tariffs – Page 2

Trump threatens Apple with 25% tariff to force iPhone manufacturing into US

Apple, digital services tax, Donald Trump, European Union, iPhones, Policy, tariffs, tim cook, us-china trade war / DJ Henderson / May 23, 2025

Donald Trump woke up Friday morning and threatened Apple with a 25 percent tariff on any iPhones sold in the US that are not manufactured in America.

In a Truth Social post, Trump claimed that he had “long ago” told Apple CEO Tim Cook that Apple’s plan to manufacture iPhones for the US market in India was unacceptable. Only US-made iPhones should be sold here, he said.

“If that is not the case, a tariff of at least 25 percent must be paid by Apple to the US,” Trump said.

This appears to be the first time Trump has threatened a US company directly with tariffs, and Reuters noted that “it is not clear if Trump can levy a tariff on an individual company.” (Typically, tariffs are imposed on countries or categories of goods.)

Apple has so far not commented on the threat after staying silent when Trump started promising US-made iPhones were coming last month. At that time, Apple instead continued moving its US-destined operations from China into India, where tariffs were substantially lower and expected to remain so.

In his social media post, Trump made it clear that he did not approve of Apple’s plans to pivot production to India or “anyplace else” but the US.

For Apple, building an iPhone in the US threatens to spike costs so much that they risk pricing out customers. In April, CNBC cited Wall Street analysts estimating that a US-made iPhone could cost anywhere from 25 percent more—increasing to at least about $1,500—to potentially $3,500 at most. Today, The New York Times cited analysts forecasting that the costly shift “could more than double the consumer price of an iPhone.”

It’s unclear if Trump could actually follow through on this latest tariff threat, but the morning brought more potential bad news for Apple’s long-term forecast in another Truth Social post dashed off shortly after the Apple threat.

In that post, Trump confirmed that the European Union “has been very difficult to deal with” in trade talks, which he fumed “are going nowhere!” Because these talks have apparently failed, Trump ordered “a straight 50 percent tariff” on EU imports starting on June 1.

Trump threatens Apple with 25% tariff to force iPhone manufacturing into US Read More »

Trump’s trade war risks splintering the Internet, experts warn

digital services tax, Donald Trump, European Union, Policy, tariffs / DJ Henderson / May 21, 2025

Trump urged to rethink trade policy to block attacks on digital services.

In sparking his global trade war, Donald Trump seems to have maintained a glaring blind spot when it comes to protecting one of America’s greatest trade advantages: the export of digital services.

Experts have warned that the consequences for Silicon Valley could be far-reaching.

In a report released Tuesday, an intelligence firm that tracks global trade risks, Allianz Trade, shared results of a survey of 4,500 firms worldwide, designed “to capture the impact of the escalation of trade tensions.” Amid other key findings, the group warned that the US’s fixation on the country’s trillion-dollar goods deficit risks rocking “the fastest-growing segment of global trade,” America’s “invisible exports” of financial and digital services.

Tracking these exports is challenging, as many services are provided through foreign affiliates, the report noted, but recent estimates “reveal a large digital trade surplus of at least $600 billion for the US, spread across categories like digital advertising, video streaming, cloud platforms, and online payment services.”

According to Allianz Trade, “the scale of this hidden trade is immense.” These “hidden” exports have “far” outpaced “the growth of goods exports over the past two decades, their report said, but because of how these services are delivered, “this trade goes uncounted in traditional statistics.”

If Trump doesn’t “rethink trade policy and narratives” soon to start tracking all this trade more closely, he risks undermining this trade advantage—which Allianz Trade noted “is underpinned by America’s innovative firms and massive data infrastructure”—at a time when he’s in trade talks with most of the world and could be leveraging that advantage.

“US digital exports now represent a significant share of world trade (about 3.6 percent of all global trade, and growing fast),” Allianz Trade reported. “These ‘invisible’ exports boost US trade revenues without filling any container ships, underscoring a new reality: routers and data centers are as strategically important as ports and factories in sustaining US leadership.”

Without a pivot, Trump’s current trade tactics—requiring all countries impacted by reciprocal tariffs to strike a deal before July 8, while acknowledging that there won’t be time to meet with every country—could even threaten US dominance as “the world’s digital content and tech services hub,” Allianz Trade suggested.

US trade partners are already “looking into tariffs or taxes on digital services as a retaliation tool that could cause pain to the US,” the report warned. And other experts agreed that if such countermeasures become permanent fixtures in global trade, it could significantly hurt the US tech industry, perhaps even splintering the Internet, as companies are forced to customize services according to where different users are located.

Jovan Kurbalija, a former diplomat and executive director of the DiploFoundation who has monitored the Internet’s impact on global trade for more than 20 years, warned in an April blog that this could have a “more profound impact” on the US than other retaliatory measures.

“If the escalation of trade tensions moves into the digital realm, it could have far-reaching consequences for Silicon Valley giants and the digital economy worldwide,” Kurbalija wrote.

“The silent war over digital services”

The threat of retaliatory tariffs hitting the digital services industry has loomed large since European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen confirmed to the Financial Times last month that she was proactively developing such countermeasures if Trump’s trade talks with the European Union failed.

Those measures could potentially include “a tax on digital advertising revenues that would hit tech groups such as Amazon, Google and Facebook,” the FT reported. But perhaps most alarmingly, they may also include “tariffs on the services trade between the US and the EU.” Unlike the digital sales tax—which could be imposed differently by EU member states to significantly hurt tech giants’ ad revenues in various regions—the tariff would be applied across a single EU-wide market.

Kurbalija suggested that the problem goes beyond the EU.

Trump’s aggressive tariffs on goods have handed “the EU and others both moral and tactical pretexts to fast-track digital taxes” as countermeasures, Kurbalija wrote. He’s also given foreign governments an appealing narrative of “reclaiming revenue from foreign tech ‘free riders,'” Kurbalija wrote, while perhaps accelerating the broader “use of digital service taxes as a diplomatic tool” to “pressure the US into balanced negotiations.”

For tech companies, the taxes risk escalating trade tensions, potentially perpetuating the atmosphere of uncertainty that, Allianz Trade reported, has US firms scrambling to secure reliable, affordable supply chains.

In an op-ed discussing potential harms to US tech firms and startups, the CEO of CareYaya Health Technologies, Neal K. Shah, warned that “tariffs on digital services would directly reduce revenues for American tech companies.”

At the furthest extreme, the “digital trade war threatens to splinter the Internet’s integrated infrastructure,” Kurbalija warned, fragmenting the Internet in a way that could “undermine decades of gradual development of technological interconnectedness.”

Imagine, Shah suggested, that on top of increased hardware costs, tech companies also incurred costs of providing services for “parallel digital universes with incompatible standards.” Users traveling to different locations might find that platforms have “different features, prices, and capabilities,” he said.

“For startups and industry innovators,” Shah predicted, “fragmentation means higher compliance costs, reduced market access, and slower growth.” Such a world also risks ending “the era of globally scalable digital platforms,” decreasing investor interest in tech, and reducing the global GDP “by up to 5 percent over the next decade as digital trade barriers multiply,” Shah said. And if digital services tariffs become a permanent fixture of global trade, Shah suggested that it could, in the long term, undermine American tech dominance, including in fields critical to national security, like artificial intelligence.

“Trump’s tariffs may dominate today’s headlines, but the silent war over digital services will define tomorrow’s economy,” Kurbalija wrote.

Trump’s go-to countermeasure is still tariffs

Trump has responded to threats of digital services taxes with threats of more tariffs, arguing that “only America should be allowed to tax American firms,” Reuters reported. In February, Trump issued a memo calling for research into the best responsive measures to counter threats of digital service taxes, including threatening more tariffs.

It’s worth asking if Trump’s tactics are working the way he intends, if the US plans to keep up the outdated trade strategy. Allianz Trade’s survey found that many US firms—rather than moving their operations into the US, as Trump has demanded—are instead rerouting supply chains through “emerging trade hubs” like Southeast Asia, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and Latin American countries where tariff rates are currently lower.

Likely even more frustrating to Trump, however, is a finding that 50 percent of US firms surveyed confirmed they are considering increasing investments in China, in response to the US abruptly shifting tariffs tactics. Only 8 percent said they’re considering decreasing Chinese investments.

It’s unclear if tech companies will be adequately shielded by the US threat of tariffs as the potential default countermeasure to digital services taxes or tariffs. Perhaps Trump’s memo will surface more novel tactics that interest the administration. But Allianz Trade suggested that Trump may be stuck in the past with a trade strategy focused too much on goods at a time when the tech industry needs more modern tactics to keep America’s edge in global markets.

“An economy adept at producing globally demanded services—from cloud software to financial engineering—is less reliant on physical supply chains and less vulnerable to commodity swings,” Allianz Trade reported. “The US edge in digital and financial services is not just an anecdote in the trade ledger; it has become a structural advantage.”

How would digital services tariffs even work?

Trump’s trade math so far has been criticized by economists as a “trillion-dollar tariff disappointment” that at times imposed baffling tariff rates that appeared to be generated by chatbots. But part of the trade math moving forward will also likely be deducing if nations threatening digital services taxes or tariffs can actually follow through on those threats.

Bertin Martens, a senior fellow at a European economics-focused think tank called Bruegel, broke down in April how practical it could be for the EU to attack digital platforms, noting, “there is a question of whether such retaliation is even feasible.”

The EU could possibly use a law known as the Anti-Coercion Regulation—which grants officials authority to lob countermeasures when facing “foreign economic coercion”—to impose digital services tariffs.

But “platforms with substantive presence in the EU cannot be the target of trade measures” under that law, Martens noted. That could create a carveout for the biggest tech giants who have operations in the EU, Martens suggested, but only if those operations are deemed “substantive,” a term that the law does not clearly define.

To make that determination, officials would need “detailed information on the locations or nationalities” of all the users that platforms bring together, including buyers, sellers, advertisers and other parties, Martens said.

This makes digital services platforms “particularly difficult to target,” he suggested. And lawmakers could risk backlash if “any arbitrary decision to invoke” the law risks “imposing a tax on EU users without retaliatory effect on the US.”

While tech companies will have to wait for the trade war to play out—likely planning to increase prices, Allianz Trade found, rather than bear the brunt of new costs—Shah suggested that there could be one clear winner if Trump doesn’t reprioritize shielding digital services exports in the way that experts recommend.

“A surprising potential consequence of digital tariffs could be the accelerated development and adoption of open-source technologies,” Shah wrote. “As proprietary digital products and services become subject to cross-border tariffs, open-source alternatives—which can be freely shared, modified, and distributed—may gain significant advantages.”

If costs get too high, Shah suggested that even tech giants might “increasingly turn to open-source solutions that can be locally deployed without triggering tariff thresholds.” Such a shift could potentially “profoundly affect the competitive landscape in areas like cloud infrastructure, AI frameworks, and enterprise software,” Shah wrote.

In that imagined future where open source alternatives rule the world, Shah said that targeting digital imports by tariff systems could become ineffective, “inadvertently driving adoption toward open-source alternatives that generate less economic leverage.”

Ashley is a senior policy reporter for Ars Technica, dedicated to tracking social impacts of emerging policies and new technologies. She is a Chicago-based journalist with 20 years of experience.

Trump’s trade war risks splintering the Internet, experts warn Read More »

Trump has “a little problem” with Apple’s plan to ship iPhones from India

Apple, india, IPhone, Policy, syndication, tariffs, Trump / Kelly Newman / May 15, 2025

Analysts estimate it would cost tens of billions of dollars and take years for Apple to increase iPhone manufacturing in the US, where it at present makes only a very limited number of products.

US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said last month that Cook had told him the US would need “robotic arms” to replicate the “scale and precision” of iPhone manufacturing in China.

“He’s going to build it here,” Lutnick told CNBC. “And Americans are going to be the technicians who drive those factories. They’re not going to be the ones screwing it in.”

Lutnick added that his previous comments that an “army of millions and millions of human beings screwing in little screws to make iPhones—that kind of thing is going to come to America” had been taken out of context.

“Americans are going to work in factories just like this on great, high-paying jobs,” he added.

For Narendra Modi’s government, the shift by some Apple suppliers into India is the highest-profile success of a drive to boost local manufacturing and attract companies seeking to diversify away from China.

Mobile phones are now one of India’s top exports, with the country selling more than $7 billion worth of them to the US in the 2024-25 financial year, up from $4.7 billion the previous year. The majority of these were iPhones, which Apple’s suppliers Foxconn and Tata Electronics make at plants in southern India’s Tamil Nadu and Karnataka states.

Modi and Trump are ideologically aligned and personally friendly, but India’s high tariffs are a point of friction and Washington has threatened to hit it with a 26 percent tariff.

India and the US—its biggest trading partner—are negotiating a bilateral trade agreement, the first tranche of which they say they will be agreed by autumn.

“India’s one of the highest-tariff nations in the world, it’s very hard to sell into India,” Trump also said in Qatar on Thursday. “They’ve offered us a deal where basically they’re willing to literally charge us no tariff… they’re the highest and now they’re saying no tariff.”

Trump has “a little problem” with Apple’s plan to ship iPhones from India Read More »

Trump tariffs could make Americans pay $123B more annually for 10 common gadgets

china tariffs, Donald Trump, laptops, Policy, smartphones, Tablets, tariffs, televisions, us-china trade war, video game consoles / 9u50fv / May 7, 2025

Average US price of smartphones, game consoles, and laptops may soon exceed $1,000.

China has finally agreed to open negotiations with the Trump administration as the tech industry warns that tariffs could soon spike Americans’ costs for the 10 most popular consumer technology products by more than $123 billion annually.

On Wednesday, the Chinese Embassy in the US announced on X (formerly Twitter) that “China’s lead on China-US economic and trade affairs,” He Lifeng, will meet with US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent from May 9 to 12 to open talks. For those talks to go smoothly, China’s Ministry of Commerce told reporters Wednesday, the US must “demonstrate sincerity” and come ready to “correct its wrongdoings,” including facing “the severe negative impacts of its unilateral tariff measures on itself and the world.”

Previously, China had demanded that President Trump drop all tariffs to begin negotiations, which Trump refused while seemingly holding out on making a deal on TikTok to keep the potential bargaining chip.

While tensions don’t exactly appear to be dissipating, these talks are the first sign that the trade rivals could reach a resolution after Trump raised tariffs on some Chinese imports as high as 145 percent. And they come just as Americans expect to soon feel the sting from tariffs in their wallets.

According to the Consumer Technology Association’s most recent estimates released Tuesday, Americans risk paying much higher prices for any Chinese imports that are not exempted from those 145 percent tariffs. They also face potentially higher prices from other tariffs the Trump administration imposed, including a baseline 10 percent tariff on all imports from all countries and reciprocal tariffs that kick in July, which would add an additional 11 to 50 percent tax on all imports from 57 countries.

For example, non-exempted video game consoles—perhaps less than 1 percent of which are produced in the US, industry analysts estimate—could soon cost more than $1,000 on average, up by about 69 percent. And as the price goes up, the CTA warned that supply chain disruptions could cause shortages since “shifting the large quantities of Chinese production to other suppliers would be very difficult given the volumes involved.”

Even some of the seemingly less painful smaller price hikes could “rob” the US economy, the CTA warned. For example, headphones costing Americans up to $5 more or speakers costing up to $60 more could drain wallets nationwide by more than $2.5 billion, the CTA estimated. And an estimated 11 percent increase on imports of non-exempt China-made TVs—which only account for a small share of total US TV imports—could significantly hurt the US economy by “forcing consumers to pay $1.9 billion more than they otherwise would for the televisions they continue to buy,” the CTA forecasted.

Meanwhile, “buyers of smartphones, laptops and tablets, and connected devices would likely feel the greatest impact,” the CTA said. In 2023, China accounted for 87 percent of video game consoles, 78 percent of smartphones, 79 percent of laptops and tablets, and 67 percent of monitors imported into the US, and there is still very little US production of those goods. On average, laptops could soon cost more than $1,000, tablets nearly $600, and smartphones nearly $1,100, while connected devices could cost up to 22 percent more, the CTA estimated.

Overall, Trump’s tariff regime threatens to “shrink the US economy by $69 billion annually” from price shifts of just 10 popular tech products, the CTA warned.

To prevent this, the CTA has been advocating on Capitol Hill for more exemptions while urging the Trump administration to stop using tariffs to force production into the US, echoing other analysts who have long warned Trump that shifting supply chains into the US cannot be done immediately.

“The effort to reshore manufacturing through higher tariff rates on imported goods comes at a cost: the research shows that consumers would lose about $16 in spending power for every $1 gained by domestic producers,” the CTA reported. And that loss of spending power, the CTA noted, means Americans have less money to spend on things like groceries or other essential goods that are also impacted by tariffs.

Ahead of talks, China signals the fight isn’t over

Although the US-China talks likely won’t trigger changes on Trump’s tariffs impacting other parts of the world, China’s role as a hard-to-replace global production hub has left many tech companies eager to see trade talks resume.

As consumers brace for sticker shock, tech companies’ revenues could be hit hard if sales significantly decrease. That seems likely, as the CTA is already forecasting drastic drops in consumption of video game consoles (down by up to 73 percent), laptops and tablets (45 percent), and smartphones (nearly 50 percent). For low-income families, the smartphone price hikes could hit the hardest, the CTA warned, which would be especially burdensome since imports triggering price drops only recently were credited with making smartphones more accessible in the US.

China still appears to potentially have the upper hand in negotiations. Trump apparently had been pushing to meet with China’s president Xi Jinping, seemingly wanting to be viewed as the sole dealmaker on tariffs, the South China Morning Post reported. But China refused, insisting on each country appointing special envoys, a concession that Trump appears to have granted in directing Bessent to meet with Xi’s trade chief instead of leading the talks himself.

For China, refusing to deal directly with Trump is depicted as necessary to preserve mutual respect in negotiations. After Trump claimed China was engaged in talks that China denied and suggested that China was “doing very poorly” due to his tariffs, the president suddenly pivoted to promising to “play nice” with China.

Now China seems to be holding Trump to his word. Ahead of trade talks this weekend, China’s Ministry of Commerce warned the US that China wouldn’t resolve trade tensions without safeguarding its own interests, promising to keep fighting “if provoked.”

“If the US says one thing but does another, or even attempts to use negotiations as a pretext to continue coercive and blackmailing tactics, China will never agree, nor will it sacrifice its principles or international fairness and justice to seek any agreement,” the Ministry said.

For US chipmakers who are still waiting for Trump to release his semiconductor tariff plan, the trade talks will likely be watched closely. Ahead of talks, Nvidia, AMD, Super Micro, and Marvell have warned investors of potentially billions in lost revenue, with some postponing further investor guidance until after the tariff plan is revealed, CNBC reported.

Other tech giants both inside and outside the US are also reportedly scrambling, even if they aren’t completely reliant on China-based production.

Despite exemptions on smartphones and a plan to shift production of US-destined products into India, Apple recently estimated that tariffs could add $900 million in costs in this quarter alone, the BBC reported.

So far, there are no clear winners in Trump’s trade war. South Korea-based Samsung—which has a Vietnamese production hub subject to 46 percent tariffs—was expected to potentially gain from any Apple losses. But an executive on a recent earnings call warned investors that “there are a lot of uncertainties ahead of us,” CNBC reported.

“Due to the rapid changes in policies and geopolitical tensions among major countries, it’s difficult to accurately predict the business impact of tariffs and countermeasures,” the Samsung executive said.

And although trade talks could dramatically shift global markets again, the CTA warned that “ongoing reviews of semiconductors and downstream products in the electronics supply chain, copper, lumber, critical minerals, and other materials” could potentially add to cost pressures and trigger even more price hikes for Americans.

Ashley is a senior policy reporter for Ars Technica, dedicated to tracking social impacts of emerging policies and new technologies. She is a Chicago-based journalist with 20 years of experience.

Trump tariffs could make Americans pay $123B more annually for 10 common gadgets Read More »

Health care company says Trump tariffs will cost it $60M–$70M this year

baxter, health, hospital, iv bags, pharmaceuticals, supply chain, tariffs / Beth Washington / May 3, 2025

In the call, Grade noted that only a small fraction of Baxter’s total sales are in China. But, “given the magnitude of the tariffs that have been enacted between the two countries, these tariffs now account for nearly half of the total impact,” he said.

The Tribune reported that Baxter is now looking into ways to dampen the financial blow from the tariffs, including carrying additional inventory, identifying alternative suppliers, alternative shipping routes, and “targeted pricing actions.” Baxter is also working with trade organizations to lobby for exemptions.

In general, the health care and medical sector, including hospitals, is bracing for price increases and shortages from the tariffs. The health care supply chain in America is woefully fragile, which became painfully apparent amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

Baxter isn’t alone in announcing heavy tariff tolls. Earlier this week, GE Healthcare Technologies Inc. said the tariffs would cost the company around $500 million this year, according to financial service firm Morningstar. And in April, Abbott Laboratories said it expects the tariffs to cost “a few hundred million dollars,” according to the Tribune.

Health care company says Trump tariffs will cost it $60M–$70M this year Read More »

OnePlus lowers Watch 3 price by $150, promises refunds for early buyers

OnePlus, smartwatches, tariffs, Tech, wearables / DJ Henderson / April 28, 2025

Things are still uncertain, but OnePlus claims to have made some adjustments to its supply chain so it can offer the Watch 3 at a more palatable price. It’s unlikely that OnePlus could eat the cost of that Chinese tariff on a wearable, so perhaps it found a way to redirect its shipments through another location with lower tariffs.

A company spokesperson confirms the watch is now listed at $349.99 in the US, and it will stay at that price despite any future changes to import tariffs. This is a bit higher than the original $330 price tag, but it’s not bad given the challenging market conditions and OnePlus’ Chinese roots.

“This change reflects our effort to be transparent, responsive, and committed to bringing the OnePlus Watch 3 to the US at a competitive price point, despite the ongoing market conditions,” a OnePlus spokesperson said.

At $500, the OnePlus Watch 3 was hard to justify when devices like the Pixel Watch, itself not exactly a bargain-priced wearable, are available for substantially less. Still, there are probably some OnePlus fans who bit at $500. The company says anyone who paid that price since the watch’s release in early April will get a refund of the difference—keep an eye out for an email from OnePlus support with details.

For anyone who was planning to pick up the Watch 3 and was scared off by the tariff increase, the lower price is available immediately in the OnePlus store.

OnePlus lowers Watch 3 price by $150, promises refunds for early buyers Read More »

Trump can’t keep China from getting AI chips, TSMC suggests

AI chips, Artificial Intelligence, china, Chips Act, Donald Trump, Huawei, NVIDIA, Policy, semiconductors, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, tariffs, TSMC, us-china trade war / Kelly Newman / April 22, 2025

“Despite TSMC’s best efforts to comply with all relevant export control and sanctions laws and regulations, there is no assurance that its business activities will not be found incompliant with export control laws and regulations,” TSMC said.

Further, “if TSMC or TSMC’s business partners fail to obtain appropriate import, export or re-export licenses or permits or are found to have violated applicable export control or sanctions laws, TSMC may also be adversely affected, through reputational harm as well as other negative consequences, including government investigations and penalties resulting from relevant legal proceedings,” TSMC warned.

Trump’s tariffs may end TSMC’s “tariff-proof” era

TSMC is thriving despite years of tariffs and export controls, its report said, with at least one analyst suggesting that, so far, the company appears “somewhat tariff-proof.” However, all of that could be changing fast, as “US President Donald Trump announced in 2025 an intention to impose more expansive tariffs on imports into the United States,” TSMC said.

“Any tariffs imposed on imports of semiconductors and products incorporating chips into the United States may result in increased costs for purchasing such products, which may, in turn, lead to decreased demand for TSMC’s products and services and adversely affect its business and future growth,” TSMC said.

And if TSMC’s business is rattled by escalations in the US-China trade war, TSMC warned, that risks disrupting the entire global semiconductor supply chain.

Trump’s semiconductor tariff plans remain uncertain. About a week ago, Trump claimed the rates would be unveiled “over the next week,” Reuters reported, which means they could be announced any day now.

Trump can’t keep China from getting AI chips, TSMC suggests Read More »

Trump’s tariffs trigger price hikes at large online retailers

Amazon, Donald Trump, eCommerce, Online Shopping, Policy, shein, tariffs, temu, us-china trade war / Kelly Newman / April 18, 2025

Popular online shopping meccas Temu and Shein have finally broken their silence, warning of potential price hikes starting next week due to Donald Trump’s tariffs.

Temu is a China-based e-commerce platform that has grown as popular as Amazon for global shoppers making cross-border purchases, according to 2024 Statista data. Its tagline, “Shop like a billionaire,” is inextricably linked to the affordability of items on its platform. And although Shein—which vows to make global fashion “accessible to all” by selling inexpensive stylish clothing—moved its headquarters from China to Singapore in 2022, most of its products are still controversially manufactured in China, the BBC reported.

For weeks, the US-China trade war has seen both sides spiking tariffs. In the US, the White House last night crunched the numbers and confirmed that China now faces tariffs of up to 245 percent, The Wall Street Journal reported. That figure includes new tariffs Trump has imposed, taxing all Chinese goods by 145 percent, as well as prior 100 percent tariffs lobbed by the Biden administration that are still in effect on EVs and Chinese syringes.

Last week, China announced that it would stop retaliations, CNBC reported. But that came after China rolled out 125 percent tariffs on US goods. While China has since accused Trump of weaponizing tariffs to “an irrational level,” other retaliations have included increasingly cutting off US access to critical minerals used in tech manufacturing and launching antitrust probes into US companies.

For global retailers, the tit-for-tat tariffs have immediately scrambled business plans. Particularly for Temu and Shein, Trump’s decision to end the “de minimis” exemption on May 2—which allowed shipments valued under $800 to be imported duty-free—will soon hit hard, exposing them to 90 percent tariffs that inevitably led to next week’s price shifts. According to The Guardian, starting on June 1, retailers will have to pay $150 tariffs on each individual package.

Trump’s tariffs trigger price hikes at large online retailers Read More »

After market tumult, Trump exempts smartphones from massive new tariffs

Apple, Google, Policy, smartphones, syndication, tariffs / Mike M. / April 13, 2025

Shares in the US tech giant were one of Wall Street’s biggest casualties in the days immediately after Trump announced his reciprocal tariffs. About $700 billion was wiped off Apple’s market value in the space of a few days.

Earlier this week, Trump said he would consider excluding US companies from his tariffs, but added that such decisions would be made “instinctively.”

Chad Bown, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, said the exemptions mirrored exceptions for smartphones and consumer electronics issued by Trump during his trade wars in 2018 and 2019.

“We’ll have to wait and see if the exemptions this time around also stick, or if the president once again reverses course sometime in the not-too-distant future,” said Bown.

US Customs and Border Protection referred inquiries about the order to the US International Trade Commission, which did not immediately reply to a request for comment.

The White House confirmed that the new exemptions would not apply to the 20 percent tariffs on all Chinese imports applied by Trump to respond to China’s role in fentanyl manufacturing.

White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt said on Saturday that companies including Apple, TSMC, and Nvidia were “hustling to onshore their manufacturing in the United States as soon as possible” at “the direction of the President.”

“President Trump has made it clear America cannot rely on China to manufacture critical technologies such as semiconductors, chips, smartphones, and laptops,” said Leavitt.

Apple declined to comment.

Economists have warned that the sweeping nature of Trump’s tariffs—which apply to a broad range of common US consumer goods—threaten to fuel US inflation and hit economic growth.

New York Fed chief John Williams said US inflation could reach as high as 4 percent as a result of Trump’s tariffs.

Additional reporting by Michael Acton in San Francisco

After market tumult, Trump exempts smartphones from massive new tariffs Read More »

Turbulent global economy could drive up prices for Netflix and rivals

netflix, streaming, tariffs, Tech, united kingdom / Beth Washington / April 12, 2025

“… our members are going to be punished.”

A scene from BBC’s Doctor Who. Credit: BBC/Disney+

Debate around how much taxes US-based streaming services should pay internationally, among other factors, could result in people paying more for subscriptions to services like Netflix and Disney+.

On April 10, the United Kingdom’s Culture, Media and Sport (CMS) Committee reignited calls for a streaming tax on subscription revenue acquired through UK residents. The recommendation came alongside the committee’s 120-page report [PDF] that makes numerous recommendations for how to support and grow Britain’s film and high-end television (HETV) industry.

For the US, the recommendation garnering the most attention is one calling for a 5 percent levy on UK subscriber revenue from streaming video on demand services, such as Netflix. That’s because if streaming services face higher taxes in the UK, costs could be passed onto consumers, resulting in more streaming price hikes. The CMS committee wants money from the levy to support HETV production in the UK and wrote in its report:

The industry should establish this fund on a voluntary basis; however, if it does not do so within 12 months, or if there is not full compliance, the Government should introduce a statutory levy.

Calls for a streaming tax in the UK come after 2024’s 25 percent decrease in spending for UK-produced high-end TV productions and 27 percent decline in productions overall, per the report. Companies like the BBC have said that they lack funds to keep making premium dramas.

In a statement, the CMS committee called for streamers, “such as Netflix, Amazon, Apple TV+, and Disney+, which benefit from the creativity of British producers, to put their money where their mouth is by committing to pay 5 percent of their UK subscriber revenue into a cultural fund to help finance drama with a specific interest to British audiences.” The committee’s report argues that public service broadcasters and independent movie producers are “at risk,” due to how the industry currently works. More investment into such programming would also benefit streaming companies by providing “a healthier supply of [public service broadcaster]-made shows that they can license for their platforms,” the report says.

The Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport has said that it will respond to the CMS Committee’s report.

Streaming companies warn of higher prices

In response to the report, a Netflix spokesperson said in a statement shared by the BBC yesterday that the “UK is Netflix’s biggest production hub outside of North America—and we want it to stay that way.” Netflix reportedly claims to have spent billions of pounds in the UK via work with over 200 producers and 30,000 cast and crew members since 2020, per The Hollywood Reporter. In May 2024, Benjamin King, Netflix’s senior director of UK and Ireland public policy, told the CMS committee that the streaming service spends “about $1.5 billion” annually on UK-made content.

Netflix’s statement this week, responding to the CMS Committee’s levy, added:

… in an increasingly competitive global market, it’s key to create a business environment that incentivises rather than penalises investment, risk taking, and success. Levies diminish competitiveness and penalise audiences who ultimately bear the increased costs.

Adam Minns, executive director for the UK’s Association for Commercial Broadcasters and On-Demand Services (COBA), highlighted how a UK streaming tax could impact streaming providers’ content budgets.

“Especially in this economic climate, a levy risks impacting existing content budgets for UK shows, jobs, and growth, along with raising costs for businesses,” he said, per the BBC.

An anonymous source that The Hollywood Reporter described as “close to the matter” said that “Netflix members have already paid the BBC license fee. A levy would be a double tax on them and us. It’s unfair. This is a tariff on success. And our members are going to be punished.”

The anonymous source added: “Ministers have already rejected the idea of a streaming levy. The creation of a Cultural Fund raises more questions than it answers. It also begs the question: Why should audiences who choose to pay for a service be then compelled to subsidize another service for which they have already paid through the license fee. Furthermore, what determines the criteria for ‘Britishness,’ which organizations would qualify for funding … ?”

In May, Mitchel Simmons, Paramount’s VP of EMEA public policy and government affairs, also questioned the benefits of a UK streaming tax when speaking to the CMS committee.

“Where we have seen levies in other jurisdictions on services, we then see inflation in the market. Local broadcasters, particularly in places such as Italy, have found that the prices have gone up because there has been a forced increase in spend and others have suffered as a consequence,” he said at the time.

Tax threat looms largely on streaming companies

Interest in the UK putting a levy on streaming services follows other countries recently pushing similar fees onto streaming providers.

Music streaming providers, like Spotify, for example, pay a 1.2 percent tax on streaming revenue made in France. Spotify blamed the tax for a 1.2 percent price hike in the country issued in May. France’s streaming taxes are supposed to go toward the Centre National de la Musique.

Last year, Canada issued a 5 percent tax on Canadian streaming revenue that’s been halted as companies including Netflix, Amazon, Apple, Disney, and Spotify battle it in court.

Lawrence Zhang, head of policy of the Centre for Canadian Innovation and Competitiveness at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation think tank, has estimated that a 5 percent streaming tax would result in the average Canadian family paying an extra CA$40 annually.

A streaming provider group called the Digital Media Association has argued that the Canadian tax “could lead to higher prices for Canadians and fewer content choices.”

“As a result, you may end up paying more for your favourite streaming services and have less control over what you can watch or listen to,” the Digital Media Association’s website says.

Streaming companies hold their breath

Uncertainty around US tariffs and their implications on the global economy have also resulted in streaming companies moving slower than expected regarding new entrants, technologies, mergers and acquisitions, and even business failures, Alan Wolk, co-founder and lead analyst at TVRev, pointed out today. “The rapid-fire nature of the executive orders coming from the White House” has a massive impact on the media industry, he said.

“Uncertainty means that deals don’t get considered, let alone completed,” Wolk mused, noting that the growing stability of the streaming industry overall also contributes to slowing market activity.

For consumers, higher prices for other goods and/or services could result in smaller budgets for spending on streaming subscriptions. Establishing and growing advertising businesses is already a priority for many US streaming providers. However, the realities of stingier customers who are less willing to buy multiple streaming subscriptions or opt for premium tiers or buy on-demand titles are poised to put more pressure on streaming firms’ advertising plans. Simultaneously, advertisers are facing pressures from tariffs, which could result in less money being allocated to streaming ads.

“With streaming platform operators increasingly turning to ad-supported tiers to bolster profitability—rather than just rolling out price increases—this strategy could be put at risk,” Matthew Bailey, senior principal analyst of advertising at Omdia, recently told Wired. He added:

Against this backdrop, I wouldn’t be surprised if we do see some price increases for some streaming services over the coming months.

Streaming service providers are likely to tighten their purse strings, too. As we’ve seen, this can result in price hikes and smaller or less daring content selection.

Streaming customers may soon be forced to reduce their subscriptions. The good news is that most streaming viewers are already accustomed to growing prices and have figured out which streaming services align with their needs around affordability, ease of use, content, and reliability. Customers may set higher standards, though, as streaming companies grapple with the industry and global changes.

Scharon is a Senior Technology Reporter at Ars Technica writing news, reviews, and analysis on consumer gadgets and services. She’s been reporting on technology for over 10 years, with bylines at Tom’s Hardware, Channelnomics, and CRN UK.

Turbulent global economy could drive up prices for Netflix and rivals Read More »

Apple silent as Trump promises “impossible” US-made iPhones

Apple, china, china tariffs, Donald Trump, Foxconn, IPhone, Policy, tariffs, tim cook, us, us-china trade war / Kelly Newman / April 12, 2025

How does Apple solve a problem like Trump’s trade war?

Despite a recent pause on some tariffs, Apple remains in a particularly thorny spot as Donald Trump’s trade war spikes costs in the tech company’s iPhone manufacturing hub, China.

Analysts predict that Apple has no clear short-term options to shake up its supply chain to avoid tariffs entirely, and even if Trump grants Apple an exemption, iPhone prices may increase not just in the US but globally.

The US Trade Representative, which has previously granted Apple an exemption on a particular product, did not respond to Ars’ request to comment on whether any requests for exemptions have been submitted in 2025.

Currently, the US imposes a 145 percent tariff on Chinese imports, while China has raised tariffs on US imports to 125 percent.

Neither side seems ready to back down, and Trump’s TikTok deal—which must be approved by the Chinese government—risks further delays the longer negotiations and retaliations drag on. Trump has faced criticism for delaying the TikTok deal, with Senate Intelligence Committee Vice Chair Mark Warner (D-Va.) telling The Verge last week that the delay was “against the law” and threatened US national security. Meanwhile, China seems to expect more business to flow into China rather than into the US as a result of Trump’s tough stance on global trade.

With the economy and national security at risk, Trump is claiming that tariffs will drive manufacturing into the US, create jobs, and benefit the economy. Getting the world’s most valuable company, Apple, to manufacture its most popular product, the iPhone, in the US, is clearly part of Trump’s vision. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters this week that Apple’s commitment to invest $500 billion in the US over the next four years was supposedly a clear indicator that Apple believed it was feasible to build iPhones here, Bloomberg reported.

“If Apple didn’t think the United States could do it, they probably wouldn’t have put up that big chunk of change,” Leavitt said.

Apple did not respond to Ars’ request to comment, and so far, it has been silent on how tariffs are impacting its business.

iPhone price increases expected globally

For Apple, even if it can build products for the US market in India, where tariffs remain lower, Trump’s negotiations with China “remain the most important variable for Apple” to retain its global dominance.

Dan Ives, global head of technology research at Wedbush Securities, told CNBC that “Apple could be set back many years by these tariffs.” Although Apple reportedly stockpiled phones to sell in the US market, that supply will likely dwindle fast as customers move to purchase phones before prices spike. In the medium-term, consultancy firm Omdia forecasted, Apple will likely “focus on increasing iPhone production and exports from India” rather than pushing its business into the US, as Trump desires.

But Apple will still incur additional costs from tariffs on India until that country tries to negotiate a more favorable trade deal. And any exemption that Apple may secure due to its investment promise in the US or moderation of China tariffs that could spare Apple some pain “may not be enough for Apple to avoid adverse business effects,” co-founder and senior analyst at equity research publisher MoffettNathanson, Craig Moffett, suggested to CNBC.

And if Apple is forced to increase prices, it likely won’t be limited to just the US, Bank of America Securities analyst Wamsi Mohan suggested, as reported by The Guardian. To ensure that Apple’s largest market isn’t the hardest hit, Apple may increase prices “across the board geographically,” he forecasted.

“While Apple has not commented on this, we expect prices will be changed globally to prevent arbitrage,” Mohan said.

Apple may even choose to increase prices everywhere but the US, vice president at Forrester Research, Dipanjan Chatterjee, explained in The Guardian’s report.

“If there is a cost impact in the US for certain products,” Chatterjee said, Apple may not increase US prices because “the market is far more competitive there.” Instead, “the company may choose to keep prices flat in the US while recovering the lost margin elsewhere in its global portfolio,” Chatterjee said.

Trump’s US-made iPhone may be an impossible dream

Analysts have said that Trump’s dream that a “made-in-the-USA” iPhone could be coming soon is divorced from reality. Not only do analysts estimate that more than 80 percent of Apple products are currently made in China, but so are many individual parts. So even if Apple built an iPhone factory in the US, it would still have to pay tariffs on individual parts, unless Trump agreed to a seemingly wide range of exemptions. Mohan estimated it would “likely take many years” to move the “entire iPhone supply chain,” if that’s “even possible.”

Further, Apple’s $500 billion commitment covered “building servers for its artificial intelligence products, Apple TV productions and 20,000 new jobs in research and development—not a promise to make the iPhone stateside,” The Guardian noted.

For Apple, it would likely take years to build a US factory and attract talent, all without knowing how tariffs might change. A former Apple manufacturing engineer, Matthew Moore, told Bloomberg that “there are millions of people employed by the Apple supply chain in China,” and Apple has long insisted that the US talent pool is too small to easily replace them.

“What city in America is going to put everything down and build only iPhones?” Moore said. “Boston is over 500,000 people. The whole city would need to stop everything and start assembling iPhones.”

In a CBS interview, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick suggested that the “army of millions and millions of human beings” could be automated, Bloomberg reported. But China has never been able to make low-cost automation work, so it’s unclear how the US could achieve that goal without serious investment.

“That’s not yet realistic,” people who have worked on Apple’s product manufacturing told Bloomberg, especially since each new iPhone model requires retooling of assembly, which typically requires manual labor. Other analysts agreed, CNBC reported, concluding that “the idea of an American-made iPhone is impossible at worst and highly expensive at best.”

For consumers, CNBC noted, a US-made iPhone would cost anywhere from 25 percent more than the $1,199 price point today, increasing to about $1,500 at least, to potentially $3,500 at most, Wall Street analysts have forecasted.

It took Apple a decade to build its factory in India, which Apple reportedly intends to use to avoid tariffs where possible. That factory “only began producing Apple’s top-of-the-line Pro and Pro Max iPhone models for the first time last year,” CNBC reported.

Analysts told CNBC that it would take years to launch a similar manufacturing process in the US, while “there’s no guarantee that US trade policy might not change yet again in a way to make the factory less useful.”

Apple CEO’s potential game plan to navigate tariffs

It appears that there’s not much Apple can do to avoid maximum pain through US-China negotiations. But Apple’s CEO Tim Cook—who is considered “a supply chain whisperer”—may be “uniquely suited” to navigate Trump’s trade war, Fortune reported.

After Cook arrived at Apple in 1998, he “redesigned Apple’s sprawling supply chain” and perhaps is game to do that again, Fortune reported. Jeremy Friedman, associate professor of business and geopolitics at Harvard Business School, told Fortune that rather than being stuck in the middle, Cook may turn out to be a key intermediary, helping the US and China iron out a deal.

During Trump’s last term, Cook raised a successful “charm offensive” that secured tariff exemptions without caving to Trump’s demand to build iPhones in the US, CNBC reported, and he’s likely betting that Apple’s recent $500 billion commitment will lead to similar outcomes, even if Apple never delivers a US-made iPhone.

Back in 2017, Trump announced that Apple partner Foxconn would be building three “big beautiful plants” in the US and claimed that they would be Apple plants, CNBC reported. But the pandemic disrupted construction, and most of those plans were abandoned, with one facility only briefly serving to make face masks, not Apple products. In 2019, Apple committed to building a Texas factory that Trump toured. While Trump insisted that a US-made iPhone was on the horizon due to Apple moving some business into the US, that factory only committed to assembling the MacBook Pro, CNBC noted.

Morgan Stanley analyst Erik Woodring suggested that Apple may “commit to some small-volume production in the US (HomePod? AirTags?)” to secure an exemption in 2025, rather than committing to building iPhones, CNBC reported.

Although this perhaps sounds like a tried-and-true game plan, for Cook, Apple’s logistics have likely never been so complicated. However, analysts told Fortune that experienced logistics masterminds understand that flexibility is the priority, and Cook has already shown that he can anticipate Trump’s moves by stockpiling iPhones and redirecting US-bound iPhones through its factory in India.

While Trump negotiates with China, Apple hopes that an estimated 35 million iPhones it makes annually in India can “cover a large portion of its needs in the US,” Bloomberg reported. These moves, analysts said, prove that Cook may be the man for the job when it comes to steering Apple through the trade war chaos.

But to keep up with global demand—selling more than 220 million iPhones annually—Apple will struggle to quickly distance itself from China, where there’s abundant talent to scale production that Apple says just doesn’t exist in the US. For example, CNBC noted that Foxconn hired 50,000 additional workers last fall at its largest China plant just to build enough iPhones to meet demand during the latest September launches.

As Apple remains dependent on China, Cook will likely need to remain at the table, seeking friendlier terms on both sides to ensure its business isn’t upended for years.

“One can imagine, if there is some sort of grand bargain between US and China coming in the next year or two,” Friedman said, “Tim Cook might as soon as anybody play an intermediary role.”

Ashley is a senior policy reporter for Ars Technica, dedicated to tracking social impacts of emerging policies and new technologies. She is a Chicago-based journalist with 20 years of experience.

Apple silent as Trump promises “impossible” US-made iPhones Read More »

Trump boosts China tariffs to 125%, pauses tariff hikes on other countries

china tariffs, consumer technology, Donald Trump, Policy, tariffs, us-china trade war / 9u50fv / April 10, 2025

On Wednesday, Donald Trump, once again, took to Truth Social to abruptly shift US trade policy, announcing a 90-day pause “substantially” lowering reciprocal tariffs against all countries except China to 10 percent.

Because China retaliated—raising tariffs on US imports to 84 percent on Wednesday—Trump increased tariffs on China imports to 125 percent “effective immediately.” That likely will not be received well by China, which advised the Trump administration to cancel all China tariffs Wednesday, NPR reported.

“The US’s practice of escalating tariffs on China is a mistake on top of a mistake,” the Chinese finance ministry said, calling for Trump to “properly resolve differences with China through equal dialogue on the basis of mutual respect.”

For tech companies, trying to keep up with Trump’s social media posts regarding tariffs has been a struggle, as markets react within minutes. It’s not always clear what Trump’s posts mean or how the math will add up, but after Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent clarified Trump’s recent post, the stock market surged, CNBC reported, after slumping for days.

But even though the stock market may be, for now, recovering, tech companies remain stuck swimming in uncertainty. Ed Brzytwa, vice president of international trade for the Consumer Technology Association (CTA)—which represents the $505 billion US consumer technology industry—told Ars that for many CTA members, including small businesses and startups, “the damage has been done.”

“Our small business and startup members were uniquely exposed to these reciprocal tariffs and the whipsaw effect,” Brzytwa told Ars. “There’s collateral damage to that.”

In a statement, CTA CEO Gary Shapiro suggested that the pause was “a victory for American consumers,” but ultimately the CTA wants Trump to “fully revoke” the tariffs.

“While this is great news, we are hearing directly from our members that the ongoing additional 10 percent universal baseline tariffs and this continued uncertainty, are already hurting American small businesses,” Shapiro said. “CTA urges President Trump to focus his efforts on what he does best, dealmaking. Now is the time to reposition the United States with our allies as a reliable trading partner while growing the American and global economy.”

Trump boosts China tariffs to 125%, pauses tariff hikes on other countries Read More »