One of the great magic tricks of art — or perhaps just of the human brain — is the ability to transmute something hyper-specific and personal into something universal. Despelote is an autobiographical, semi-documentary game about being a kid in Ecuador during the country’s first successful qualifying run for the 2002 World Cup. It’s also just a game about the totality of being a kid: the play, the boredom, the obsession, the myth-making, the outsiders’ view of the adult world, and the way that adult world informs everything about who you are. It’s really beautiful. Despelote is by Julián Cordero and Sebastian Valbuena. It’s based on Cordero’s childhood in Ecuador’s capital city, Quito, and his intense relationship — much of the country’s intense relationship, at the time — with soccer (which, for the rest of this article, I’ll call football, like the rest of the world outside of the U.S. does). It’s a memory piece, then — but memory is a tricky thing. Late in the game, Cordero admits in a voiceover that Ecuador’s successful qualification for the World Cup is his first memory, from when he was four. His memory of it is vivid, but he wishes it was more expansive — so, in the game, he’s eight. Despelote is the memory he wishes he had. Nonetheless, it’s communicated with an authenticity and detail that is completely immersive. Despelote is a short, deceptively simple first-person narrative game that takes a couple of hours to play. (It’s available now on Steam, Xbox, and PlayStation, with a Switch version coming soon.) As Julián, you roam your family home, the school, and the local park, kicking a ball around with your friends. You attend a wedding, punting balloons at the ceiling fans; you eavesdrop on your parents’ conversations; you play hide-and-seek with your sister. Your mom drags you places, sends you out, orders you home, asks you to stay put. It’s the late summer of 2001 and the whole of Quito is obsessed with Ecuador’s series of qualifying matches against other South American nations. Julián’s memory hops from one match to the next, but rather than being the focus of the action, the matches are an ever-present context that hums in the atmosphere of the city; video footage plays on TVs in shop windows while grown-ups everywhere discuss the strategy and the scoreline. As a kid, Julián’s relationship with the sport of football is more tactile. He kicks. Cordero and Valbuena have designed a sensationally fluid and intuitive first-person footballing control scheme, with dribbling that is automatic but still requires finesse (especially when running with R2), and kicks delivered by holding and flicking the right stick. The system works just as well in the top-down football video game that Julián plays on his console at home, Tino Tini’s Soccer 99 (an homage to the 1993 Britsoft classic Dino Dini’s Soccer). This extremely playable and fun game within a game is stunningly deployed in a series of slow but arresting perspective shifts that ambiguously blur the lines between author, player, and avatar. As Tino Tini’s Soccer eats into young Julián’s life, so Despelote, a game an older Julián made about his life, eats into ours. Despite the game’s tiny scope and budget, its rendition of 2001 Quito feels enveloping and fully realized. Visually, it’s composed of low-poly 3D models rendered in a grainy, pastel monochrome, like a zine print, with simply but vividly cartooned 2D black-and-white figures representing people and important things. It’s like a hazy photograph superimposed with a child’s understanding of what’s important. Brilliant audio design draws you deeper into this world, building the city up as a wash of ambient noise and layers of overlapping dialogue about life in Ecuador as it faces both financial catastrophe and a shot at sporting glory. The result is impressionistic, but also genuinely realist — as in, grounded in the reality of our world — in a way few video games can achieve. Playing it, you feel as if you’ve been transported to a different time and place. That’s not to say that Despelote stays in the same time and place, either. Like some of its snappy narrative indie forebears — particularly Blendo Games’ jump-cutting mini masterpiece, Thirty Flights of Loving — Despelote deploys cinematic editing and juxtaposition to great effect. (Cinema is in Cordero’s blood; his father Sebastián directed the 1999 crime film Ratas, Ratones, Rateros that was the first Ecuadorian movie to get recognition at international film festivals. His parents can be heard chatting about the state of Ecuadorian film in the game.) Occasionally, the game jumps forward in time to the experiences of a more rootless teenage Julián; later, Despelote smashes down the fourth wall to take a documentary look at the mechanics of its own making. So yes, among other things, Despelote is a meditation on the creative process, a remembered documentary on life in turn-of-the-millennium Ecuador, and a playable essay on the way sport connects to both individuals and societies. Above all that, though, it’s a game about being a kid, kicking a ball, and watching it sail into the future. It’s a marvel.

One of the great magic tricks of art — or perhaps just of the human brain — is the ability to transmute something hyper-specific and personal into something universal. Despelote is an autobiographical, semi-documentary game about being a kid in Ecuador during the country’s first successful qualifying run for the 2002 World Cup. It’s also just a game about the totality of being a kid: the play, the boredom, the obsession, the myth-making, the outsiders’ view of the adult world, and the way that adult world informs everything about who you are. It’s really beautiful.Despelote is by Julián Cordero and Sebastian Valbuena. It’s based on Cordero’s childhood in Ecuador’s capital city, Quito, and his intense relationship — much of the country’s intense relationship, at the time — with soccer (which, for the rest of this article, I’ll call football, like the rest of the world outside of the U.S. does). It’s a memory piece, then — but memory is a tricky thing. Late in the game, Cordero admits in a voiceover that Ecuador’s successful qualification for the World Cup is his first memory, from when he was four. His memory of it is vivid, but he wishes it was more expansive — so, in the game, he’s eight. Despelote is the memory he wishes he had.Nonetheless, it’s communicated with an authenticity and detail that is completely immersive. Despelote is a short, deceptively simple first-person narrative game that takes a couple of hours to play. (It’s available now on Steam, Xbox, and PlayStation, with a Switch version coming soon.) As Julián, you roam your family home, the school, and the local park, kicking a ball around with your friends. You attend a wedding, punting balloons at the ceiling fans; you eavesdrop on your parents’ conversations; you play hide-and-seek with your sister. Your mom drags you places, sends you out, orders you home, asks you to stay put.Image: Julián Cordero, Sebastian Valbuena/PanicIt’s the late summer of 2001 and the whole of Quito is obsessed with Ecuador’s series of qualifying matches against other South American nations. Julián’s memory hops from one match to the next, but rather than being the focus of the action, the matches are an ever-present context that hums in the atmosphere of the city; video footage plays on TVs in shop windows while grown-ups everywhere discuss the strategy and the scoreline.As a kid, Julián’s relationship with the sport of football is more tactile. He kicks. Cordero and Valbuena have designed a sensationally fluid and intuitive first-person footballing control scheme, with dribbling that is automatic but still requires finesse (especially when running with R2), and kicks delivered by holding and flicking the right stick. The system works just as well in the top-down football video game that Julián plays on his console at home, Tino Tini’s Soccer 99 (an homage to the 1993 Britsoft classic Dino Dini’s Soccer). This extremely playable and fun game within a game is stunningly deployed in a series of slow but arresting perspective shifts that ambiguously blur the lines between author, player, and avatar. As Tino Tini’s Soccer eats into young Julián’s life, so Despelote, a game an older Julián made about his life, eats into ours.Despite the game’s tiny scope and budget, its rendition of 2001 Quito feels enveloping and fully realized. Visually, it’s composed of low-poly 3D models rendered in a grainy, pastel monochrome, like a zine print, with simply but vividly cartooned 2D black-and-white figures representing people and important things. It’s like a hazy photograph superimposed with a child’s understanding of what’s important. Brilliant audio design draws you deeper into this world, building the city up as a wash of ambient noise and layers of overlapping dialogue about life in Ecuador as it faces both financial catastrophe and a shot at sporting glory. The result is impressionistic, but also genuinely realist — as in, grounded in the reality of our world — in a way few video games can achieve. Playing it, you feel as if you’ve been transported to a different time and place.Image: Julián Cordero, Sebastian Valbuena/PanicThat’s not to say that Despelote stays in the same time and place, either. Like some of its snappy narrative indie forebears — particularly Blendo Games’ jump-cutting mini masterpiece, Thirty Flights of Loving — Despelote deploys cinematic editing and juxtaposition to great effect. (Cinema is in Cordero’s blood; his father Sebastián directed the 1999 crime film Ratas, Ratones, Rateros that was the first Ecuadorian movie to get recognition at international film festivals. His parents can be heard chatting about the state of Ecuadorian film in the game.) Occasionally, the game jumps forward in time to the experiences of a more rootless teenage Julián; later, Despelote smashes down the fourth wall to take a documentary look at the mechanics of its own making.So yes, among other things, Despelote is a meditation on the creative process, a remembered documentary on life in turn-of-the-millennium Ecuador, and a playable essay on the way sport connects to both individuals and societies. Above all that, though, it’s a game about being a kid, kicking a ball, and watching it sail into the future. It’s a marvel.See More:

Even if the United States were to impose a 25 per cent tariff on iPhones manufactured in India, the total production cost would still be much lower if compared with manufacturing the devices in the U.S, according to a report by Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI).This comes amid a statement by U.S. President Donald Trump, threatening to impose 25 per cent tariffs on iPhones if Apple decides to make it in India. However, the GTRI report showed that manufacturing in India remains cost-effective, despite such duties.The report breaks down the current value chain of a $1,000 (roughly Rs. 83,400) iPhone, which involves contributions from over a dozen countries. Apple retains the largest share of the value, about $450 (roughly Rs. 37,530) per device, through its brand, software, and design.It also added that the U.S. component makers, such as Qualcomm and Broadcom, add $80 (roughly Rs. 6,672), while Taiwan contributes $150 (roughly Rs. 12,510) through chip manufacturing. South Korea adds $90 (roughly Rs. 7,506) via OLED screens and memory chips, and Japan supplies components worth $85 (roughly Rs. 7,089), mainly through camera systems. Germany, Vietnam, and Malaysia account for another $45 (roughly Rs. 3,753) through smaller parts.GTRI stated that China and India, despite being major players of iPhone assembly, earn only around $30 (roughly Rs. 2,502) per device. This is less than 3 per cent of the total retail price of an iPhone.The report argues that manufacturing iPhones in India is still economically viable even if a 25 per cent tariff is applied.This is mainly because of the sharp difference in labour costs between India and the U.S. In India, assembly workers earn approximately $230 (roughly Rs. 19,182) per month, while in the U.S. states like California, labour costs could soar to around $2,900 (roughly Rs. 2,41,860) per month due to minimum wage laws, a 13-fold increase.As a result, assembling an iPhone in India costs about $30 (roughly Rs. 2,502), while the same process in the U.S. would cost around $390 (roughly Rs. 32,526). In addition to this Apple gets the benefit of production-linked incentive (PLI) on iPhone manufacturing in India from government.If Apple were to shift production to the U.S., its profit per iPhone could fall drastically from $450 (roughly Rs. 37,530) to just $60 (roughly Rs. 5,004), unless retail prices are significantly increased.The GTRI report highlighted how global value chains and labour cost differences make India a competitive option for manufacturing, even in the face of potential U.S. trade restrictions.(This story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

We should have known it was too good to last. After markets enjoyed a month of relative peace in Donald Trump’s trade war with the world—a stretch of time during which Trump paused his so-called “reciprocal” tariffs on most countries and then rolled back his massive 145% tariffs on China—the president reignited the conflict Friday morning with a couple of posts on TruthSocial. First, he directly threatened Apple with a company-specific 25% tariff on all iPhones if it shifts production to India from China, rather than to the U.S. Then, he attacked the European Union for being “very difficult to deal with,” and said he wanted to impose a 50% tariff on all U.S. imports from the EU on June 1. The threats—which he may not have the legal authority to follow through on—rattled markets severely at first, with S&P futures dropping more than 2%. Stocks recovered somewhat after Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent tried to cool investor anxieties in an appearance on Fox, and European officials said they were continuing to negotiate. But the turmoil engendered by Trump’s posts was a reminder of the fact that U.S. trade policy is now being made, in effect, by presidential whim, making the future profits of many American companies dependent on how Trump happens to feel on any given day. When the president first unveiled his plan to impose high tariffs on imports from most of the world’s countries—which he called “Liberation Day“—he claimed that the goal of his scheme was to bring about an “ECONOMIC REVOLUTION.” But that implied a level of planning and strategy that has been sorely lacking in the way Trump has handled tariffs since April 2. He jacked up tariffs (relying on an absurd formula), only to roll them back when markets cratered. He promised that trade deals galore were in the offing, only to then say he would raise tariffs unilaterally because the deals were taking too long to do. And he promised a 90-day pause on all the reciprocal tariffs, only to now say he’s going to tariff the EU less than 60 days into the pause. The most obvious consequence of Trump’s chaotic trade policy is that he has massively increased the amount of uncertainty American businesses (and, by extension, American consumers) will face going forward. It’s next to impossible for businesses that import goods (either for sale or as part of their supply chain) to make reasonable plans for the future, since there’s no way for them to know what Trump will require them to pay for imports down the road. Nor is there any guarantee that the tariff rates Trump comes up with will stay the same over time. As a result, companies don’t know whether they now should be massively stocking up on imports in anticipation of higher tariffs (a move that would increase their inventory costs)—or if they should be buying like normal in anticipation that deals will get made. They have to decide, but that decision can’t be built on much more than guesswork.  The only thing companies do know, in fact, is that regardless of whatever else Trump decides, they’re going to have to pay a 10% universal tariff on everything they import (along with permanently higher tariffs on imports from certain countries, like China). This universal 10% tariff—which Trump imposed on Liberation Day and kept in place even as he rolled his other tariffs back—is not a bargaining tool or a threat: It’s here to stay for as long as Trump remains president. So companies are facing permanently higher import costs on top of major uncertainty. The fact that, for all his changes of mind, Trump has stayed committed to the 10% universal tariff isn’t surprising. In the first place, it was one of his oft-repeated campaign promises—he said it would be a “ring” around the U.S. economy. And it fits well with Trump’s basic view of trade, which is that when we buy stuff made abroad, we’re “losing money,” so the government should charge what he thinks of as effectively a cover charge to sell to U.S. customers. (That cover charge, of course, is paid by the U.S. businesses that are importing the goods, but Trump prefers to ignore that fact.) Trump may talk about the importance of opening foreign markets (as he did in his post about the EU Friday morning), but he’s always been more interested in imposing tariffs on imports than he has been in encouraging exports. The 10% tariff is not as dramatic as the China tariffs or the threats against the EU and Apple, which helps explain why investors have, for the most part, shrugged off its potential impact. But American businesses and consumers won’t be so lucky. That’s why Walmart said on an earnings call last week that it would be hiking prices as soon as the end of the month because of tariff costs. As the company’s CFO explained in an interview with CNBC: “We’re wired for everyday low prices, but the magnitude of these increases is more than any retailer can absorb. And so I’m concerned that consumer is going to start seeing higher prices.” This of course infuriated Trump, who wrote on TruthSocial that Walmart should “eat the tariffs.” But the company was simply acknowledging economic reality: Its net profit margin last year was around 2.6%, and it imports almost $50 billion a year in goods from China alone, plus tens of billions of dollars of goods from other countries. It does not have the leeway to absorb a sizable increase in the price of those goods without passing at least some of the cost along. And the same is true of many other retailers—indeed, it’s even more true of small- to medium-size retailers. In response to Trump’s criticism, Walmart said: “We’ll keep prices as low as we can for as long as we can, given the reality of small retail margins.” But the message was ultimately the same: Prices will have to rise.  Those price increases are not likely to be massive. But that doesn’t mean they won’t matter. What Trump’s policy means is that we are now looking at a global economy in which tariffs are going to be higher across the board, and in which he is imposing, at a minimum, a new 10% tax on trade. When you tax something, you get less of it—meaning that in addition to higher retail prices, we’re likely to have less trade and lower retail sales. This will be even more true if Trump follows through on his latest threats. But even if he backs down from them, the Yale Budget Lab estimates that a universal 10% tariff, along with 60% tariffs on Chinese imports (which would be a little higher than they are now), would cost consumers, on average, a minimum of $1,900 a year in higher prices, and could shrink U.S. GDP by somewhere between 0.5% and 1.4%. We may yet dodge the disaster that the U.S. is headed for if Trump ends up returning to his original Liberation Day tariffs, and if we have a real trade war with the EU and China. But even if we do, the tariffs we’ll still be stuck with are going to be a permanent, steady drag on the economy—a drag that may not be big enough to make headlines but that nonetheless will be impossible to avoid.  

Psych out College Board keeps apologizing for screwing up digital SAT and AP tests AP Psych is the latest casualty of digital snafus. Nate Anderson – May 23, 2025 3:54 pm | 10 Credit: Getty Images Credit: Getty Images Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only   Learn more Don't worry about the "mission-driven not-for-profit" College Board—it's drowning in cash. The US group, which administers the SAT and AP tests to college-bound students, paid its CEO $2.38 million in total compensation in 2023 (the most recent year data is available). The senior VP in charge of AP programs made $694,662 in total compensation, while the senior VP for Technology Strategy made $765,267 in total compensation. Given such eye-popping numbers, one would have expected the College Board's transition to digital exams to go smoothly, but it continues to have issues. Just last week, the group's AP Psychology exam was disrupted nationally when the required "Bluebook" testing app couldn't be accessed by many students. Because the College Board shifted to digital-only exams for 28 of its 36 AP courses beginning this year, no paper-based backup options were available. The only "solution" was to wait quietly in a freezing gymnasium, surrounded by a hundred other stressed-out students, to see if College Board could get its digital act together. I speak, as you may have gathered, from family experience; one of my kids got to experience the incident first-hand. I was first clued into the problem by an e-mail from my school, which announced "a nationwide Bluebook outage (the testing application used for all digital AP exams)" for all AP Psych testers. Within an hour, many students were finally able to log in and begin the test, but other students had scheduling conflicts and were therefore "dismissed from the testing room" and given slots during the "late test day" or "during the exception testing window." On Reddit, the r/APStudents board melted down in predictable fashion. One post asked the question on everyone's mind: HOW DO U NOT PREPARE THE SERVERS FOR THE EXAM WHEN U KNOW WE'RE TAKING THE EXAM HELLO?????? BE SO FR i was locked in and studied like hell for this ap psych exam ts pmo like what the actual f---nugget??? Now, I'm old enough not to know what "BE SO FR," "TS," or "PMO" mean, but the term "f---nugget" comes through loud and clear, and I plan to add it to my vocabulary. Other students, whose schools canceled the exam before access was restored, raged against having to gear up for the test again in the future. "I CANT BELIEVE THEY DELAYED IT," wrote one. "I STUDIED FOR THR PAST WEEK EIGHT HOURS EVERYDAY AND RUINED MY SOCIAL LIFE FOR THIS. WHAT THE FREAK." Of course, there's always a silver lining to a cloudy day, and some less-prepared students—who had not apparently ruined their social lives for the past week—celebrated the delay. "i studied for like 12 hrs the day before no f---ing joke," wrote one, "and ngl [not gonna lie] idek [i don't even know] what psychoanal or biosycosocial model is or anything so its a win for me." College Board issued a statement on the day of the AP Psych exam, copping to "an issue that prevented [students] from logging into the College Board’s Bluebook testing application and beginning their exams at the assigned local start time." Stressing that "most students have had a successful testing experience, with more than 5 million exams being successfully submitted thus far," College Board nonetheless did "regret that their testing period was disrupted." It's not the first such disruption, though. Deeply and sincerely apologize This year's move to all-digital AP testing for most subjects is the latest move in a process that began several years back, and it still has numerous wrinkles. Not all of these are the fault of the College Board, either, but asking millions of students and educators to use a complex set of tools—including Chromebooks, school Wi-Fi networks, the Internet, and the College Board's own app infrastructure—imposes a new and more complex set of technical challenges than the older paper exams. For instance, this year's AP Stats exam was also disrupted at my school district, though this appears to have been an issue related to local Wi-Fi access. And when my eldest took the (also digital, also Bluebook) SAT exam at another school district last year, that district, too, had its own tech issues as students from other districts had trouble getting onto the school network. College Board also continues to have problems delivering digital testing at scale in a high-pressure environment. During the SAT exam sessions on March 8–9, 2025, more than 250,000 students sat for the test—and some found that their tests were automatically submitted before the testing time ended. College Board blamed the problem on "an incorrectly configured security setting on Bluebook." The problem affected nearly 10,000 students, and several thousand more "may have lost some testing time if they were asked by their room monitor to reboot their devices during the test to fix and prevent the auto-submit error." College Board did "deeply and sincerely apologize to the students who were not able to complete their tests, or had their test time interrupted, for the difficulty and frustration this has caused them and their families." It offered refunds, plus a free future SAT testing voucher. Switching to digital has many benefits, including higher security and easier grading, but organizations routinely appear to underestimate how difficult it is to run complex digital infrastructure at scale, especially under time pressures. The fact that College Board has had significant errors this year alone in both of its flagship testing regimes is not the sort of thing students want to hear. Nor do parents, for that matter, who can easily rack up $1,000-plus College Board fees per student (8–10 AP courses across their high school years at $99 per test, plus two SAT exams at $68 apiece). And the irritation only grows when the money goes to massive executive salaries while the core exams continue to have problems. Nate Anderson Deputy Editor Nate Anderson Deputy Editor Nate is the deputy editor at Ars Technica. His most recent book is In Emergency, Break Glass: What Nietzsche Can Teach Us About Joyful Living in a Tech-Saturated World, which is much funnier than it sounds. 10 Comments

Editor's take: Broadcom aims to convert every valuable customer into a recurring online subscriber. The company has achieved notable financial success with this approach. However, regulators may soon scrutinize its business practices, raising the possibility of costly antitrust fines that could impact its future growth. The European Cloud Competition Observatory (ECCO) is a monitoring group founded by CISPE, a non-profit trade association of European cloud providers. Created as part of CISPE's antitrust settlement with Microsoft, ECCO now has its sights set on Broadcom and its conduct following the acquisition of VMware and its entry into the cloud and virtualization market. The observatory recently published a new report following an earlier study of Broadcom's abrupt licensing changes. The findings confirmed the ECCO's previous claims: Broadcom continues to impose harsh, unfair contract terms on European infrastructure providers. Many CISPE members reluctantly accepted the terms, forced by the lack of viable alternatives to VMware. The situation has worsened as Broadcom increasingly uses litigation to pressure its partners and customers into signing new agreements. Recently leaked memos reveal the company is sending cease-and-desist letters to VMware perpetual license holders. These letters reportedly demand payment for continued support or face legal consequences. Representatives from CISPE held one meeting with Broadcom, but ECCO reports it yielded no progress. The organization highlights a recent formal complaint submitted by VOICE, a German IT association, to the European Commission. VOICE called for an antitrust investigation and more decisive action against Broadcom's harmful practices, with ECCO lending its support. The European watchdog group claims Broadcom has done nothing to address complaints from European cloud providers. // Related Stories "Unlike Microsoft, Broadcom shows no interest in finding solutions or collaborating with European cloud infrastructure providers," CISPE secretary Francisco Mingorance said. The company can boast about its new contracts and financial results all it wants, but these punitive conditions will ultimately threaten the viability of the locked-in VMware ecosystem. The ECCO welcomed Brussels authorities' formal antitrust investigation and urged Broadcom to take immediate corrective steps. These include restoring fair business practices, introducing transparent pricing, reopening access to partner programs, and protecting customer privacy. While Broadcom is unlikely to comply, a spokesperson said the company seeks a constructive dialogue with CISPE to support European competitiveness.

President Trump has revealed that his proposed 25% tariffs on all smartphones coming into the U.S. will take effect in June 2025, well before a single iPhone 17 will ship.President Trump says a 25% smartphone tariff will come into effect by the end of June 2025.Earlier on Friday, Trump announced that there will be a penalty if Apple does not move manufacturing to the United States. Now, his latest statements serve to clarify that other smartphone manufacturers will be affected, and the President revealed exactly when the new tariffs will be imposed.According to President Trump, the 25% smartphone will impact not only Apple, but every other manufacturer that imports to the US, in the interest of fairness. The tariffs are scheduled to take effect by the end of June, said Trump. Continue Reading on AppleInsider | Discuss on our Forums

UPDATE: When questioned today whether he has the power to tariff only one company, Trump replied that this edict applies to any smartphone maker. "It would be more. It would be also Samsung and anybody that makes that product; otherwise, it wouldn't be fair," he said.Trump says he's setting an end-of-June deadline, but it's unclear if that deadline is for a commitment from these companies to build smartphone factories in the US or actually seeing phones roll off production lines. According to analyst Ming-Chi Kuo, "Moving all iPhone assembly for US models back to the US before Trump’s term ends is unrealistic." "I had an understanding with Tim that he wouldn't be doing this," Trump said of Apple's plan to build iPhones in India versus China. When asked why he thinks Apple can build a phone in the US without raising prices, Trump argued that "a lot of [the production] is computerized now. These plants are amazing, if you look at them," adding, "If they're going to sell it in America, I want it to be built in the United States. They're able to do that."Kuo says, "Apple’s top priority in negotiations with Trump should be finding ways to avoid, delay, or prevent higher iPhone tariffs. For example, Apple could adjust its DEI policies to secure Trump’s temporary commitment to hold off on targeting them.Original Story:President Trump kicked off Memorial Day weekend by threatening to impose a 25% tariff on Apple unless it produces its iPhones in the US. "I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhone’s [sic] that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else," Trump posted on Truth Social. "If that is not the case, a Tariff of at least 25% must be paid by Apple to the US. Thank [you] for your attention to this matter!"Separately, Trump posted that the European Union "has been very difficult to deal with," and said he is "recommending a straight 50% Tariff on the European Union," starting June 1.'India Can Take Care of Themselves'Apple has long produced most of its iPhones in China via manufacturing partners like Foxconn, though it has taken steps to diversify. Amid the threat of Trump's tariffs, the highest of which were imposed on China, Apple moved much of its US-based iPhone production to India. "For the June quarter, we do expect the majority of iPhones sold in the US will have India as their country of origin," Cook said in an April earnings call. Most iPads, Macs, and Apple Watch devices sold in the US will come from Vietnam. “China would continue to be the country of origin for the vast majority of total product sales outside the US,” Cook added. That didn't sit well with Trump, who said last week that he called Cook to complain about Apple moving production to India. "We put up with all the plants you built in China for years," he told reporters during a recent trip to the Middle East. "We are not interested in you building in India. India can take care of themselves. They are doing very well. We want you to build [in the US]."Apple didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. Recommended by Our EditorsSmartphones are currently exempt from Trump's tariffs, but that could change soon.Is $500 Billion Not Enough?In February, Apple said it would invest more than $500 billion in the US over the next four years. The money will be used to build a server manufacturing facility in Houston, produce silicon chips in Arizona, establish a manufacturing academy in Detroit, and create 20,000 new jobs. But moving iPhone production to the US is probably an unrealistic and expensive goal. Analyst Ming-Chi Kuo suggests that "in terms of profitability, it's way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to US." For now, a lot of Apple-based production in the US is being done via partnerships."We're excited about bringing more production to the US," Cook said during that earnings call. "As you know, we've been very key in the TSMC project in Arizona and are the largest and first customer getting product out of that.""During calendar year 2025, we expect to source more than 19 billion chips from a dozen states, including tens of millions of advanced chips being made in Arizona this year," Cook added. "We also source glass used in iPhone from an American company. All told, we have more than 9,000 suppliers in the US across all 50 states."TSMC, however, is warning that tariffs could hamper its expansion plans in Arizona. "Diminished demand could create uncertainty around the timeline for the construction and operation of our Arizona fabs. It could also undermine TSMC’s financial capacity to timely execute its ambitious Arizona project,” the company said in a letter to the US Commerce Department, which sought public comment on the US potentially tariffing foreign-made semiconductors to help encourage domestic chip manufacturing. A year ago, TSMC said it would receive $11.6 billion in US government funding via the 2022 CHIPS and Science Act signed by President Biden, with $6.6 billion of that as grants and the remaining $5 billion as loans.A $2,300 iPhone? Trump's post suggests that iPhones will be subject to tariffs regardless of their country of origin, which could be costly for those looking to upgrade to the iPhone 17 later this year. Rumors already indicate Apple is considering a price increase for its next-gen phones, which it is trying not to tie publicly to tariffs. In April, an analyst from Rosenblatt Securities tells Reuters that tariffs could increase the cost of producing iPhones by up to 43%, putting the high-end iPhone at $2,300 if Apple passes all the extra costs on to consumers.The White House is currently trying to broker individual trade deals with countries around the globe. Thus far, it's announced one with the UK and paused tariffs on China while it negotiates. In the EU, however, Trump says, "Our discussions with them are going nowhere!"Trump claims the US has a trade deficit of more than $250 million with the EU, "which is totally unacceptable," he said. The only way for the EU to avoid US tariffs is to produce its products in the US.

Iran and the United States prepared for a fifth round of negotiations over Tehran’s rapidly advancing nuclear program Friday in Rome, with enrichment emerging as the key issue.U.S. officials up to President Donald Trump insist Iran cannot continue to enrich uranium at all in any deal that could see sanctions lifted on Tehran’s struggling economy. Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi early Friday insisted online that no enrichment would mean “we do NOT have a deal.” “Figuring out the path to a deal is not rocket science,” Araghchi wrote on the social platform X. “Time to decide.”The U.S. will be again represented in the talks by Mideast envoy Steve Witkoff and Michael Anton, the State Department’s policy planning director. Oman’s Foreign Minister Badr al-Busaidi is mediating the negotiations as the sultanate on the Arabian Peninsula has been a trusted interlocutor by both Tehran and Washington in the talks.A car carrying Araghchi arrived at the Omani Embassy in Rome’s Camilluccia neighborhood around 12:30 p.m. Witkoff had yet to be seen, but the embassy previously served as the site of another round of talks. Enrichment remains key in negotiations The talks seek to limit Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for the lifting of some of the crushing economic sanctions the U.S. has imposed on the Islamic Republic, closing in on half a century of enmity.Trump has repeatedly threatened to unleash airstrikes targeting Iran’s program if a deal isn’t reached. Iranian officials increasingly warn they could pursue a nuclear weapon with their stockpile of uranium enriched to near weapons-grade levels.“Iran almost certainly is not producing nuclear weapons, but Iran has undertaken activities in recent years that better position it to produce them, if it chooses to do so,” a new report from the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency said. “These actions reduce the time required to produce sufficient weapons-grade uranium for a first nuclear device to probably less than one week.”However, it likely still would take Iran months to make a working bomb, experts say.Enrichment remains the key point of contention. Witkoff at one point suggested Iran could enrich uranium at 3.67%, then later began saying all Iranian enrichment must stop. That position on the American side has hardened over time.Asked about the negotiations, State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said “we believe that we are going to succeed” in the talks and on Washington’s push for no enrichment.“The Iranians are at that table, so they also understand what our position is, and they continue to go,” Bruce said Thursday.One idea floated so far that might allow Iran to stop enrichment in the Islamic Republic but maintain a supply of uranium could be a consortium in the Mideast backed by regional countries and the U.S. There also are multiple countries and the International Atomic Energy Agency offering low-enriched uranium that can be used for peaceful purposes by countries.However, Iran’s Foreign Ministry has maintained enrichment must continue within the country’s borders and a similar fuel-swap proposal failed to gain traction in negotiations in 2010.Meanwhile, Israel has threatened to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities on their own if it feels threatened, further complicating tensions in the Mideast already spiked by the Israel-Hamas war in the Gaza Strip.Araghchi warned Thursday that Iran would take “special measures” to defend its nuclear facilities if Israel continues to threaten them, while also warning the U.S. it would view it as being complicit in any Israeli attack. Authorities allowed a group of Iranian students to form a human chain Thursday at its underground enrichment site at Fordo, an area with incredibly tight security built into a mountain to defend against possible airstrikes. Talks come as U.S. pressure on Iran increases Yet despite the tough talk from Iran, the Islamic Republic needs a deal. Its internal politics are inflamed over the mandatory hijab, or headscarf, with women still ignoring the law on the streets of Tehran. Rumors also persist over the government potentially increasing the cost of subsidized gasoline in the country, which has sparked nationwide protests in the past.Iran’s rial currency plunged to over one million to a U.S. dollar in April. The currency has improved with the talks, however, something Tehran hopes will continue as a further collapse in the rial could spark further economic unrest.Meanwhile, its self-described “Axis of Resistance” sits in tatters after Iran’s regional allies in the region have faced repeated attacks by Israel during its war against Hamas in the Gaza Strip. The collapse of Syrian President Bashar Assad’s government during a rebel advance in December also stripped Iran of a key ally.The Trump administration also has continued to levy new sanctions on Iran, including this week, which saw the U.S. specifically target any sale of sodium perchlorate to the Islamic Republic. Iran reportedly received that chemical in shipments from China at its Shahid Rajaei port near Bandar Abbas. A major, unexplained explosion there killed dozens and wounded over 1,000 others in April during one round of the talks. Gambrell reported from Dubai, United Arab Emirates. Associated Press writer Nasser Karimi in Tehran, Iran, contributed to this report. —Jon Gambrell and Giada Zampano, Associated Press

President Donald Trump threatened Apple with a tariff of at least 25% if it does not manufacture its iPhones in the US, ramping up pressure on the tech giant to secure more domestic production.“I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhone's that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump said in a post on Truth Social on Friday. “If that is not the case, a Tariff of at least 25 percent must be paid by Apple to the US”US equity futures dropped to session lows on Trump's announcement and his threat to impose a 50 percent tariff on goods from the European Union starting on June 1. Nasdaq 100 contracts led the decline, while Apple shares were down as much as four percent in pre-market trading.The president's demands for US-based manufacturing pose a stark challenge to the company, whose supply chains for its popular phones have been concentrated in China for years. The US lacks the rich ecosystem of Apple suppliers, manufacturing and engineering know-how that — for now — can only be found in Asia.Apple, which has become a frequent Trump target, didn't immediately respond to a request for comment on the president's threat. Earlier this month, the company warned that it would face $900 million (roughly Rs. 7,674 crore) in higher costs from tariffs in the current quarter. Last week, during his trip to the Middle East, Trump said he had asked Apple Chief Executive Officer Tim Cook to stop building plants in India to make devices for the US, pushing the iPhone maker to add domestic production as it pivots away from China.“I had a little problem with Tim Cook yesterday,” Trump said of his conversation. “He is building all over India. I don't want you building in India.”  Apple said earlier this year that it plans to spend $500 billion (roughly Rs. 42,63,505 crore) in the US over the next four years, which will include work on a new server manufacturing facility in Houston, a supplier academy in Michigan and additional spending with its existing suppliers in the country.But that stops short of the full shift to US-based production envisioned by Trump. Moving manufacturing of its signature iPhone and other devices to the US would be an enormous undertaking for the Cupertino, California-based company. Apple's biggest FATP facilities — short for final assembly, test and pack-out — are massive and incomprehensible to many people outside of Asia. They are almost towns themselves, with several hundred thousand people, schools, gyms, medical facilities and dormitories. One major iPhone factory, a complex in Zhengzhou, has even been dubbed iPhone City.Development of new iPhones and other products still starts at Apple's labs in Silicon Valley. But working with Asia-based component suppliers and other partners begins long before a product actually hits the market. Apple engineers and operations experts spend months or years working closely with Foxconn Technology Group, Pegatron Corp. and other suppliers to customise assembly of new devices.One popular counterpoint is that Apple should use its cash hoard to buy thousands of acres in the US and create a fully robotic and automated iPhone manufacturing facility. That would remove any human-related challenges from the manufacturing process, but supply chain experts say that is not realistic due to frequently changing demands. Also, much of the manufacturing equipment is made in China. Escalating pressure on Apple in recent weeks marks a change from the president's first term, when Cook had leveraged a personal relationship with Trump to win tariff carveouts for Apple products. For investors on Wall Street, it signals the uncertainty surrounding the impact of Trump's trade policy on one of the world's most valuable companies. “It's a red flag for me that Trump continues to single out Apple and seems to have something against them,” said Randy Hare, director of equity research at Huntington National Bank. “It doesn't mean that Trump is going to do anything more, but you can't predict what's going to happen, and that makes me cautious.”Cook was one of several Big Tech executives and billionaires who attempted to court Trump following his comeback election victory in November. The Apple CEO had traveled to Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida for a series of private meetings and dinners. He also sat behind the president at the inauguration in January along with Elon Musk, Google's Sundar Pichai, Meta Platforms' Mark Zuckerberg and Amazon.com Founder Jeff Bezos.© Thomson Reuters 2025(This story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.) For the latest tech news and reviews, follow Gadgets 360 on X, Facebook, WhatsApp, Threads and Google News. For the latest videos on gadgets and tech, subscribe to our YouTube channel. If you want to know everything about top influencers, follow our in-house Who'sThat360 on Instagram and YouTube. Further reading: Apple, iPhones, US, Donald Trump, Tariff Related Stories