The only logical choice for Apple is to pay the 25% tariff.
And the only logical choice for consumers/voters is to decide if they want to support this "tax" and by extension, it's proponent.
The simple fact is that we now live in an interconnected world. It is simply not possible or practical to natively produce everything that goes into an iPhone. Not now, not within the decades to come and probably not ever.
And decrees from the fuhrer and pining for yesteryear won't change this.
boroboro4 · 8h ago
> The simple fact is that we now live in an interconnected world. It is simply not possible or practical to natively produce everything that goes into an iPhone.
US is a huge country with tremendous human capital and natural resources. I don’t see issues with US producing much more goods than it is producing now. It might be not practical, or not practical yet, but it’s for sure possible.
watwut · 7h ago
The US will need to crash its own economy and create underclass of people with no better employment options first to make it reasonable.
It is working on for sure, but not there yet. It still have too low unemployment rates for these potential jobs to become cheap enough.
xp84 · 5h ago
It's not even about the supposedly cheap labor. China has built very advanced automated assembly plants, and has a whole supply chain which provides most of the parts needed. Either we have to, at great expense, replicate that whole supply chain here, or we have to import the parts at great, tariffed, cost anyway and only do final assembly. While this would save money since I guess then the tariff is only on the BOM and not Apple's legendary margin, it would still massively inflate the cost. Why do "Republicans" love high taxes so much now?
This seems so stupid because we don't really need every continent to have a very complex and expensive supply chain for tiny electronic components when boats and money both exist, but let's say you disagree on that.
On what earth does it make sense to tariff smartphones in 2025 with zero warning? It would take ten years to fully construct a completely domestic supply chain for iPhones if you started today. So why not announce a tariff that starts in 10 years, so that that can be built, but we don't burden all Americans with this high tax on something everyone buys?
(Answer: Everybody knows Trump and Navarro will be dead in 10 years and that anyone else would cancel this dumbass idea and replace it with policy that isn't so idiotic and self-defeating.)
lawn · 8h ago
Not at this price point it's not.
AnimalMuppet · 14h ago
No, the only logical choice for Apple is to go to court to block this random act of executive over-reach. The president does not have the constitutional authority to impose random tariffs on individual companies.
bathtub365 · 4h ago
The tariff will likely also be off again in a few days. The only constant with this administration seems to be random change.
jqpabc123 · 14h ago
Haven't you heard, the law no longer applies. He has been anointed with immunity.
bangertho · 13h ago
All Presidents have.
A future President could have the entire admin thrown out of a plane on the way to El Salvador as an official act of national security.
I can dream.
duxup · 14h ago
I suspect Apple is concerned not just with the tariff, but the next tweet and the next…
Tim already paid his bribe, https://variety.com/2025/digital/news/apple-ceo-tim-cook-don... and others who have cut deals with him have found those deals to be less than solid. Law firms that settled with Trump have reported that they've received demands well outside their agreements.
jqpabc123 · 14h ago
Concern is certainly understandable.
The choice for Apple (and everyone) is how to respond effectively and appropriately.
As it stands, the world economy is being subjected to the whims of one person. And this person has a checkered history with marketplace economics.
raincom · 11h ago
In the third world, $1M is hardly considered as a bribe. For large contracts in the third world, companies pay 20% as bribe. That's why Benazir Bhutto's husband is called "Mr 10%". In India, regional parties rule many states; the big bosses there want 20%.
tim333 · 6h ago
Come on. In this modern world they must be able to bribe the president for less than that.
QuietWatchtower · 5h ago
Maybe if Tim buys some Trump coin?
qingcharles · 7h ago
Buy Samsung instead? They are a foreign corp that makes their products in Korea, so they only currently have 10% tariffs added. They didn't pay a million dollar donation to the inauguration fund, either.
qingcharles · 2h ago
edit: Trump later clarified he would also tariff Samsung to make it fair.
pr07ecH70r · 14h ago
My son (who is 7 and knows already basic maths) can tell you that if a giant production like Apple moves to the US will cost at least 90% or even more to produce. This automatically will make them 110+% more expensive, which will destroy the demand. And who will pay?! The biggest market - USA (~43% as of 2024) Interesting who are the finance advisors of the guy in the white house?!? Good luck!
duxup · 14h ago
> who are the finance advisors of the guy in the white house
As far as we know there’s nobody with an education in this administration who is making any sensible argument why these random choices make sense / will produce.
Everyone in the administration who takes questions are political appointees / politicians and they to a person eventually ignore any specific questions and then tell you how great Trump is. The press conferences are creepy at times.
The little info that leaks out from insiders indicates Trump doesn’t take advice from even his own staff often and they are blindsided by tweets frequently.
xp84 · 5h ago
Peter Navarro, an unhinged lunatic with a singular obsession with tariffs, is the person who has Trump's exclusive attention when it comes to trade policy.
Navarro is to tariffs as Ron Paul was to "abolishing the Fed"
It's true that Trump is laughably cheap to bribe when you compare the magnitude of the many bribes compared to the damage caused to whoever isn't bribing him (In his first term he put a big tariff on bauxite that cost billions to an entire industry who imports it to produce aluminum metal, for a small windfall for the only domestic bauxite producer (friend/donor of Trump), it was orders of magnitude less money)
That said, I think current Trump wants to get his beak more wet. If Tim isn't an idiot, he's looking into joint ventures where Apple brokers and finances a couple of Trump Hotels in China or something. Not a million bucks.
duxup · 15h ago
I’m starting to think Trump thinks about as deeply about things as a tweet.
mdp2021 · 11h ago
I think the above parent post will enter history textbooks.
And the only logical choice for consumers/voters is to decide if they want to support this "tax" and by extension, it's proponent.
The simple fact is that we now live in an interconnected world. It is simply not possible or practical to natively produce everything that goes into an iPhone. Not now, not within the decades to come and probably not ever.
And decrees from the fuhrer and pining for yesteryear won't change this.
US is a huge country with tremendous human capital and natural resources. I don’t see issues with US producing much more goods than it is producing now. It might be not practical, or not practical yet, but it’s for sure possible.
It is working on for sure, but not there yet. It still have too low unemployment rates for these potential jobs to become cheap enough.
This seems so stupid because we don't really need every continent to have a very complex and expensive supply chain for tiny electronic components when boats and money both exist, but let's say you disagree on that.
On what earth does it make sense to tariff smartphones in 2025 with zero warning? It would take ten years to fully construct a completely domestic supply chain for iPhones if you started today. So why not announce a tariff that starts in 10 years, so that that can be built, but we don't burden all Americans with this high tax on something everyone buys?
(Answer: Everybody knows Trump and Navarro will be dead in 10 years and that anyone else would cancel this dumbass idea and replace it with policy that isn't so idiotic and self-defeating.)
A future President could have the entire admin thrown out of a plane on the way to El Salvador as an official act of national security.
I can dream.
Tim already paid his bribe, https://variety.com/2025/digital/news/apple-ceo-tim-cook-don... and others who have cut deals with him have found those deals to be less than solid. Law firms that settled with Trump have reported that they've received demands well outside their agreements.
The choice for Apple (and everyone) is how to respond effectively and appropriately.
As it stands, the world economy is being subjected to the whims of one person. And this person has a checkered history with marketplace economics.
As far as we know there’s nobody with an education in this administration who is making any sensible argument why these random choices make sense / will produce.
Everyone in the administration who takes questions are political appointees / politicians and they to a person eventually ignore any specific questions and then tell you how great Trump is. The press conferences are creepy at times.
The little info that leaks out from insiders indicates Trump doesn’t take advice from even his own staff often and they are blindsided by tweets frequently.
Navarro is to tariffs as Ron Paul was to "abolishing the Fed"
He's 7.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/trump-crypto-golf-club-dinner-...
[0] https://www.axios.com/2025/01/03/tim-cook-apple-donate-1-mil... - nb4: Tim Cook = Apple for the purposes of this. I'm "he" donated to give Apple a firewall and a way to disown it when he retires (or hopefully is let go sooner).
That said, I think current Trump wants to get his beak more wet. If Tim isn't an idiot, he's looking into joint ventures where Apple brokers and finances a couple of Trump Hotels in China or something. Not a million bucks.