There is 0 benefit to Apple consumers and investors to have phones made here. The quality of the phone would either be the same or worse because they would need to start cutting costs to make up for the increased $$$ you have to pay people here. You would only make them here to score politcal points which is stupid.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Donald Trump Tells Tim Cook He'll Offer Apple 'Very Large Tax Cut' to Make Products in America
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No, but many serve as to-do lists for peck-sniff chair warmers at the "enforcement" levels of various agencies. Anyone who has run a small business understands this, government by its nature is parasitic.
The problem with tax cuts to a single corporation is that it's impossible to differentiate between that and a bribe.
Tax policy should apply to everyone equally, not tailored to individual companies. Now it's quite possible that trump is talking about how a general policy could apply to an individual corporation. But I think it's important to clarify that and not appear as if the government is picking and choosing who it will favor in the marketplace.
But Apple isn't going to use repatriated earnings to create subsidized jobs for low-skilled US workers. It just isn't. And neither is any other multinational corporation.
You either give a company a tax cut, or you don't. If I promised to give you a personal tax cut that worked out to be worth $10,000 to you, but only on the condition that you spent $10,000 in a way I specify - it's not really a tax cut, is it?
Is that right being threatened? They're being offered an incentive. I assume they can turn it down, unless it's actually an ultimatum.
Labor cost is the second or third out of main top3 cost components within production costs. I highly doubt, americans will work in factories for similar salaries as chinese.
As I said in another post, this would apply to all corporations. Apple just happens to be the biggest and with the most cash overseas.
It depends on the way you do it. Bush had a tax holiday in 2004 and no jobs were created.
Trump could tie the taxes to infrastructure spending or to a jobs program. It's all in the details.
This is why we need to invest in 21st century technical education for our youth. A giant automated plant will still require a lot of skilled maintenance workers, engineers, etc. Why are we still not preparing our workforce for these 21st century jobs? The US could be a leader in automated production and it would still provide many good jobs, but it seems like we are stuck in the either you go to a 4 year university or work at McDonalds or Walmart phase.
Heck it's even a struggle to get a plumber in my area anymore because we have less and less students taking up skilled trades. Automated factories would have all sorts of skilled trades jobs available, but we need to also come up with a training plan and not just the factories. Maybe Bernie Sanders could work on that part of the equation.
I am saying that bringing manufacturing jobs back to the US is pie in the sky. How about this instead? Bring back the money overseas and the money you would have collected from taxes, let the company keep half, and put the other half into re-training and re-tooling our outdated blue collar workforce.
I'm sure others have pointed this out, but the issues I see are:
1) Those jobs are getting fewer and fewer as automation occurs
2) Those jobs are kinda seasonal/cyclical. They ramp up at product releases, then downsize of the lifetime of that product . Are people going to be happy with that type of job.
1) Those jobs are getting fewer and fewer as automation occurs
2) Those jobs are kinda seasonal/cyclical. They ramp up at product releases, then downsize of the lifetime of that product . Are people going to be happy with that type of job.
The labor participation rate (U6) is the issue. Worst in decades.
A strong dollar means that your goods cost more than other nations. In addition to high labor and other costs, that will now be (has been) working against you.
Except he is president-elect of a ->country<-, not a ->business<-. One is a currency provider/manger, the other is a currency user. These "run the country like a business" points of view are as bad as "Well I can't deficit spend, why should the country be able to?" They are puerile points of view that do not match the reality of how things work.
Sure. And only the citizens of a country should fund the worlds largest, by far, armed forces, build its roads, and cover other operating costs. Big business should not have to pay any taxes and get a free ride on the backs of the people. Yes, that is hyperbole and, granted, modern tax policy in light of the new economy can be an issue to discuss. But this over simplification to sway voters one way or the other doesn't help.
And a strong dollar and high standard of living with governing health and environmental regulations all work against that goal in the global economy. What are you proposing to give up so that we can compete with the squalor of manufacturing in the third world or the environmental disaster area that are portions of China? There's no free lunch here and people thinking any president (all who have tried, BTW) will change that are deluding themselves.
And being the smart fellow that you are, you know that robotic equipment designs, manufactures and services itself, right? Have you ever done any hands-on work in your life?
Yes, cause inflation is good. Especially when it's applied to goods and not salaries! /s
By stealing less money from Apple than smaller businesses. Large corporations already receive tax-advantaged status by their access to expensive tax attorneys that small businesses can't afford, which they use to pay far less than the stated nominal corporate tax rate. The government shouldn't be in charge of picking who the winners and losers are in the economy.
Obviously some people are required to design, set up, and maintain robotic systems, but far fewer than the work robots replace.
Are you seriously trying to state that technology cannot replace humans, in a forum about a company that innovated and completely redefines a lot of industries?