Wall Street Journal columnist, Greg Ip, says Bringing iPhone Assembly to U.S. Would Be a Hollow Victory for Trump.

> Apple’s iPhone is one of the most successful consumer products in history, and one of the most globalized. The iPhone 7’s camera is Japanese, its memory chips South Korean, its power management chip British, its wireless circuits Taiwanese, its user-interface processor Dutch and the radio-frequency transceiver American, according to a study of the value added in smartphones by Jason Dedrick of Syracuse University and Kenneth Kraemer of the University of California at Irvine.

> The factory workers who assemble iPhones in China contribute just 1% of the finished product’s value. Apple’s shareholders and employees, who are predominantly American, capture 42%.

> The economics of the iPhone’s competitors are quite similar: Assembly represents only 1% of the value of Samsung Electronics Co.’s Galaxy S7 and just 4% for Huawei Technologies Co.’s P9, according to Mr. Dedrick and Mr. Kraemer. For all three phones, the most valuable parts of the supply chain occur elsewhere: in the parent company’s design and research; the manufacturing of key components such as microprocessors, memory and communications chips, and cameras; and the intellectual property embedded in key patents. These jobs aren’t as numerous but they pay more and have more spinoff benefits for the rest of the economy in the form of innovation, expertise and profits reinvested in new products and markets.

> This is where the real stakes in the current trade row lie. It’s too late for the U.S. to bring back all of the supply chain. The time to act would have been in the early 1980s, before Western manufacturers began outsourcing the assembly of personal computers and many components to east Asia. Taiwan and South Korea exploited those supplier relationships to acquire know-how for manufacturing increasingly sophisticated products.

> Mr. Trump accuses China of using forced technology transfer, subsidies and nontariff barriers to help its companies supplant foreign competitors at home and abroad. The U.S. has a lot of leverage in this fight given China’s continued dependence on U.S. technology and the presence of companies like Apple to hone its capabilities. But the fight has risks: forcing Apple to shoulder costs its competitors don’t hurts its own dominance, and China has multiple ways to punish American companies, as it did recently by blocking Qualcomm Inc.’s takeover of Dutch chip maker NXP Semiconductors NV on antitrust grounds.

Assembly Workers

Based on 2 hours assembly time, Apple could do assembly in the US and create approximately 60,000 jobs. But at what expense?

Answer: Higher priced phones or lost profits.

Ip writes:

> Hiring that many workers is no picnic: In 2013 Motorola Mobility set out to make its Moto X phone in the U.S. but struggled to find enough American workers according to Willy Shih, an expert in manufacturing at Harvard Business School who is also a director of Flex Inc., the contract manufacturer that Motorola used. In 2014 Motorola decided to outsource production. Apple has encountered similar problems assembling its Mac Pro computer in Texas.

> Assuming Apple could find 60,000 workers, it would have to hire many away from other employers given how low unemployment currently is. The benefit of the wages they earn would be offset by the higher prices other Americans pay for their phones.


> The bigger cost of U.S. assembly, says Mr. Dedrick, would be the inability to quickly add hundreds of thousands of workers when new phones are launched, which is only possible in Asia. Apple can charge premium prices in part because it introduces superior features before its competitors do.

If they are coming to market late and their products cost more…Apple is going to lose market share,” says Mr. Dedrick.

Brad Setser Chimes In


Image placeholder title

​I am not in favor of targeted subsidies. The US government ought not be picking winners and losers which is precisely what targeted subsidies and tariffs do.

Setser removed that Tweet so perhaps he agrees.

I am in favor of tax policy that encourages all companies to do business in the US.

Related Articles

  1. Trump's Hand-Picked Winners and Losers: China vs Canada, NAFTA Threats, and P&G
  2. Value of Exports to Canada and China by State

Mike "Mish" Shedlock

Trump Says "Trade War Could be Over Quickly" - Why Should Anyone Believe Him?

Alternating bullsheet: Deals are coming soon, not soon, and sooner.

Understanding Trump's Trade War Tactics in One Picture

For the 42nd time, Trump reports trade war progress with China.

Trump's Trade War With China: The US is Not Winning

Think trade wars are easy to win? Think again.

Make Trade Math Great Again, iPhone Example: Globalization in Reverse

Trump's trade thesis with China misses the boat. The iPhone provides an excellent starting point for discussion.

Trump Started a Global Trade War Today: Canada, Mexico Responded, So Will Europe

Trump has been itching for a global trade war ever since he took office. He just confirmed one.

Trump Tweets "Trade Wars are Good and Easy to Win"

In one Tweet, Trump proves he understands neither trade math nor trading partner psychology.

Trade War Hits Home: Trump's Asinine Protectionism

On MSNBC’s Morning Joe, Steven Rattner presented charts showing how the fallout from Trump’s trade war is coming home.

Car Manufacturers Caught in Crossfire of Trump's Trade War

The global repercussions of Trump's trade wars have a new casualty: US and European car manufacturers.

Coronavirus Simulating a Full Blown Trump Trade War

Trump likes trade wars. Well, this is what happens when borders close.