China. 4. Thus Xiaomi is entirely irrelevant. If China and India ever get into a tariff, you'd be 100% wrong in all your points.

      Why can’t that work come home? Mr. Obama asked. Mr. Jobs’s reply was unambiguous. “Those jobs aren’t coming back,”

      Where is "laugh"? In your example, there is no "laugh". So are you lying?

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  48. As an Apple commentator... by tuppe666 · · Score: 1

    1. Apple commentators sometimes argue that Apple pricing is designed to maximise margins rather than market share. Unsurprisingly, Apple doesn't state its pricing strategy in public. Why would it?

    They don't produce a $100 for the mass market they produce a boutique brand phone for $1000 at the cost of 85% worldwide market share. They do not keep it secret

    2. In any event, the logical chain between "Apple prices for margin rather than share" and "therefore tax increases shouldn't lead to price increases" doesn't exist. Obviously, input costs affect final prices, even though final prices are affected by more than just input prices. This is Pricing 101.

    Then you have never done any accounting. Please search brand equity Apple still sell Apple users to Google.

    3. Apple is the largest corporate taxpayer in America. Maybe you want it to pay more, but if that's the case, what the fuck was the point of giving American corporations including Apple a massive tax cut earlier this year, which is going to balloon your deficit to unheard of levels?

    They didn't create a bond to avoid paying any for hospitals and schools, and only paid after getting massive tax cuts. Next you will be saying the Irish sandwich was a myth, please stop spreading fake news.

    4. The American economy may benefit from more Apple accessories that are sold in America being made in America, but it will also lose out when Apple margins and shares decline

    Apple is anti-america, the fact that jobs might be created here, and tax that is harder to avoid paid is impossible to spin badly. Share price only affects shareholders.

    1. Re:As an Apple commentator... by shilly · · Score: 1

      I don't know what your word salad response to my #2 means, but it was very exciting. Congratulations!

      Now, how about spelling out the logic that goes from "Apple prices for margin rather than share" to "therefore tax increases shouldn't lead to price increases"? Because you actually have your logic bass-ackwards. If Apple priced for *share*, it would wish to preserve share in the face of rising input costs, and therefore would do what it could to absorb increases in input costs, even at the expense of margin. If Apple prices for margin, then it will allow rising input costs to increase product pricing in order to preserve margin. Actually, and unsurprisingly, Apple's pricing strategy can be inferred to be more complex than either of these scenarios.

      As for your response to #3, it is entirely possible for Apple to be the largest corporate taxpayer in America and *also* pursue a strategy of tax minimisation including the use of bonds, negotiating tax cuts with states and countries, etc. If you think it's "fake news" that Apple is the largest corporate taxpayer in America, then why don't you link to a source that shows someone else paid more?

      Your response to #4 is so silly, it's almost unbelievable. Apple's shares are exceptionally widely held. A large proportion of Americans have a stake in the success of Apple through their investments and retirement plans etc.

  49. Lower Margins by tuppe666 · · Score: 1

    It makes perfect sense that tariffs would raise prices on lower margin peripherals. There is less of a markup for the market to bear,

    Except their peripherals look to have even higher margins...in a monster cable joke way.

  50. Dongles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple's prices are set to maximize profits. The cost has little to do with how much it costs to manufacture them.