So let's take the 6 core Mac Pro as an example of what it would really cost:
USA: $3999.00 before tax or $4353.91 after New York tax.
GERMANY: 3999.00 including 639.00 German tax which un US dollars is $5471.83
Now if you remove the GERMAN VAT (639 = $874.34) the cost of the Mac Pro in Germany after the governments cut would be: $4597.00 and that's the amount that pretty much goes to Apple before shipping costs.
Now to make it even more clear, if I was to buy the same Mac Pro in New York the tax would put the final price at: $4353.91
So all things considered that makes a $243.09 difference which could easily be accounted by the fact that these babies are assembled in USA and have to be shipped to Europe.
Sigh.. so you add sales tax to the cost in NY and REMOVE sales tax (which is essentially what VAT is) from the cost in Germany, and still end up with it costing $243.09 more in Germany?? What exactly are you trying to prove with that tortured, nonsensical comparison?
Are things more expensive in other countries? Hell yeah, just ask Brazil, they even get the iPhones assembled there and still they have the highest prices of Apple products in the world.
I do believe the price differences go to taxes and shipping and not to Apples pockets as largely claimed.
You can believe it all you want, but if you want to convince anyone else of it you'll have to learn some basic "like-for-like" comparison skills first.
No idea once again what you're trying to prove by pointing out how much more of a ripoff Brazilian prices are again over-and-above those in Europe? Does that make it OK for us to ripped off slightly less? It certainly doesn't help your subsequent claim that the difference goes just to taxes and shipping at all!
How many of those comparing US prices to those around the world are factoring in the US sales tax to the US price? Not many by the looks of it
Of course not, because despite the internet opening up an almost bottomless well of knowledge most people don't learn anything.
Wow. Just... wow. Just about every post on this thread complaining about the international difference in prices has explicitly and clearly called out sales tax as being part of their calculations. Really not sure what in the hell you were both reading. Beautiful sense of irony there btw ArcaneDevice, kudos on that.
Or factoring in the extra years warranty that you get in Europe/Australia which adds to the price.. not many by the looks of it
This was also covered in this very thread already, but to be fair this point hasn't been very well responded to by the whiners (me included!) as of yet. First off, Apple charge extra for AppleCare internationally as well, not just in the US, and indeed we even get ripped off on the price of that as well. Secondly, yes, a lot of countries offer better basic consumer protection than the US (you should really be taking the chance to look at pushing for an improvement in your own laws in this regard really) but they have done so for a long time - this isn't something new (at least not in much of Europe). And yet it's been shown in recent court cases in Europe and Australia that Apple were not honouring their local legal obligations on warranty all this time (they certainly weren't publicly acknowledging them at least) and were essentially applying their US standards globally (where they could get away with it), applying a 1 year warranty and charging customers for extended warranty even though they legally had to provide it anyway. But they've _always_ charged the premium for their goods in Europe that we're complaining about, and in Australia, where the new consumer law only came in during 2011. So this argument doesn't really stand up.
The final point is around currency buffering as some have said. One guy gave an example of £1 <-> $1.60 being calculated at £1 <-> $1.45 for a buffer. First off, I agree that large companies have to do this to maintain consistent local pricing, but then they are large companies: they can use dedicated brokerages to get better deals and maintain large pools of local currency in any (at least large enough) country that they trade in, then have those brokerages trade currency at what they foresee as optimal times. In other words, they'd be expecting to see a far better deal than $1.45 (it's actually $1.63 atm) internally - especially as $1.45 would be a sucky deal for a consumer buying from a traditional ripoff bureau, never mind a massive multinational!
In short I agree that this plus international shipping, which would be a tiny proportional cost when done at scale, would have to be factored in as well, but would surely come nowhere near the 15% premium that posters have been reporting. I've never seen an argument in defence of companies doing this (they all do it, not just Apple, to be fair) that actually adds up when you break it down. I'd love to be shown to be wrong and to have not considered some factor, as it's a very frustrating situation, and at least then we could look at what that factor is and what, if anything, could be done to change this.