I live in the country with the most expensive Apple products on the planet | Hacker News Reader

I live in the country with the most expensive Apple products on the planet

vaghetti.dev

121 pointsvaghetti136 comments

A few comments on this from an Indian perspective. Apple products are quite expensive here too, when compared against U.S. prices (plus sales tax). It may seem as if this is because of customs duties, but that’s not the entire story.

Many companies tend to have geographically differentiated pricing to expand their market and make more money. Even if the prices aren’t completely matching the local currency equivalent (with respect to USD) and local conditions, they would have some compensation applied.

Apple has historically been against differentiated pricing, especially for its hardware. It also focuses heavily on retaining its 35% (approx.) profit margins. Only on a few services has Apple reduced pricing in the recent years in some countries (for example, in India, Apple Arcade, Apple TV+ and Apple Music are priced at nearly one fourth of the U.S. prices, but iCloud is priced the same as in the U.S.).

I’m not saying that all Apple hardware products are sold at the USD price plus local customs duties and taxes in other regions, but almost all of them are. What’s more ridiculous is that the prices don’t go down much even when Apple is assembling products locally and doesn’t have to pay as much in duties (a few iPhone models are assembled in India).

Since Apple has this business model, people in India who do know of someone coming from the U.S. or Dubai or another country/location where these are cheaper ask them to purchase those there and bring them down. There are several “Bring me this from there (BMTFT)” groups on social media to connect people.

For individual travelers the duty free limit (legal) plus duty evasion (not legal) in certain cases offer big incentives not to buy locally. I’m sure there’s plenty of organized smuggling also going on.

Whatever metrics Apple is tracking on sales by country get skewed by this, tilting heavily towards U.S. and other countries and making them seem larger than they are, while also making the countries with typically weaker currencies and higher duties seem as smaller markets than they are. (I know Apple can get country wise usage numbers from its telemetry in iOS, the App Store and other Apple apps)

This is a huge market in south america too.

In many countries with high tarriffs, there are literally open "luggages" advertised in FB and IG, to bring stuff from the US into X.

Buyer gives a heads up and asks if there is enough space for X goods. If yes, buyer routes amazon orders to travaler's residence, and presto.

The charge is usually 7-9 USD per pound, although there are flat rates for lightweight items like SD cards and phones.

It has gotten so bad that there are people boarding planes just to do this.

Somehow custom authorities are not making a fuss. Although quantities are low enough and varied enough (no one is foolish enough to load 3 luggages full of prada handbags) that anyone caught at airport can make a legitimate argument they are bringing presents for extended family.

The importers in south america have therefore more or less gone out of business.

Yes Apppe basically doesnt bother trying to be competitive in countries outside the US. I guess they don't mind since their products still sell and they're raking in huge profits.

I'm guessing they don't want a situation where a $200 iPhone sold in India doesn't end up back in the US undercutting their $400 model.

I would be ecstatic if I could buy a "$400 iPhone" for only $400.

Apple prices tend to be higher, not only in absolute terms, but also relative to their competitors. A Samsung phone that sells for $800 in the US might cost $900, while an Apple phone that sells for $800 in the US will cost over $1000.

The new iphone SE starts at $429.00

Not in India, that's the point:

https://www.apple.com/in/shop/buy-iphone/iphone-se/

It is INR 43900, or around USD 570.

ETA: In Brazil, it is BRL 4199 or USD 825.

https://www.apple.com/br/shop/buy-iphone/iphone-se/

And that's at market exchange rates. Adjusted for purchasing power or wages it would be even more expensive, I assume.

My apologies, I read the parent comment again, and I see what they meant.

A few years ago Apple used to "only" charge the same price in Euros as they did in USD. Well, not anymore! The German prices of the iPhone SE start at 519 € - around 571 USD (source: https://www.apple.com/de/iphone-se/). So India definitely isn't alone with the inflated prices...

That comparison is slightly misleading because the German price includes the local VAT. Tax-free price (unless I'm mistaken) would be approximately 436 euros, so more than in the US, but not 150 dollars more.

The EU prices are inclusive of ~20% local sales tax.

Does Brazil still have a 100% tariffs on foreign made electronics? And the US charges almost none to highly favoured nations ie. China. So $429 iPhone in the US will be over $800 after duties in Brazil. And this is not set by Apple but the Brazilian authorities.

The taxes vary and are around 60% in the case of the iPhone.

We have the ICMS in São Paulo (18%), the national tax on industrialized products (IPI – 15%) and the tax on imports (II – 16%). In addition to them, there is still PIS (2.10%) and Cofins (9.65%).

I just had that request from my girlfriend in the Netherlands to bring back an iPad mini in this trip because they're $100 less for the 256GB model here in Canada than they work out to in the Netherlands once exchange rates and taxes are considered.

Living close to the U.S. border, it's quite easy for me to do a 24-48 hour jaunt down to the U.S. - long enough to qualify for the customs exemptions and bring cheap electronics back to Canada. The only down side is that if anything goes wrong with them, I have to cross the border back to the U.S. to deal with warranty issues.

Having an address in the Netherlands and parents in the UK also means that I have similar benefits in the opposite direction, sometimes stuff is way cheaper in the UK or Europe and if I need it I just pick it up there when I'm there. The down side there being that they're obviously cabled for European or UK plugs which means I either need to replace the cables or, thankfully, most stuff is rechargeable via USB-C now, so all I need are European, British and American USB-C charging units and everything carries on as normal.

>What’s more ridiculous is that the prices don’t go down much even when Apple is assembling products locally

You still have to pay import tax on components made outside of India. The assembly line only get Apple some tax incentives.

cost from apple.com/uk/in/us store macbook air

US - $999

India - ₹92,900 ≅ $1,213

India(without GST) = ₹78,728 ≅ $1027

UK - £999 ≅ $1316

UK(without VAT) - £832.5 ≅ $1,096

iPhone 13

US - $799

India - ₹79,900 ≅ $1,043

India(without GST) - ₹67,711 ≅ $884

UK - £779 ≅ $1,025

UK(without VAT) - £649 ≅ $854

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/cons-products/...

With effect from April 1, 2021, BCD on import of printed circuit board assembly (PCBA), camera modules and connectors will be raised to 2.5%. For PCBA and moulded plastic for manufacture of charger or adapter, duty will go up from existing 10% to 15%. Whereas, other inputs and parts of chargers will attract 10% duty.

Completely built-up units (CBUs) of battery chargers attract 15-20% customs duty while handsets attract 22.5%. Certain sub-assemblies of phones such as display panels, printed circuit boards, mechanics and die cut parts are also liable for 10% duty to encourage greater value addition in India.

Most places in the US will have an additional ~7%+ sales tax on top of the above quoted prices.

8%+ is more common than 7%. It's around 10.5% in some cities.

From what I have heard the prices go up in Brazil and India are special cases because the governments mandate local parts and manufacturing. Their goal was never about cheaper electronics, rather to subsidize local expertise. The Apple cut is the same on a now more expensive item.

Those that smuggle devices often experience unhappiness about how they cannot get warranty repairs for foreign purchased phones because repairs must be made with more expensive locally manufactured parts and Apple refuses to eat the difference. I have heard there are papers that can be used to prove foreign phones can use foreign parts without fees, but the local shops/repair depots are unwilling/untrained to help process that paperwork (and the replacements need even more time to be imported).

Even when repairs were authorized shipping and parts issues would take weeks. And no home shipping because issues finding trustworthy delivery so often six hour drive to the store often to be refused service or have to drive six hours weeks later. I am sure Apple could smooth out these issues (and hopefully has) but a lot of the issues likely arose from being cautious to avoid extreme fines.

I would rate both those countries as near Russia on how fun it is to own an Apple product in need of repair. (Samsung I have heard does not have the same issues is the same region).

I always know something with the customs/duty is off there when arriving in Delhi and seeing everybody with a brand new TV as their checked luggage :) Hopefully apple having stores in the country gives them better market visibility as I think the new SE is a fantastic phone for the Indian market. And remember to avoid buying the Dubai version of the iPhone as they turn off facetime (i had to live with this choice for 2 years)

> Whatever metrics Apple is tracking on sales by country get skewed by this, tilting heavily towards U.S. and other countries and making them seem larger than they are, while also making the countries with typically weaker currencies and higher duties seem as smaller markets than they are.

They can most likely see analytics on which country is using how many of their devices. Where the device was bought would be just one metric. Where the device is being mostly used would be the more important metric here.

Even before I clicked the link, I was sure the answer was Brazil. It's not so much the taxes that raise the prices as the tariffs (which are kind of invisible taxes in that they are paid through higher prices rather than directly—which is part of what made a former president's boasting about raising tariffs somewhat absurd. It seemed he believed that the exporting country paid the price of the tariffs and not domestic consumers in the form of higher prices). I remember that there were plans to build a Foxconn factory in Brazil specifically to manufacture iPhones for the Brazilian market because of the tariffs (I don't know if this ever happened, I think maybe it did?).

Isn't it referred to as Brazil Cost by economists. The only way to reduce the tariff is to manufacture locally. NOKIA did this and gained significant market share as a result 20+ years ago

I would say that the "Brazil cost" referred by the economists most probably means bribe.

The term "Brazil's cost" is about the legal overheads, which are much higher than anything due to corruption (which does, indeed, increase the cost of doing business).

The largest component is cascading taxes. There are some rules which allow you to get a discount on taxes of products you sell based on taxes of the components you bought, but in general each step in production and distribution will pay taxes on the incoming values including all previous taxes. That means that you look at a product in a store and think that the price includes 18% state taxes which doesn't sound so bad. But if you could trace it back through the supply chain all the way to mining the raw materials you would see that about 60% of the price is tax.

This, by the way, leads to the ironic situation where poor people pay way more taxes than rich ones even though the law is supposed to implement "progressive taxes". So the poor person is in the 0% income tax bracket but spends nearly everything they earn on stuff with hidden 60% taxes in them. The rich person is in the 35% income tax bracket but only a fraction of that income goes to products while much of their expenses have little to no taxes.

Other sources of "custo Brasil" are losses in transport due to bad infrastructure and crime, having to hire extra people to deal with complex regulations, costs due to delays and things like that.

It’s because it’s harder to do business in Brazil. Reasons listed on the Brazil Cost Wikipedia page:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazil_cost

Corruption is one of the items listed.

I think it's more likely the huge margins applied to products here.

If your market is large enough and the tariffs are high enough then it seems logical that tariffs will force the companies to manufacture their goods elsewhere to stay competitive and increase revenue.

Short term the tariffs are likely paid for by the exporting country, company and/or consumer (there's a limit to how much you can pass on to the consumer), whereas long term the goods will be manufactured/assembled in another country.

Here's a Foxconn factory near Jundiaí: https://goo.gl/maps/Y4R5VzZeS3cqi49W7 They also have other factories in the country, including in Manaus.

It was inaugurated in 2012 and indeed for a few years did produce Apple devices, specifically iPads, but AFAIK in 2017 they shut down the line: https://diariodonordeste.verdesmares.com.br/negocios/apple-e...

I was sure it would be Turkey, looks like we are the close second. Congrats on your first place Brazil!

Is being 1st or 2nd place in this matter to celebrate? I live in Brazil and this is something that really sucks.

He was being ironic

> which are kind of invisible taxes in that they are paid through higher prices rather than directly—which is part of what made a former president's boasting about raising tariffs somewhat absurd. It seemed he believed that the exporting country paid the price of the tariffs and not domestic consumers in the form of higher prices

Depends on the tariffs. If done correctly, they can be used to protect a local industry in its infancy until it is mature enough to compete on the world stage (assuming you don't stifle its own innovation via these subsidies).

But in this case, Brazil wasn't making an iPhone/Mac competitor

> what made a former president's boasting about raising tariffs somewhat absurd

Wow, how does a president think this?

IME this is one of the most common economic misconceptions that people have, to think that the economic cost of a tax is borne by whoever nominally pays it.

Most people with no economics background will for example think that it's just companies that pay salary related taxes, or consumers who pay VAT. Those are both true in the accounting sense that the money is paid by those respective parties to the government but not in the economic sense of who would have the extra money if there were no tax.

My dad had the same reaction when I told him that we'd pay the extra credit card fees. He said "the merchant pays those" and didn't seem to get my "where do you think the merchant gets the money from?" reply.

It's the same when you try to buy a house in the US and you have to pay a realtor to represent you, who takes 3% of sell price as commission. You'd then bargain "I already found the house myself, I just need you to draft the offer, can you do it for less", and they'll reply "no, but don't worry, you only pay for the house, and our commission is paid by the seller".

The way houses in the US are sold looks insane from outside. When I last sold a house in the UK I paid the estate agent 1.5%, there were no buyers fees.

I sold my house without any agents in Portugal. They are common and people use their services frequently, but I figured I could do it by myself and pocket the fees.

OP is full or crap or misinformed. Buyers almost never pay any fees for realtors in my area of the US. Unless the seller is trying to rip you off or something. Maybe it’s different on the west coast.

Everyone I know who has bought a house (not selling) has the seller pay the commission. I bought a house 2 years ago and the seller didn’t have a realtor, he paid 3% to my realtor. It’s baked into the price, you don’t pay $500k for a house and then add on 6% or 3% percent commission to pay the realtors. The commission comes out of the sale price.

Where you do think the money for the commission comes from? Houses aren't a fixed-price good where you declare that you're selling a house for $500k and stick exactly to that price regardless of what you're offered. If a buyer without an agent to pay offers you $490k, that's a better offer than one with an agent offering you $500k if it means you don't have to pay that 3%, and the buyer has saved $10k by not having an agent.

No one is forced to use an agent or pay agent fees in the US.

>OP is full or crap or misinformed. Buyers almost never pay any fees for realtors in my area of the US

I think you've missed the point of this comment thread. Head up to great-great-great-grandparent comment:

"IME this is one of the most common economic misconceptions that people have, to think that the economic cost of a tax is borne by whoever nominally pays it. Most people with no economics background will for example think that it's just companies that pay salary related taxes, or consumers who pay VAT. Those are both true in the accounting sense that the money is paid by those respective parties to the government but not in the economic sense of who would have the extra money if there were no tax."

Elsewhere in the thread is the example of credit card feeds which technically are paid for by the merchant, but economically are paid for by the consumers.

Now try to carry these concepts to your Real Estate Agent scenario. I shall leave that as an exercise.

I completely disagree unless your state has some specific details that forced the buyer to pay commission. A buyer should not be paying the commission of any realtor. The seller should have it baked into the price, or they should be fine with losing 3-6% of the sale price after the sale.

There is a labor cost to accepting cash (or, to a lesser extent, checks) that you don't incur when someone pays with a credit card. I recall reading some dubiously sourced research claiming that it costs most businesses more to accept cash than it does to take a credit card[0], which didn't seem that plausible, but it's probably closer to a wash than you would think.

[0]: I think it was this: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20180130005244/en/New...

I have seen this argument a lot, but whenever I see a separate price for paying with cash versus paying with credit cards, the price for paying with cash is always lower.

Cash allows the merchant to pocket a lot more by evading taxes on the income.

The same mechanism works the opposite way for larger employers, where electronic payments cut losses from theft, and the costs required to prevent the thefts.

True, but the merchants with separate prices tend to be smaller organizations, since they need to fly under credit card processors' radar to do this. For a mom and pop shop, they may be willing to do the extra labor to make back the 3%, even if it's not something that would make economic sense to pay an employee to do. (Similar to how it's cheaper for you to mow your own lawn on the weekends, even if the money you save is less than your hourly wage at work.) Or they may view labor as a sunk cost and see cash handling duties as a way to decrease idle time for staff.

While all the money is coming from the customers this changes which customers pay and more and which pay less. The guy buying a whole month of grocery will pay less with (fair) explicit fees, the guy buying a single redbull would pay more.

Personally my problem with credit card fees is that they are generally not advertised and the costumer should easily be able to know how much they are going to get charged even before the checkout or ordering (this obviously applies to non VAT-included prices).

Merchants on the other hand should reject non-profitable payment options (in my country it is quite rude to try to pay a coffe with a visa/mastercard)

Depending on the product and the competition on the market of that product, the merchant might also take the extra fees from their margins rather than raise prices.

Yeah, this argument doesn't always hold water. If a seller could increase their price without affecting their sales volume, why wouldn't they have done so already to generate more profit? The price product of most major companies is at what the company assumes will provide them the most profit in the demand curve. So by increasing the cost for the company with a tax, it doesn't necessarily follow that the maximum profit possible will be one where the tax is entirely passed to the consume.

It’s not, but presumably all substitution products would see a similar tax, so you’re just shifting the supply curve up across the board.

It really comes down to the market dynamics for that particular product and its competitors.

the purpose of well-thought tariffs is tho incentivize local markets and production, that is how South Korean and Japanese car companies were able to exists.

The two cases where it is almost unconditionally stupid is if there is no chance to develop or grow a local market or if you are reliant on those same countries for your own export (they are most likely going to tariff your products back)

> Those are both true in the accounting sense that the money is paid by those respective parties to the government

Where do you live that this is true of VAT? Everywhere I know of, the retailer is responsible for paying VAT on the products they sell to consumers.

Yes this is true. I thought about this when I wrote it, and the explanation is that as the retailer you just subtract the VAT off your books, and the customer is the one who "paid", all you're doing as the business is counting the money and sending it through to government. So in your accounts you just have this VAT number that appears to be the customer paying the government, but economically it's not quite like that.

There is one other important factor that is seldom discussed: inequality. Even being so expensive, they still sell enough to make good profits, because there is enough rich people in Brazil to buy them once a year. Brazil has one of the higher inequalities in the world and while it’s common to say Brazil is poor, the truth is that there is a shitload of very rich people too (it’s more than 200M people after all). I’m sure things would change if people simply stopped buying them (or couldn’t afford).

^this

In most countries Apple's market is the top 1%

This sentence looks plausible, but easy to misinterpret by reading it incorrectly. For example, I think most Apple device users are middle-income Americans or middle-high income people from other developed countries.

A Mac in Brazil costs literally 1 year worth of salary if you're poor, if you're lucky enough to have a source of income at all. Even as you go up the class hierarchy, most people are in debt (over 70% of families if I'm not mistaken).

Edit: A Macbook Pro costs 3 years of minimum wage. https://themacindex.com/variants/MKGT3/macbook-pro-14-inch-m...

I think if one quickly reads the comment I replied to, one could think that most Apple devices are owned by people who are very rich compared to others in their country. I know I tripped up on that implication for example. However there are a lot more middle-income Europeans than very rich Brazilians so the actual balance of Apple users mostly come from the middle of a small number of rich countries rather than the top of a slightly larger number of small countries. For example if you counted each US state as a country, I think it would not be the case that ‘In most countries Apple's market is the top 1%’ so I think the statistic is mostly biased by the fact that the richer countries where most Apple devices are owned are very large countries and so their population is underweighted in a ‘proportion of countries’ statistic.

In America yes, and also in Europe for example. I come from Brazil and live in northern Europe and having an iPhone here means absolutely nothing because everyone can afford it, even though it is still expensive. It’s simply that the gap between rich and poor is small, so you get to play the same game. But in an extremely unequal place like Brazil the economy works differently. It’s like a tug of war where 1% from one side pull as strongly as the rest on the other side. There is a huge gap in-between, and the same deals sometimes won’t work on both sides.

Most countries are poor and Apple devices are expensive. Why are you hacknernews-splaining their comment when it's obvious what they meant?

Ah! Today morning, I woke up to the news of the new Apple products everywhere including Hackernews. As usual, for the kicks, I tried customizing the total spec-out version of the Apple Mac Studio.

This is costlier than most typical cars on Indian roads. And the Mac Studio cost do not include the keyboard, mouse, and monitor which is needed to make it the bare minimum usable computer.

https://twitter.com/brajeshwar/status/1501440907295752193

Its more expensive than many cars on the road in the USA!

“25% of cars on the road are are at least 16 years old”

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/28/25percent-of-cars-in-us-are-...

A 16 year old car that people drive not usually worth $10k.

That's about 9000 euro, about the same as the "trashcan mac" (i forget the marketing name) when they were still selling them. I think this one is a bit faster though :)

Well, there was a hearty discussion when Apple opened their online store win India (Sep 23, 2020). The fully spec-out Mac Pro cost more than a typical home in most Indian city sub-urban area.

I made peace that day by earmarking the day with my first purchase -- an Apple Watch Band. ;-)

Check it out https://twitter.com/brajeshwar/status/1308632105711095809

Some parts of this price ecosystem would have looked different if Samsung had decided to straighten up their act and not shovel out crapware, adware, and nagware with their so called "Updates" for their lower end phones. It's a lost opportunity for Samsung.

Apple gets to do this because their devices seem safer, easier, and faster to use right now.

I bought samsung earbuds. They worked flawlessly.

From time to time, a software update comes. Every single time I look into change log only to read "Improved stability and security".

Few updates ago, when I took out my buds, only one was playing. Till today I need to disconnect and connect my buds to make them both work.

If only they would just leave the things as they were, or gave me option to rollback.. So much for "Improved stability and security" I guess. I'll never buy a Samsung headphones again.

TBF, I had similar issues with only one ear connecting with my AirPods (gen1). The only difference is the software updates are silent and happen in the background with zero update notes.

Oh, just be happy they do not have (yet) updated to integrate advertisement into them.

If these are Bluetooth LE devices they surely integrated advertisement, it just means something different in this context and could actually explain the technical problem which the parent had.

Doing satire is hard, when reality is way ahead with all the bad things that can happen.

This is why I shed a tear when Huawei was eviscerated by the US.

In Brazil the start model of the new iPhone SE starts at 4200 brl or 835 usd, according to google.

The most famous apple joke in Brazil is that it's cheaper to go to US buy a top of the line iPhone, do some tourism and return to Brazil than buying it here.

Seems to be common practice here in Ecuador as well.

Ordering stuff online from anywhere outside of Ecuador is kind of a last resort, because of very high import duties for many items (and a small but real risk of your items getting "lost" by customs).

However if you are bringing that stuff back on a flight, that's exempt from import duties if you stick to the 2-item limit (e.g. don't come back with a suitcase full of iPhones, but if you're traveling back with your existing old phone and a new phone for yourself, that is allowed).

If you're rich enough to afford an iPhone here, you're not buying locally. You plan a shopping trip to Miami once or twice a year, the ticket cost is basically evened out by the savings of all the stuff you're buying in the USA and many people have family there as well they can visit (which is an extra reason to travel, and you're not staying in a hotel).

This makes me wonder how many industries stay underdeveloped due to high hardware prices. Think of Nigeria movie industry, Brazilian game industry, or even the worldwide impact of high gpu prices due to crypto mining and scarce chips.

Brazil has only itself to blame. Not only Apple products, but several other technology items are pretty expensive due to the VAT (Value Added Taxes), namely, ICMS - state vat tax, IPI - federal vat tax for manufactured products, IOF - federal government tax that incurs on financial trasactions, and high import tariffs. All tariffs and taxes almost doubles the price of everything imported and whenever a product is sold to a distributor and the final seller, state and federal VAT taxes adds up increasing the price even further. Unlike the global north, most of taxes revenues in Brazil come from VAT taxes since brazilian middle class is not willing to pay higher income tax and at the same time they want US-style taxes and European-like lifestyle, such as ree healthcare and free college that are paid in Europe mostly through income tax revenues and dividend tax revenues. So despite higher taxes, it it is not that bad for the upper class and those who can afford Apple gadgets as they would have to pay higher income taxes if they moved to Europe, US or other countries. In Brazil even dividends are not taxed, while in US and Erope they are taxed and companies have to use stock buybacks in order to avoid double taxation.

I lived in Brazil, and my well-off friends bought their Macs smuggled from Paraguay. Still, at Paraguay prices a MacBook Pro used to cost about 10x the minimum wage.

My friends in California enjoy railing against systemic racism except when it's a system that results in my fellow Indians and myself paying more money for the same iPhone. Obviously it's because of import duties and taxes which have nothing to do with Apple, but I'm sure the richest company in the world that is committed to the cause of social justice can find a way to make the pricing fair ;)

My Brazilian friend asked me to recommend her a laptop given her budget. It was certainly an interesting experience. Not only the laptops were much more expensive than they would be in other parts of the world, but also they were older models, with HDDs and 4GB of RAM instead of more up to date models going with SSDs and 8GB of RAM (or more).

Did you consider buying one in the US (or wherever you are/online) and then mailing it to them?

I recently was going to mail a new Mac M1 to a university student in a foreign country. I found services that specialized in it that would do it for $99, FWIW

... $99 plus all applicable taxes and duties on the item you're importing.

I would imagine local laws regarding warranties would also affect pricing. For example, in the US you get one year of warranty, and that's it. In some other countries, there are longer mandatory warranty periods for expensive items. Presumably part of the reason Apple products are more expensive in those countries is that they are on the hook for more warranty service.

Interestingly, this means Apple might not care that foreign tourists snap up Apple products when visiting the US. They might claim that those products don't qualify for the enhanced local warranty when the tourists return to their home countries. /speculation

I don't think better warranties explain it. In Europe where 2 year warranties are mandated UK prices for a MacBook Pro 14 base model (after excluding 20% VAT) are only 3.6% higher than the US price while German prices (after excluding 19% VAT) are 14% lower at current exchange rates. The Brazilian cash price (10% less than the headline price which includes financing on the Apple store) seems to be 25% higher than the US price after accounting for 17% sales tax and 60% import duty.

>> In Europe where 2 year warranties are mandated UK prices for a MacBook Pro 14 base model

In UK all Apple products come with a 1 year warranty. Yes the consumer rights act gives you the right to have a product repaired or replaced(by the seller) if it becomes faulty due to manufacturing defects in 2 years after purchase....but after the initial 6 months it's the consumer who has to demonstrate that the fault is a result of manufacturing defect. If you can't demonstrate that then the seller doesn't have to repair your product.

It's absolutely not the same as a warranty.

One must remember that Apple is notorious for refusing to repair certain defects within their one year warranty until the relevant class action or sufficient media coverage occurs, so the extent to which their warranty is a 'real' warranty can be somewhat debated.

Anyway, it's absolutely known as a 'statutory warranty' in places like Australia https://www.apple.com/au/legal/statutory-warranty/au/ and people certainly get things repaired based on an expectation for the lifetime of a product, without having to prove that it was a manufacturing defect.

It's almost 15 years ago now, but I found Apple (or at least staff in the London Oxford Road Apple store) to be very responsive when the battery for my perhaps 3 or 4 year old MacBook Pro expanded and broke.

I think there may have been a recall (which had expired by that point) but on bringing it in the staff member just unboxed a new £100 battery and sent me on my way. Various employers have purchased maybe 5 new Apple laptops on my behalf since so probably a good call.

> “Yeah, Apple’s products are pretty good, probably the best depending on what you need from them, but at the end of the day they are not that different from the cheaper alternatives and not really worth the extra money unless you have a lot to spare”. Which, it seems to me, is pretty much what you are going to hear from most people about Apple products anywhere in the world.

This could not be further from the truth. I imagine the number of people who think iPhones are the superior product outnumber the number of people who don't really care, and I'd be among them.

Countries like India and Brazil are so stratified in terms of wealth that you essentially have people who have no chance of affording it, ever, and people with the same or more disposable income as those in the west. So the strategy is to simply get as much as possible out of the 'rich' people who will buy it as a status symbol.

It's a long time ago but I once made a business trip to Brazil where local colleagues attempted to explain the reason behind these high prices. I don't remember everything but one example stuck with me: the government forcing the shipment of the incoming goods into a particular harbor that is far away from the end destination, as an attempt to provide them work, and perhaps apply local tariffs. Next, this product needs to be shipped again, probably by air, to the place it needs to be. So it's the distribution of work for the sake of work, keeping each other busy I guess.

The other odd thing I noticed back then is electronics that exist nowhere else. For example, an electronics company you may only know for their TVs suddenly also has laptops and phones. But only in Brazil. I guess they are white label products that are rebranded, as part of the "wealth signaling" the author talked about.

Also in my country, very expensive. Therefore, I order from Apple USA directly and import through courier. The exchange rate, courier fee and 15 day arrival 'delay' are much more tolerable than what I would pay for locally at the 'iStore'.

While working on a BigCo product that produced invoices to advertisers in different countries I learned that there are different local laws around invoicing and how a final price is shown to a customer. In the US all prices in our application were exclusive of taxes, which were added after a total cost for customer was computed. For Brazil, a multi month and multi team effort ensued to assure variable tax rates could be applied to different customers and so a only a final price/cost inclusive of “taxes” would be shown to advertisers.

… this makes me wonder if taxes/“cost of doing business” is the true cause (something the author waves away without data, and which I don’t have either :) …

Brazil also has world's most expensive cars. We build cars in Brazilian factories and sell them in other countries cheaper than we sell in the local market.

https://www.automotiveworld.com/uncategorised/89068-brazil-h...

And the reason for that is.. that we pay the price. For some reason we accept to pay a higher price than any other country, even though there's a lot of competition (maybe the companies form a cartel here? But why here and not in the rest of the world?)

Come to Turkey, here Apple prices are cheaper than Eggplant prices.

I still think the reason are custom duties (which I think is something immoral), and anything else is just a consequence. Buying an Apple product from elsewhere is more expensive than buying one here. If that wasn't the case, people would just import the products, and the local businesses would have to adjust or risk bankruptcy.

I recently had to upgrade my really old iPad. I'm not exactly poor but I went for a pretty cheap model as I couldn't mentally justify the prices of the higher end models. The iPad is the only Apple device I'm willing to buy, it's great.

Apple products are so expensive here in South Africa. And we don't have as much disposable cash as Americans/westerners. So yeah adoption is hindered. They don't even try to be competitive unlike Samsung and Huawei do here.

There is joke here that I as an India would like to share. For the price of the latest iPhone to be bought from a store in India , it is cheaper to buy a two way flight ticket to the UAE , buy the iPhone and bring it back.

Different countries have different import duties, which are "hidden" costs for foreign products. It's possible that these types of tariffs cause Apple stuff to be more expensive in Brazil.

I am lucky enough to live in a country that isn't that bad, however all the Apple stuff I ever owned, wasn't mine rather provided by work/custormer's project.

Same as in Egypt. Prices for Apple products are nuts over there.

I think in Argentina they're expensive than brazil. Argentina has a lockdown on dollars actives so it's hard to get dollars to buy such imported products.

iPhone 13 cost R$ 7,599.00, or Roughly $1500 in USD. Compared to $799 in US.

On a 30% Import Tax, and a maximum of VAT for Import product alone makes it ~$1250 already. For unstable currency ( comparatively speaking ) Apple tends to hedge at least 15% rate, that makes it around $1437. Apple tends to add a few pcenctage more for those countries with extra consumer protection. ( As in EUR ).

So I dont think it is that far off at all.

You call it the unstable currency adjustment, somebody else can call it the "phone is already unaffordable, let's go further to make it a luxury status symbol" adjustment.

But the same iPhone 13 in India costs 1048 USD, which is almost completely explained by their 22.5% tariffs.

So why doesn't Apple apply your supposed "luxury adjustment" in India? Why only in Brazil?

The phone is a luxury status symbol with or without those adjustment anyway.

I live in Nicaragua and they are pretty expensive here. 14" Macbook Pro with M1 Pro, 16GB / 1TB set me back $3350 USD.

https://themacindex.com/variants/MKGT3/macbook-pro-14-inch-m...

It can always get worse :)

I was thinking that a $3000+ anything from Apple just doesn't sound mind blowing. Then again, I'm always one to play the game of max everything out on Apple's new thing, and then think about how many other things that could buy. Regional differences apply, but you could easily buy a really decent car for some Apple gear maxed out (think MacPro) or just a daily beater for the price of a maxed out MBP laptop. The fact the new M1Ultra maxed is <$10k was a bit shocking.

I find the comparison with a car a bit amusing, though I get your point. Usually, a car spends more than 95% of the time parked somewhere, whereas a smartphone or a computer are usually used for at least a few hours everyday. I’m not saying that cars are useless in comparison. It’s just that they’re not even near the same category on what they offer to the user.

Just for the lulz, I just maxed out a MacPro: $52,299.

I know I'm cheap and what not, but there's not many things in my world that costs $52k. A car is the most relatable thing in that price range to me, so that's where I turn. I'm guessing for some of you overpaid SV types <ducks>, that's just an average night at the club. We all relate to things differently.

Fascinating site—I was surprised to see Thailand as the cheapest country on the list, although I realize that I know nothing about their trade policies.

That site, shows the prices (in Thailand and elsewhere) by default with tax refunds. I presume that to be the tax refunds for short term travelers in that country who buy things there, and not applicable to ordering online from there and getting it shipped. AFAIK, a few countries (including countries like Australia and Canada) have such tax refunds above a specific amount of spending for some specific categories of spending.

Why whould anyone care about garbage prices? ) If you wanted some justifiably expensive hardware, buy Sun! Oh, wait, it doesn't exist anymore... (

The last thing I'd want to do when out and about in Brazil is "wealth signal."

Displaying an iPhone in Rio is likely to get you robbed.

Won't this soon be Russia now that Apple has cut all sales with the country?

Russia will be the new Cuba with phone tech 50 years old instead of cars.

Or, they'll just keep supplying from China and not really notice

That assumes that the situation will last 50 years. Cuba has been embargoed by the US for so long because its oligarchs all moved to Florida and Texas and took their money with them and have bought themselves some American democracy with it. My cynical side thinks that the worst case scenario (short of nukes or full-scale WWIII) where Russia essentially annexes Ukraine like China did Tibet will eventually lead to roughly the same consequences for Russia that the Chinese annexation of Tibet did for China.

Except Ukraine has 10x the population of Tibet and a land border with EU countries...

To be fair, the annexation of Tibet happened at a time where China was irrelevant on the world stage having come out of WW2 and a civil war almost completely ruined. Tibet wasn't recognised internationally as a country at the time because of the KMT claims to it. That's not to say that the CCP's invasion, annexation and suppression should have happened or was moral in any way, but Ukraine today has much more political clout and meaning than Tibet had 70 years ago, because attitudes and the capabilities of the countries involved today were different then than they are now.

Reasonably point. I don't think (or at the very least I hope) that my worst-case non-Armageddon scenario will happen, but I suspect that the only thing that will end the Russian occupation of Ukraine will be the fall of Putin from power. But then I'm just some schmuck who doesn't know much more than anyone else.

When industrial partnerships are broken, there is no incentive to go back. No trust either, neither from the two sides, neither from companies to government not to shut down the transaction again at the first whim.

My bet is that once Russia is on a black list for everything China is going to keep Russia on a leash. Buy enough from them in yuan to keep them alive, sell to them to get those yuans back, don't make them so rich to be able to rebuild a really worrisome army. And who'll be in the Cremlin will still rule over all of Russia and be rich and happy.

I'd like to hear from someone in Russia to understand if this is a credible endgame.

Russian here. IMO that's the most probable outcome in the short term, and this process started long before recent events.

Cuba has survived for 50 year by leaching off from other countries, USSR until its fall, then Venezuela with two puppet regimes and when that also failed, Obama threw them Oxygen by opening up.

They have the advantage that the embargo is unilateral by the US. They're cut off from their closest and largest potential trading partner, but there are still relations with the rest of the world. If anything, the embargo strengthened the regime by creating a convenient scapegoat for all of its failures.

The way the escalation might go on, it probably won't matter how long it would last.

Or maybe the Russians might invent something of their own?

They did have those space programs which were a big deal at the time.

If we count China out, the all-Russian phone would be in a suitcase form-factor. The best tech process for chip making in Russia is 110nm, even though 90nm was bought a decade ago.

> the all-Russian phone would be in a suitcase form-factor

You don't know that.

If China didn't make phones, wouldn't you have said "all Chinese phones would be shaped like a pyramid"?

China invests huge amounts of money in their own chip making and it didn't start yesterday.

now, actually

https://www.citilink.ru/product/noutbuk-apple-macbook-pro-m1...

6400$

Laughs in Argentinian..

Brazil most expensive Apple products.. , yes..

Still laughing

Reply on news.ycombinator.com