spheric
About
- Username
- spheric
- Joined
- Visits
- 290
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 4,418
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 2,805
Reactions
-
No India tariff deal means Apple will face iPhone import fees eight times higher than befo...
-
No India tariff deal means Apple will face iPhone import fees eight times higher than befo...
Afarstar said:Apple will already be importing the first batches of the 17 range. What a mess from the most idiotic President ever. I thought he was on US companies side. -
What Apple products will get hit the hardest by Trump's new tariff orders
tiredskills said:jem101 said:Now here VAT is applied at a national level, currently 20% but some products are zero rated, most foodstuff, children's clothing, for example. So if a product is sold for, say £100 then the retailer is required to send £20 to the government as a sales tax. And this applies to everything, there is no exemption for ‘home made’ stuff, so yes, I’m struggling to see what issue the current US administration has about this! -
Apple tells EU to forget about getting all the new iOS 26 features
ihatescreennames said:prof said:sloth77 said:I voted Remain in the UK back in 2016. But as an Apple user, I can't say hand-on-heart that I would do so now, with the shenanigans the EU is pulling with Apple.
It is a shame, as some of the EU regulations have been decent - like the USB-C support.Is Fortnite available on iOS in the U.S.? Last I checked, only the EU gets that.There's also Altstore, which may or may not include porn apps. I don't know. Everything I've needed so far has been available in the regular App Store. -
New Vietnam trade deal means Apple will pay at least five times more in tariffs
9secondkox2 said:Mike Wuerthele said:9secondkox2 said:Wesley_Hilliard said:9secondkox2 said:so… tje idea that the usa is not imposing tarriffs on Vietnam is incorrect.The two countries are equalizing their tarriffs with the same rates.The USA is charging 20% direct snd 40% trans-shipped.Plus the usa gets a wide open door to sell to Vietnam markets.Seems like a pretty clear win for the usa.Tarriffs equal out, creating a level playing field, but then the USA gains a marketplace to sell previously difficult to penetrate.So, it may not be crazy, but it’s a notable win.From cnn of all places:Trump said the United States will charge a 20% tariff for Vietnamese exports into America, and a 40% tariff for “transshipping.” US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said in a post on X Wednesday afternoon the “transshipping” tariff means “if another country sells their content through products exported by Vietnam to us — they’ll get hit with a 40% tariff.”
The 20% tariff is double the current minimum tariff rate the US is charging on goods from Vietnam and virtually every other country.
“In return, Vietnam will do something that they have never done before, give the United States of America TOTAL ACCESS to their Markets for Trade,” he added. “In other words, they will ‘OPEN THEIR MARKET TO THE UNITED STATES,’ meaning that, we will be able to sell our product into Vietnam at ZERO Tariff.”
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/07/02/business/trade-deal-vietnam-trumpI don’t know how snyonr can argue against this move. Yet Another notch in the win column.It’s a “lopsided deal” in favor of the USA according to some economists.
https://fox59.com/business/ap-business/ap-president-trump-announces-trade-deal-with-vietnam-that-will-let-us-goods-into-the-country-duty-free/amp/And nobody needed to “cover” my post. It was simply stating facts from multiple news sources. That’s literally the crime here? Dang.
You literally wrote "The two countries are equalizing their tarriffs with the same rates" which is just so bonkers meaningless that it can't even aspire to be wrong. It's just — no.(I particularly enjoy that you insist on misspelling "tariffs", but that's beside the point.)
That was the opening premise of your post.
The rest is just news links rehashing the exact same numbers posted in the article, though it's utterly unclear whether you're posting them to support whatever you think that opening statement meant, and if so, how.