Hacker News Reader

Comment by robertlagrant | Hacker News Reader

> It is no secret that the taxes and duties that are applied to imported phones are highest in India. The taxes are so high that for an important iPhone that you will end up paying an average tax of Rs 24,000 for something like an iPhone 12 or iPhone 12 Mini.

> However, despite the sky-rocketing prices, iPhone still sells best in India and the buyers give whatever price Apple asks them to pay. So for a business, that is not a bad deal at all.

Not really a good deal for Apple. More like an amazing deal for the Indian government.

View on HN

For the USAians, Rs24000 is $325.78.

By comparison, I paid $92.04 in sales tax for my new iPhone, and I am currently in a geography that is considered low-tax.

By comparison, in the UK you will pay £166.50 in sales tax, equivalent to $218. I don't think there is any import duty to pay [1].

1. https://madb.europa.eu/madb/euTariffs.htm?productCode=851712...

What is USAian?

It's a term people use to either be funny, or it's because they're somehow offended that people from USA use the demonym "American" even though there are other countries in the Americas, yet despite the fact that no one else in those countries seems to care because they have their own demonyms they use.

The former are just having a laugh, and the latter are looking for things to be offended by.

I don't know which camp the GP falls into but I'll be charitable and assume they're just being silly.

I don't think you know many people from Latin America. A lot of them will absolutely not like American to refer to the USA only. Especially as the USA imperialism has done so much damage in many places there. It is not as strong as say the Macedonian debate but it is very real.

That may be the case, you're not wrong about what the US has done in Latin America. That said, I've never in my life heard anyone from Latin America call themselves American. Now that's just my experience, so I'm open to being proven wrong.

When I lived in Costa Rica for a time, I was only ever "Americano" and everyone from there were "ticos" or "costarricense." Though to be fair, Costa Rica has pretty much been spared of American meddling.

Well I for one (born in Venezuela and moved to Italy) used to be mildly annoyed when italians used the term "americano" to refer people from USA, and used to tell them "I'm also american". In Venezuela I used "estadounidense" [1] and in italian it would be "statunintense" the proper form, but almost nobody uses it.

Now I'm used to it and don't mind it anymore and this is the first time I've heard of the term USAian and find it quite amousing but I don't think it will catch on.

[1] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/estadounidense

But wouldn't you be sudamericano?

America isn't a continent. We have North America and South America. We typically refer to the grouping of those two continents as 'The Americas', but not America. At least not that I've ever seen.

On a side note - maybe it depends on if you are taught a different number of continents? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continent)

In the U.S. we do 7. Maybe in Venezuela or Brasil they do 5?

I guess that's one of the things that confuses me here. If you're from Europe you can be European because that's the continent you're from. If you're from Canada you can be Canadian or North American, but you can't be American because that's not a continent. I mean I guess you technically can, but it's a bit of a lossy term to use. It isn't specific enough. Do people from Bangladesh or Pakistan think of themselves as Asian, or Pakistani?

I guess as I see some of this discussion, it strikes me as very arbitrary and resentful, and also not very consistent.

> USAian and find it quite amousing but I don't think it will catch on.

Yea I saw it and had to do a double take because I thought it was USAsian. I think at least in English it won't catch on because it doesn't flow very well.

In East Asia, but especially in Taiwan, Japan and China, people from the USA are usually called American. Normally, when asked, I state I’m from California or the US. I think it’s just a language thing here. It’s easier to say America than it is to say USA or United States.

I’m sure Canadians and others get quite annoyed from that.

I usually say the same. I’m from X or I’m from the United States.

If you’re Canadian you’d say I’m from North America, not America. If you’re from Brazil you’d say you’re from South America. The same would be true of Americans. You’d say you’re from North America. That’s the continent. If you are going to go down that route.

Do Mexicans, Canadians, Brazilians, and others really consider themselves of the region of the Americas and not from one of the two continents? I just don’t get the organizational structure that’s used. You wouldn’t say you’re American, that’s for sure. You’d say you’re north or South American.

Yes, in my Latam country they taught us there were 5 continents: America, Europe, Africa, Asia and Oceania. However, we call ourselves latinos or something else, really.

You and the people of Latin America are making a language category error though. The people of Latin America speak Spanish (and perhaps Portugese), and the Spanish word "America" means what it does in Spanish. But in English, the word "America" refers to the USA. It doesn't make sense to complain about words in other languages that you don't speak.

You acknowledge what America means when you use the English word "Americas" to refer to the regions within North and South America, because in English that is the word to use and has the other meaning.

The same logic applies to "football", btw. The vast majority of English speaking people refer to soccer as soccer. That people who speak other languages use a word in their language that sounds like "football" to refer to soccer does not give them standing to sound off on what Australians, Americans, and Canadians call soccer. There is room for the British to bicker about it, but they are a distinct minority among English speakers.

> a word in their language that sounds like "football" to refer to soccer

Isn't that word, "football"?

So if I speak to someone from Colombia or Brasil I should expect them to say they are American?

In Brazil is usual to hear in more educated circles the denomination "estadunidense", which is essentially the same thing as USAian. Or north-americans, when talking about the culture from the standpoint of Brazilians. It's far from true that no one cares.

That's fair, I might be wrong for sure. I'm still going to call myself American.

I don't know which camp the GP falls into but I'll be charitable and assume they're just being silly.

You are correct. I have only very rarely in my life given fig one about offending strangers.

I prefer Youessians.

I suppose that any suffix is not culturally neutral.

Youessish. Like in British, English, Irish, Welsh, Scottish.

Youessan. Like in Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban.

Youessese. Asian American.

Youessian. Like Italian, Hungarian, Russian, Indian.

Youessi - like Iraqi, Yemeni

Or they might be USians themselves, trying to distance themselves from their country being so imperialist.

A United States of American.

It's a U.S.-ian.

I doubt that the taxes from import of electronics is significant enough for it to be a 'great deal' for the Indian Government. I think their intended purpose is to promote/protect local manufacturing.

I get the protectionist aspect, but are they re-investing the money from this tax to make manufacturing desirable in the country?

We're talking logistics improvement, stable electric grid, infrastructure and training programs to get an educated workforce. Or is it just contributing to some bureaucrat's pension fund?

In the same vein, I 100% agree with fuel taxes and green taxes... if the government can demonstrate 100% of the tax goes to finance alternatives that are useful to me.

What they do with the money is up to the citizens, it is they who pay the taxes and not Apple.

To be clear, I was just pointing out what the intention behind the taxes were.

I was not voicing an opinion on whether such protectionist policies actually work. (They seldom do).

Anyway India market is huge so big corps want to sell products. Apple ordered ODMs to build factory in India. The tax works.

So does this mean that presumably, going forward, when the factory starts working at full capacity, the taxes imposed will be lower, and hence Apple products will be cheaper in India?

It should, since they'll be able to claim (rightfully) that some of it was manufactured in India.

Depending on the costs of manufacturing, the price of might not go down by much however, or Apple might keep the difference.

How much is the tax for software in the US?

A $149 IntelliJ licence costs $176 including taxes + there is a 3.5% processing and currency conversion charges imposed by by credit card. Converting to INR I may have to shell out Rs. 3.5k to 4k extra which has dissuaded me going for an All Products Pack and settle for the Ultimate license.

More like the government is incompetent for failing to use policy to move manufacturing to India and instead raising prices for the average consumer.

If the govt reduces taxes, doesnt that incentivize apple to just make them elsewhere and ship to India?

I thought high taxes are the incentive to start manufacturing or assembly locally.

High tariffs are an incentive. Not taxes. Import tax == tariff basically.

Aren't tariffs and taxes the same thing? In this context, import taxes are tariffs.

Certainly there is an inflection point where demand meets a taxed price that would cause Apple to build a factory in India. If Apple is not currently building a factory in India, then that point has not been reached and the result is just higher prices for Indians.

The tax isn't just designed to make Apple and others move to India, it's to give an advantage to local manufacturers over foreign ones. Now whether or not local phone companies are starting/growing in India as a result of this tax, I don't know

iPhone in India is not for an average consumer, it is just a show off phone

Unless they're subsidizing the airlines.

"However, despite the sky-rocketing prices"

Not despite.

People don't understand the Apple brand.

Price elasticity of demand isn't linear. Something that is a Giffen good at a lower price may well have negative marginal demand if the price rises too much.

In this particular example, the iPhone is probably better represented as a Veblen good?

People will really pay anything for status over functionality.

> People don't understand the Apple brand.

How fortunate that we have you to explain it. They're probably just holding it wrong.

It's a good deal for both

Reply on news.ycombinator.com