Affiliate Disclosure
If you buy through our links, we may get a commission. Read our ethics policy.

President Trump talked to Apple CEO Tim Cook after China tariff reduction

iPhone prices may be safe from going up, for now

The phone calls between the President and the country's most lucrative tech company's CEO have become regular, though it isn't clear what they accomplish beyond keeping Apple on the nice list.

The economically catastrophic and seemingly random tariff wars reached a new milestone on Monday as the Trump administration announced a new tariff deal with China. While Apple was exempt from much of the tariffs for now, it was still set to take a $900 million hit in the June quarter — which now may have been lessened.

According to a report from CNBC, President Trump said he spoke with Apple CEO Tim Cook on the phone after announcing the changes to the tariffs in China. He didn't share details of the conversation, only that Cook will "even up his numbers."

There's no real way to interpret what that phrase might actually mean.

It could be referring to Apple not having to lose $900 million during the June quarter. However, that number won't be zero. The tariffs are still set to 10% to 30% based on which goods are being discussed — still notably higher than before Trump took office.

The phrase could indicate that Apple's $500 billion investment in American manufacturing infrastructure could be recouped. However, whether or not Apple's investment is returned is moot because that money won't see returns for more than a decade.

There's a chance that he's referring to the price of the iPhone, which Apple is still toying with the idea of raising to account for tariffs. While Apple would still be taking a loss at 10%, it isn't as great a loss as at 145%, so it could eat that difference instead of passing it to customers.

Regardless, Apple won't be able to "even up numbers" for long, as a semiconductor tariff is still being worked on by the administration. That, and the chaotic back and forth on every economic policy, makes it impossible to predict the next three months, let alone the next three days.

Whatever the case, Apple has enough cash on hand to endure for many years, regardless of the whims of the US presidency. Cook's phone calls continue to be a part of his strategic playbook, which plays to Trump's ego in desiring phone calls and dinners with powerful people seemingly as a trade of good faith.

37 Comments

davidmalcolm 10 Years · 408 comments

I suspect that Apple is really regretting not kicking both Truth Social and Twitter off the App Store. 

Tim got played by the right wing goons and now he’s trying to keep them from doing irreparable harm to Apple’s long term future. 

Don’t get me wrong, I like Tim as much as I can like any Billionaire. But it wasn’t the working class who rigged the system so that the only options were a disingenuous lady who couldn’t even say genocide was bad, and a geriatric baby who can’t remember what he said last sentence let alone last week. 

Apple could have been pushing Biden for more reforms that would have benefitted society. They could have been working with their unions. Instead Apple like everyone else kept acting like America could keep eating its own tail and it would never get to the head. 

And honestly now it’s too late for Tim to fight back in any meaningful capacity. The only thing that will give America a chance of avoiding complete collapse in the next three years is a heart attack, stroke or some other surprise illness. Or at least something that looks like one of those. 

America’s debt to GDP is out of control and the politicians want to slash taxes for those who need it the least so they can make… more innovative… restaurant delivery apps? 

The politicians are acting like they can squeeze the working class more to dig themselves out of the debt crisis that they’ve been fostering for decades.

America is being sacrificed on the alter of Reaganomics. 

6 Likes · 9 Dislikes
igorsky 10 Years · 787 comments

Tim Cook is just waiting out a lame duck President, as is pretty much every other business leader who is currently paying this man lip service.

6 Likes · 6 Dislikes
sdw2001 24 Years · 17479 comments

I suspect that Apple is really regretting not kicking both Truth Social and Twitter off the App Store. 
Tim got played by the right wing goons and now he’s trying to keep them from doing irreparable harm to Apple’s long term future. 

Don’t get me wrong, I like Tim as much as I can like any Billionaire. But it wasn’t the working class who rigged the system so that the only options were a disingenuous lady who couldn’t even say genocide was bad, and a geriatric baby who can’t remember what he said last sentence let alone last week. 

Apple could have been pushing Biden for more reforms that would have benefitted society. They could have been working with their unions. Instead Apple like everyone else kept acting like America could keep eating its own tail and it would never get to the head. 

And honestly now it’s too late for Tim to fight back in any meaningful capacity. The only thing that will give America a chance of avoiding complete collapse in the next three years is a heart attack, stroke or some other surprise illness. Or at least something that looks like one of those. 

America’s debt to GDP is out of control and the politicians want to slash taxes for those who need it the least so they can make… more innovative… restaurant delivery apps? 

The politicians are acting like they can squeeze the working class more to dig themselves out of the debt crisis that they’ve been fostering for decades.

America is being sacrificed on the alter of Reaganomics. 

I completely disagree.  I realize it's more than fashionable here to trash Trump, the tariffs, etc.  But the reality is that our trade policy has been a nightmare for decades, particularly with China.  We had been operating in the 20th-century paradigm, both for China and the rest of world.   For the former, the theory of the case was "free" trade (which was nothing of then kind) would enable economic growth in both countries, but that China would liberalize as its prosperity grew.   In fact, China went exactly the opposite way.  China has become more closed, more authoritarian, more corrupt and more aggressive.  For the latter, our policies were stuck in the post-war mentality, when Europe was devastated and we were helping them recover.   

What Trump is doing is resetting these relationships.  His plan should now be obvious to anyone who doesn't have--pardon me---"derangement syndrome."  That goal was to triangulate China into changing the way it does business...from tariffs, to non-tariff barriers, to theft of IP, etc.  Secondarily, the goal was to improve terms with our other trading partners or "allies."   As a supporter of the president, I have to admit that I didn't really understand the strategy of going after allies as well as foes (or frien-a-mies.).   After all, why not just target China and go the opposite way with allies?  Why not treat them in a more conciliatory way, but go hard on China?  

However, as deals with India, the UK, Vietnam  and others took shape, it dawned on me.  Trump hit everyone hard (but China harder) and then proceeded to quickly work on deals with those friendlier nations.  He was able to largely correct (or is in process of correcting) the trade problems we've  had with our allies, and leave China--pardon me again---standing with its junk in its hand.   It explains why they are now negotiating and willing to stand down.  Their economy is getting hammered, millions are unemployed, factories are closing....and Trump is running around making trade deals with everyone but them.  

I'll admit it's been somewhat chaotic.  Wall Street hates tariffs.   But we're already seeing the results.  Debt growth has slowed dramatically.  Inflation is nearing the 2% target.  Prices of staples (such as eggs) continue to fall.  Ditto on energy prices.  Private payrolls are showing solid growth.   Even last quarter's GDP reduction (-.3%) was misleading, as companies like Apple rushed to import goods before tariffs kicked in (this reduces GDP in the calculation).   

You've railed against debt, tax cuts, Reagannomics, etc.   Briefly:  

Debt:  We agree on the scope of the problem.  I would think you'd support things like DOGE, energy development, tax cuts for economic stimulation, etc.   I'd certainly think you'd realize both parties have historically been a nightmare on this issue, but that the Democrat party is currently far, far worse (just take 2021-24 alone).   

Tax cuts:  I don't know where this notion of "squeezing the working class" and "tax cuts for the rich" comes from, other than the Democrat party propagandists and their media allies.  The Trump tax cuts benefited the lower and working classes more than the wealthy.  That is simply a fact.  Another fact is that Trump and the GOP are considering actually raising taxes on the wealthy in the planned extension (reconciliation) package.  

Reagannomics:  I'm not sure I see the connection.  I also have my doubts that you have a full understanding of what "Reaganomics" even was/is.   You've no doubt been told (as nearly everyone has) that it was cutting taxes on the wealthy, slashing welfare and healthcare, and giving "tax breaks" to evil corporations and the mega rich.  Sound familiar?  I wonder why?  

5 Likes · 15 Dislikes
foregoneconclusion 13 Years · 3004 comments

Trump doesn't have the legal authority to levy tariffs under the IEEPA. The statute never mentions tariffs or taxes as powers that Congress intended to give to the executive branch in an emergency. Its intent was for sanctioning foreign countries, not changing trade policy domestically. And the Supreme Court has said in the Major Questions Doctrine that statutes being used by the executive branch for actions that have large scale economic and political impact need to have very specific language that supports the action being taken. 

7 Likes · 4 Dislikes
foregoneconclusion 13 Years · 3004 comments

sdw2001 said: I completely disagree.  I realize it's more than fashionable here to trash Trump, the tariffs, etc.  But the reality is that our trade policy has been a nightmare for decades, particularly with China.

You seem to be forgetting that the first Trump administration withdrew from TPP and NAFTA, did new negotiations, then proceeded to proclaim that the result was so much better than what existed before. Then Trump's 2nd administration claimed that their own trade deals that replaced TPP and NAFTA constituted a national emergency. 

How do you reconcile that with your claims that Trump has a strategy in mind? He's already proven that deals he made previously and personally endorsed are meaningless. 

10 Likes · 1 Dislike

OSZAR »