Tim Cook, chief executive officer of Apple Inc., speaks during a “First Tool-In” ceremony at the TSMC facility under construction in Phoenix, Arizona, US, on Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2022.
Caitlin O’Hara | Bloomberg | Getty Images
When President Barack Obama asked the late Apple CEO Steve Jobs about making an iPhone in the U.S., Jobs didn’t mince words.
The president of the U.S. and the CEO of Apple have changed, but the ambition of a “Made in the USA” iPhone remains.
Defending its “reciprocal tariffs,” the White House this week said President Donald Trump believes the U.S. has the workforce and the resources to build iPhones in the U.S. Apple CEO Tim Cook nor anybody else at the tech company has come out to back that claim, but analysts who follow Apple say the idea of an American-made iPhone is impossible at worst and highly expensive at best.
As it’s largely a theoretical exercise, there’s a broad range of guesses as to how much an all-American iPhone might cost.
Bank of America Securities analyst Wamsi Mohan said in a Thursday note that the iPhone 16 Pro, which is currently priced at $1,199, could increase 25% based on labor costs alone. That would make it a roughly $1,500 device.
Wedbush’s Dan Ives pegged $3,500 as the U.S. iPhone’s price shortly after last week’s tariff announcement, estimating that Apple would need to spend $30 billion over three years to move 10% of its supply chain to the U.S.
At the moment, Apple makes more than 80% of its products in China. Those products now receive a 145% tax when they’re imported into the U.S. after Trump’s tariffs went into effect this week.
Experts say that a “Made in the USA” iPhone would face serious challenges, ranging from finding and paying a U.S. workforce to tariff costs that Apple would incur importing parts to the U.S. for final assembly.
There’s broad agreement among analysts and industry watchers that it’s not likely to happen. Wall Street has doubted for years that Apple would do an American iPhone. “I don’t think that’s a thing,” Needham’s Laura Martin quipped on CNBC this week.
“It’s just not a reality that on the time frame of imposing tariffs that this is going to shift manufacturing here. It’s pie in the sky,” said Jeff Fieldhack, research director at Counterpoint Research.
A man checks an iPhone 16 Pro as the new iPhone 16 series smartphones go on sale at an Apple store in Beijing, China September 20, 2024.
Florence Lo | Reuters
Apple designs its products in California, but they are made by contract manufacturers, such as Foxconn, the company’s top supplier.
Even if Apple spent heavily to get Foxconn or another partner to agree to build some iPhones in the U.S, it would take years to construct the plants and install the machinery, and there’s no guarantee that U.S. trade policy might not change yet again in a way to make the factory less useful.
The biggest issue with Uncle Sam’s iPhone is that the U.S. doesn’t have the same workforce as China – though the massive number of workers needed to build iPhones is one of the attractions for the Trump administration.
“The 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,” Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said on CBS on Sunday.
Foxconn builds iPhones and other Apple products in massive campuses that include dorms and shuttles. Workers often travel from nearby regions to work at the plant for short periods, and employment surges seasonally in the summer before new iPhones come out in the fall. The well-oiled system helps Apple pump out more than 200 million iPhones per year.
Additionally, Foxconn over the years has come under scrutiny for worker conditions many times, including in 2011 when the company installed nets around some of its buildings after a rash of worker suicides. Oversight groups have said that Foxconn’s work is grueling and that workers are pressured into working overtime.
Despite working conditions, Foxconn hired 50,000 additional workers at its biggest factory in Henan to build enough iPhones ahead of the latest models’ September launch, Chinese media reported last fall.
But Chinese workers get paid far less than American workers. The hourly wage during the iPhone 16 surge was 26 yuan, or $3.63, with a signing bonus of 7,500 yuan, or about $1,000, according to the South China Morning Post. For comparison, the minimum wage in California is $16.50 per hour.
Bank of America Securities’ Mohan estimated on Thursday that the labor cost for assembling and testing an iPhone in the U.S. would come in at $200 per iPhone, up from $40 in China.
Apple CEO Cook has also said that another issue is that American workers don’t have the right skills. In a 2017 interview, Cook said there aren’t enough tooling engineers in the U.S. Those engineers work on and configure the machines that take the sophisticated designs from Apple, which come in the form of computer files, and transform them into physical objects.
“The reason is because of the quantity of skill in one location, and the type of skill it is,” Cook said when asked at a conference why Apple does so much production in China.
A meeting of tooling engineers in China could fill “multiple football fields,” but in the U.S., it would be hard to fill one, Cook said.
The most recent effort to have Foxconn move significant production to the U.S. was a failure.
Trump announced a $10 billion investment from Foxconn to build plants in Wisconsin in 2017. Apple was never officially attached to Foxconn’s Wisconsin location, but that didn’t stop Trump from claiming Apple would build three “big beautiful plants” in the U.S.
Foxconn changed plans several times for what the Wisconsin plant would produce, but it eventually settled on making face masks during the pandemic – nothing electronics related. The Foxconn Wisconsin plant was pitched as delivering 13,000 jobs, but it only created 1,454 jobs.
During the pandemic, plans for the plant were abandoned, and most of the facility remains unbuilt.
Apple worked with Foxconn in 2011 to expand iPhone production to Brazil to avoid large import duties in that country. The plant is still operational today, and will produce iPhone 16 models to help Apple get around U.S. tariffs, according to recent Brazilian media reports.
But even after the $12 billion factory was operational, most components were still imported from Asia, and in 2015, four years after the plant was announced, the iPhones made in Brazil retailed for twice the price of iPhones made in China, according to Reuters.
However, recent efforts by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co., Apple’s main chip manufacturer, have been successful. TSMC now makes small quantities of cutting-edge chips at a new factory in Arizona, and Apple’s a committed customer.
Apple CEO Tim Cook escorts President Donald Trump as he tours Apple’s Mac Pro manufacturing plant with Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin looking on in Austin, Texas, November 20, 2019.
Tom Brenner | Reuters
Even if iPhones could be assembled in America, much of what goes into an iPhone comes from countries around the world, all of which have received tariffs.
The vast majority of parts in an iPhone are made in Asia. The processor is manufactured by TSMC in Taiwan, the display is produced by South Korean companies like LG or Samsung, and the majority of the other components are made in China.
Apple would face tariffs on most of those parts, according to Mohan of Bank of America Securities, unless it could secure waivers for individual parts. Semiconductors, which are among the most valuable parts inside an iPhone, are exempt from tariffs at the moment.
Trump on Wednesday put a 90-day pause on most of his tariffs, but if the pause comes to an end, a Yankee-made iPhone 16 Pro Max could increase in price by 91% thanks to tariffs and increased labor costs, Mohan wrote.
“While it may be possible to move final assembly to the U.S., moving the entire iPhone supply chain would be a much bigger undertaking and would likely take many years, if even possible,” Mohan wrote.
Though Jobs shut down the idea of an America iPhone flat out with Obama, Cook hasn’t taken the same unvarnished approach.
Instead, Cook has led Apple’s strategy to engage with Trump, including attending his inauguration in January. Apple also announced that it will spend $500 billion within the U.S., including on some AI server production in Houston. Trump regularly cites the investment with approval.
During the first Trump administration, Cook’s strategy worked.
Although Trump talked about stars-and-stripes iPhones and Apple building plants in the U.S., the tech company was able to secure temporary exemptions for many of its products made in China. That meant Apple didn’t have to pay tariffs on important devices like the iPhone.
The charm offensive during Trump’s first term culminated in the fall of 2019 when Apple extended its commitment to assembling the $3,000 Mac Pro in a Flex factory outside Austin, Texas. Trump toured the factory with Cook.
Before Apple commits to a red, white and blue iPhone, it may produce some lower-volume products or accessories in the U.S. to charm Trump, Wall Street analysts say.
“Given we now know that the Trump administration is willing to negotiate, we wouldn’t be surprised to see Apple commit to some small-volume production in the US (HomePod? AirTags?), similar to its September 2019 commitment to manufacture the new Mac Pro in Austin, TX, to try and win an exemption,” Morgan Stanley analyst Erik Woodring wrote in a Thursday note.
Corporate treasuries have surpassed ETFs in bitcoin buying for a third consecutive quarter as more companies try to benefit from the MicroStrategy playbook in a more crypto-friendly regulatory environment.
Public companies acquired about 131,000 coins in the second quarter, growing their bitcoin balance 18%, according to data provider Bitcoin Treasuries. ETFs showed an 8% increase or about 111,000 BTC in the same period.
“The institutional buyer who is getting exposure to bitcoin through the ETFs are not buying for the same reason as those public companies who are basically trying to accumulate bitcoin to increase shareholder value at the end of the day,” said Nick Marie, head of research at Ecoinometrics.
Public company bitcoin holdings increased 4% in April, a tumultuous month after the market was rocked by President Donald Trump’s initial tariffs announcement, versus 2% for ETFs, he pointed out.
“They don’t really care if the price is high or low, they care about growing their bitcoin treasury so they look more attractive to the proxy buyers,” Marie added. “It’s not so much driven by the macro trend or the sentiment, it’s for different reasons. So it becomes a different kind of mechanism that can push bitcoin forward.”
Bitcoin ETFs, whose collective U.S. launch in January 2024 was one of the most successful ETF debuts in history, still represent the largest holders of bitcoin by entity with more than 1.4 million coins held today, representing about 6.8% of the fixed supply cap of 21 million. Public companies hold about 855,000 coins, or about 4%.
Regulatory relief
The trend reflects the significant regulatory relief the crypto industry broadly is benefiting from under the Trump administration. In March, Trump signed an executive order for a U.S. bitcoin reserve, sending a strong message that the flagship cryptocurrency, which has long been a source of reputation risk among many investors, is here to stay. The last time ETFs outpaced public companies in bitcoin buying was in the third quarter of 2024, before Trump was re-elected.
In the second quarter, GameStop began buying bitcoin, after its board approved it as a treasury reserve asset in March; health-care company KindlyMD merged with Nakamoto, a bitcoin investment company founded by crypto entrepreneur David Bailey; and investor Anthony Pompliano’s ProCap, kicked off its own bitcoin purchasing program and is going public through a special purpose acquisition company, or SPAC.
Strategy, recently rebranded from MicroStrategy, is still the main behemoth in the bitcoin treasury game. The company pioneered the strategy that more than 140 public companies globally are now emulating. It holds about 597,000 BTC, and is followed by the bitcoin miner Mara Holdings, which has almost 50,000 coins.
“It’s going to be very hard to catch Strategy’s scale,” said Ben Werkman, chief investment officer at Swan Bitcoin. “They’re going to be the preferred landing spot for institutional capital because of the deep liquidity around their equity, while these smaller equities are going to be really good risk returns for retail investors and smaller institutions that want more of that upside – that initial growth that comes in kicking off the strategy – because a lot of people missed it with MicroStrategy.”
A long-term case?
Marie suggested that 10 years from now, there probably won’t be so many companies committed to the bitcoin treasury strategy. Firstly, he said, the more that enter the category, the more diluted the activity at each firm becomes. Plus, bitcoin may be so normalized by then that proxy buyers are no longer constrained by rules and mandates around direct exposure to bitcoin.
“You can think about this wave as a bunch of companies that are trying to benefit from this arbitrage,” Marie said.
Werkman pointed out that most investors that are attracted to bitcoin treasury companies today already have a thesis around bitcoin. For them, leveraged bitcoin equities are likely how they try to outperform bitcoin itself, the foundational component of their investments.
“What people really like about these companies, and why they like to get into these smaller companies, is because they can do something that the investors holding spot bitcoin can’t do: go and accumulate more bitcoin on your behalf because they have access to the capital markets and can issue securities,” Werkman said.
There’s also likely to be a fair number of companies that convert their existing treasury holdings to bitcoin without pursuing leverage the way Strategy does, Werkman noted.
“They’ve got that ability to generate more and more value behind their shares, backed by bitcoin, plus whatever the operations of the company are generating. It’s a unique value proposition,” he said.
Don’t miss these cryptocurrency insights from CNBC Pro:
An image of a Quantix drone made by AeroVironment.
David Mcnew | Getty Images News | Getty Images
AeroVironment shares fell 7% Tuesday after the defense contractor said it plans to offer $750 million in common stock and $600 million in convertible senior notes due in 2030 to repay debt.
The drone maker said it would use leftover funding for general purposes such as boosting manufacturing capacity.
AeroVironment shares have soared 85% this year, ballooning its market value to about $13 billion.
Last week, shares of the Arlington, Virginia-based company rallied on strong fourth-quarter results, lifting higher as CNBC’s Jim Cramer called it the “next Palantir of hardware.”
Read more CNBC tech news
Last month, the company also closed its $4.1 billion acquisition of space-related defense tech company Blue Halo.
Earlier this month, President Donald Trump signed an executive order intended to boost drone production in the U.S. and crack down on unauthorized uses.
The company also has a high short interest level, which may have contributed to some of the recent gains, creating a short squeeze. This phenomenon occurs when a stock price surges, forcing those shorting the stock to purchase shares to cover their positions and prevent losses.
Internet firm Cloudflare will start blocking artificial intelligence crawlers from accessing content without website owners’ permission or compensation by default, in a move that could significantly impact AI developers’ ability to train their models.
Starting Tuesday, every new web domain that signs up to Cloudflare will be asked if they want to allow AI crawlers, effectively giving them the ability to prevent bots from scraping data from their websites.
Cloudflare is what’s called a content delivery network, or CDN. It helps businesses deliver online content and applications faster by caching the data closer to end-users. They play a significant role in making sure people can access web content seamlessly every day.
Roughly 16% of global internet traffic goes directly through Cloudflare’s CDN, the firm estimated in a 2023 report.
“AI crawlers have been scraping content without limits. Our goal is to put the power back in the hands of creators, while still helping AI companies innovate,” said Matthew Prince, co-founder and CEO of Cloudflare, in a statement Tuesday.
“This is about safeguarding the future of a free and vibrant Internet with a new model that works for everyone,” he added.
What are AI crawlers?
AI crawlers are automated bots designed to extract large quantities of data from websites, databases and other sources of information to train large language models from the likes of OpenAI and Google.
Whereas the internet previously rewarded creators by directing users to original websites, according to Cloudflare, today AI crawlers are breaking that model by collecting text, articles and images to generate responses to queries in a way that users don’t need to visit the original source.
This, the company adds, is depriving publishers of vital traffic and, in turn, revenue from online advertising.
Read more CNBC tech news
Tuesday’s move builds on a tool Cloudflare launched in September last year that gave publishers the ability to block AI crawlers with a single click. Now, the company is going a step further by making this the default for all websites it provides services for.
OpenAI says it declined to participate when Cloudflare previewed its plan to block AI crawlers by default on the grounds that the content delivery network is adding a middleman to the system.
The Microsoft-backed AI lab stressed its role as a pioneer of using robots.txt, a set of code that prevents automated scraping of web data, and said its crawlers respect publisher preferences.
“AI crawlers are typically seen as more invasive and selective when it comes to the data they consumer. They have been accused of overwhelming websites and significantly impacting user experience,” Matthew Holman, a partner at U.K. law firm Cripps, told CNBC.
“If effective, the development would hinder AI chatbots’ ability to harvest data for training and search purposes,” he added. “This is likely to lead to a short term impact on AI model training and could, over the long term, affect the viability of models.”