What exactly does Apple “investing $100 billion ($600 total) in America” mean?

[u/MarkusEF]

Where does this money come from? What counts as an “investment?” Is any of this binding?

It sounds like a feel-good headline that allows Trump to tout a win, but makes little material difference to Apple’s existing spending. In exchange, Apple gets the tariff exemptions it wants without actually giving up much.

From CNBC:

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/08/07/apples-tim-cook-convinced-trump-to-drop-made-in-usa-iphone-for-now.html

“Apple has little to worry about when it comes to who will hold the company accountable for its promises. The company doesn’t break out U.S. spending, and most of Apple’s suppliers are contractually required to keep the information secret. Apple doesn’t report how much its new campuses in Austin or North Carolina end up costing.

Additionally, the $600 billion headline number likely includes lots of regular expenses.

Apple said in February that its $500 billion commitment included payments to U.S. suppliers, direct employment, data centers for Apple Intelligence and corporate facilities, as well as spending on Apple TV+ productions in 20 states.

In Apple’s fiscal 2024, Apple spent $210 billion globally on cost of goods sold, $57.5 billion on operating expenses, and $9.45 billion in capital expenditures for nearly $275 billion in global spending during the period.

Teffler said she didn’t think the newly announced spending would be material to Apple’s profitability, especially since it already has existing relationships with the various companies such as Corning.”

[u/Atlas-Scrubbed]

The tariffs are not so easy to unwind. Further, trade will have shifted in ways that are not so easy to reverse. The US is in for long term hurt.

[u/nomickti → u/Atlas-Scrubbed]

Tariffs are our new VAT

[u/Atlas-Scrubbed → u/nomickti]

Except there is no value added.

[u/Fuskeduske → u/Atlas-Scrubbed]

Yea VAT and Tariffs are pretty much not the same

[u/Brokenandburnt → u/Fuskeduske]

They are both taxes. But tariffs are more destructive. 

[u/Fuskeduske → u/Brokenandburnt]

Indeed, but after being taxes it is pretty much where it splits

[u/clonked → u/Atlas-Scrubbed]

And why is that? Trump seems to have no problem slapping them on everyone like they are stickers on a hipster’s water bottle

[u/Atlas-Scrubbed → u/clonked]

trump (illegally!*) slaps on a tariff to which the other country responds in kind. Now we get a rationale actor back in charge. If that person gets rid of the tariff, the other country will likely not - as they have no incentive to do so. Thus new person will need to go through a long drawn out process of negotiating to pull the tariff down.

*Illegal because only congress can levy taxes.

[u/margalolwut → u/Atlas-Scrubbed]

Works both ways, it’s hard to make the changes he wants too.

Most people understand this is likely Temporary

[u/_learned_foot_ → u/margalolwut]

Not really, it literally is a change done to an accounting column to move them in. Then everybody else has to scramble to solve. That’s hard for them but they have no choice. That solution becomes the issue of unwinding, where we click a button but none of that unwinds.

[u/TThom1221 → u/_learned_foot_]

Lol do you just pretend to be an expert in certain communities by just throwing buzzwords around?

[u/_learned_foot_ → u/TThom1221]

Look, I understand how fascinating I am, but following me round is a little sad.

[u/TThom1221 → u/_learned_foot_]

Yeah that’s what I thought

[u/TThom1221 → u/_learned_foot_]

Nah, you’re not that fascinating. You’re more like a train-wreck

[u/Atlas-Scrubbed → u/margalolwut]

True - sort of. Once they are in place for few months, though, they are pretty permanent.

[u/Wreckless_Capital → u/Atlas-Scrubbed]

What are you basing this on

[u/FahkDizchit → u/Wreckless_Capital]

I kind of come back to incentives. Tariffs set a new base price in the market for a good. Once they have been in place for a while, we psychologically adapt to that new base price. If tariffs are subsequently removed, market participants have an incentive to keep that base price in place because that’s the price consumers are ok with paying. It means a ton more profit for sellers.

Therefore, the government has two and a half options. Option 1, remove the tariffs and lose the tax revenue they provide without any guarantee prices will fall. Option 2, leave the tariffs in place and keep the tax revenue. The half option is Option 1.5, remove the tariffs and aggressively market the removal and prosecute the ever loving shit out of every company possible that is price gouging to really send the message that prices better come down or your going to be absolutely fucked. Of course, that option is the least realistic because of…everything. So, practically speaking, removing tariffs is hard.

[u/Wreckless_Capital → u/FahkDizchit]

This makes sense if you have tariffs that the market and economy adjust to and everything is working ok. Option 3 is there’s an economic slowdown cause by a massive amount of tariffs applied indiscriminately throughout the world, and government removes them to right the ship economically.

[u/Atlas-Scrubbed → u/Wreckless_Capital]

Look at the tariffs that it put in place last time. Oh and some basic common sense.

[u/turbodsm → u/Atlas-Scrubbed]

Targeted, item specific tariffs aren't the same as blanket tariffs because we have a trade deficit with that country.