(01-17-2018 10:09 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Wow.... does this count as a sign that the tax bill was one huge mfing mistake?

Apple brings back almost all its 250 billion clams stuck overseas

Apple announces 350 billion in investment and 20k jobs in 5 years

Quote: After the repatriation tax payment, the company will have $207 billion left over from the move it can use for investments, acquisitions, stock buybacks or larger dividends. Apple said it plans more than $30 billion in capital expenditures in the U.S. during the next five years.

Apple had $252.3 billion in overseas cash as of the end of September quarter, according to SEC filings, so that means the company is paying tax on nearly all of that foreign cash.

Quote:Apple announces plans to repatriate billions in overseas cash, says it will contribute $350 billion to the US economy over the next 5 years

This is an absolute disastrous outcome for US workers......

Somebody tell Pelosi and Schumer.

Hah! As if they would listen.

Trump admin imposing 30% tarrif on imported solar cells (decreases a bit in years to come).

Business friendly? It will protect companies who have to compete with Chinese companies, but will likely reduce installation which will decrease revenues. Thoughts?

(01-23-2018 08:03 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Trump admin imposing 30% tarrif on imported solar cells (decreases a bit in years to come).

Business friendly? It will protect companies who have to compete with Chinese companies, but will likely reduce installation which will decrease revenues. Thoughts?

The effect on business will be inconsequential. It's a symbolic gesture.

(01-23-2018 08:03 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Trump admin imposing 30% tarrif on imported solar cells (decreases a bit in years to come).

Business friendly? It will protect companies who have to compete with Chinese companies, but will likely reduce installation which will decrease revenues. Thoughts?

My thought is that I guess you arent aware of the massive dumping issue with regards to solar panels and the Chinese. I have no problems with tariffs when the tariffed country engages in the actions that the Chinese government has performed and still performs in this area.

(01-23-2018 09:11 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 08:03 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Trump admin imposing 30% tarrif on imported solar cells (decreases a bit in years to come).

Business friendly? It will protect companies who have to compete with Chinese companies, but will likely reduce installation which will decrease revenues. Thoughts?

My thought is that I guess you arent aware of the massive dumping issue with regards to solar panels and the Chinese. I have no problems with tariffs when the tariffed country engages in the actions that the Chinese government has performed and still performs in this area.

I’m aware of it - i was trying to gauge y’all’s opinions because it is a complicated issue that fit within the current discussion here of being business friendly. It has the potential to impact businesses here in positive and negative ways.

What did I state that made you think I was unaware of those massive subsidies provided by China to its solar production companies?

(01-23-2018 08:29 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 08:03 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Trump admin imposing 30% tarrif on imported solar cells (decreases a bit in years to come).

Business friendly? It will protect companies who have to compete with Chinese companies, but will likely reduce installation which will decrease revenues. Thoughts?

The effect on business will be inconsequential. It's a symbolic gesture.

What makes you say that? 30% increase on the primary component of an alternative energy production method hardly seems inconsequential. I’m not super familiar with solar panel costs, but I imagine the cost differential between US and china panels is not inconsiquential and this may push companies to purchase American-made panels.

(01-23-2018 10:12 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 08:29 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 08:03 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Trump admin imposing 30% tarrif on imported solar cells (decreases a bit in years to come).

Business friendly? It will protect companies who have to compete with Chinese companies, but will likely reduce installation which will decrease revenues. Thoughts?

The effect on business will be inconsequential. It's a symbolic gesture.

What makes you say that? 30% increase on the primary component of an alternative energy production method hardly seems inconsequential. I’m not super familiar with solar panel costs, but I imagine the cost differential between US and china panels is not inconsiquential and this may push companies to purchase American-made panels.

I was referring to its overall impact on the economy.

(01-23-2018 10:15 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 10:12 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 08:29 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 08:03 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Trump admin imposing 30% tarrif on imported solar cells (decreases a bit in years to come).

Business friendly? It will protect companies who have to compete with Chinese companies, but will likely reduce installation which will decrease revenues. Thoughts?

The effect on business will be inconsequential. It's a symbolic gesture.

What makes you say that? 30% increase on the primary component of an alternative energy production method hardly seems inconsequential. I’m not super familiar with solar panel costs, but I imagine the cost differential between US and china panels is not inconsiquential and this may push companies to purchase American-made panels.

I was referring to its overall impact on the economy.

So because a single piece of legislation likely won’t have a quantifiable effect on the US economy we shouldn’t be care about it? Not sure of your point - can you explain?

(01-23-2018 10:22 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 10:15 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 10:12 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 08:29 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 08:03 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Trump admin imposing 30% tarrif on imported solar cells (decreases a bit in years to come).

Business friendly? It will protect companies who have to compete with Chinese companies, but will likely reduce installation which will decrease revenues. Thoughts?

The effect on business will be inconsequential. It's a symbolic gesture.

What makes you say that? 30% increase on the primary component of an alternative energy production method hardly seems inconsequential. I’m not super familiar with solar panel costs, but I imagine the cost differential between US and china panels is not inconsiquential and this may push companies to purchase American-made panels.

I was referring to its overall impact on the economy.

So because a single piece of legislation likely won’t have a quantifiable effect on the US economy we shouldn’t be care about it? Not sure of your point - can you explain?

I was only answering your question about it being business-friendly. It will have negligible impact on business, except perhaps specifically for U.S. solar-panel manufacturers. I had no point beyond that.

(01-23-2018 10:25 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 10:22 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 10:15 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 10:12 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 08:29 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  The effect on business will be inconsequential. It's a symbolic gesture.

What makes you say that? 30% increase on the primary component of an alternative energy production method hardly seems inconsequential. I’m not super familiar with solar panel costs, but I imagine the cost differential between US and china panels is not inconsiquential and this may push companies to purchase American-made panels.

I was referring to its overall impact on the economy.

So because a single piece of legislation likely won’t have a quantifiable effect on the US economy we shouldn’t be care about it? Not sure of your point - can you explain?

I was only answering your question about it being business-friendly. It will have negligible impact on business, except perhaps specifically for U.S. solar-panel manufacturers. I had no point beyond that.

That doesn’t really answer the business friendly question - unless being business friendly is only a macro-scale issue.

Also, this will affect solar panel installers, not just manufacturers, and could conceivably lead to reciprocation by the Chinese. Which, at that point, could start having macro effects. It isn’t as simple an answer - that’s why I posed the question.

(01-23-2018 10:10 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 09:11 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 08:03 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Trump admin imposing 30% tarrif on imported solar cells (decreases a bit in years to come).

Business friendly? It will protect companies who have to compete with Chinese companies, but will likely reduce installation which will decrease revenues. Thoughts?

My thought is that I guess you arent aware of the massive dumping issue with regards to solar panels and the Chinese. I have no problems with tariffs when the tariffed country engages in the actions that the Chinese government has performed and still performs in this area.

I’m aware of it - i was trying to gauge y’all’s opinions because it is a complicated issue that fit within the current discussion here of being business friendly. It has the potential to impact businesses here in positive and negative ways.

What did I state that made you think I was unaware of those massive subsidies provided by China to its solar production companies?

Trying to shoehorn a move that has its underpinnings as protecting US manufacturers from massive dumping as not 'business friendly' is one clue that you may not be aware of the issue. My apologies for making that assumption.

The economics of 30 per cent on a panel to a US installation will be a minimal impact given the current ratio of materials/balance of system/installation cost and the current state of grid parity cost. Especially when the local area has feed in tariffs and/or cost offsets that promote solar.

And, this doesnt mean a 30 per cent price rise overall in the panels. It means about a 4-6 percent since those Chinese panels will be replaced with Malaysian, Singaporean, or Taiwanese panels at that 4-6 per cent more. The overall impact to a US installation from soup to nuts will come to about a 1.5 per cent rise in cost. If your installation is dependent on a 1.5 per cent issue on an ROI analysis, unless you are a 'oil is forbidden stuff' type person you shouldnt be installing, period.

It really is a non-impact move to US installers.

(01-23-2018 10:54 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 10:25 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 10:22 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 10:15 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 10:12 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  What makes you say that? 30% increase on the primary component of an alternative energy production method hardly seems inconsequential. I’m not super familiar with solar panel costs, but I imagine the cost differential between US and china panels is not inconsiquential and this may push companies to purchase American-made panels.

I was referring to its overall impact on the economy.

So because a single piece of legislation likely won’t have a quantifiable effect on the US economy we shouldn’t be care about it? Not sure of your point - can you explain?

I was only answering your question about it being business-friendly. It will have negligible impact on business, except perhaps specifically for U.S. solar-panel manufacturers. I had no point beyond that.

That doesn’t really answer the business friendly question - unless being business friendly is only a macro-scale issue.

Also, this will affect solar panel installers, not just manufacturers, and could conceivably lead to reciprocation by the Chinese. Which, at that point, could start having macro effects. It isn’t as simple an answer - that’s why I posed the question.

Chinese will be hurt more in trade war. Their markets arent really known as being open in a macro-scale in the current environment. And, in a trade war, the 'loser' is more often the one with the larger balance of payments --- Chinese are well aware who is ahead in that score.

(01-23-2018 10:54 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 10:25 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 10:22 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 10:15 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 10:12 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  What makes you say that? 30% increase on the primary component of an alternative energy production method hardly seems inconsequential. I’m not super familiar with solar panel costs, but I imagine the cost differential between US and china panels is not inconsiquential and this may push companies to purchase American-made panels.

I was referring to its overall impact on the economy.

So because a single piece of legislation likely won’t have a quantifiable effect on the US economy we shouldn’t be care about it? Not sure of your point - can you explain?

I was only answering your question about it being business-friendly. It will have negligible impact on business, except perhaps specifically for U.S. solar-panel manufacturers. I had no point beyond that.

That doesn’t really answer the business friendly question - unless being business friendly is only a macro-scale issue.

Also, this will affect solar panel installers, not just manufacturers, and could conceivably lead to reciprocation by the Chinese. Which, at that point, could start having macro effects. It isn’t as simple an answer - that’s why I posed the question.

Solar panels won't get significantly more expensive, so installers won't be affected.

The Chinese won't escalate this. It is calculated to have little impact to either country's economy or solar panel businesses.

(01-23-2018 10:54 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 10:10 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 09:11 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 08:03 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Trump admin imposing 30% tarrif on imported solar cells (decreases a bit in years to come).

Business friendly? It will protect companies who have to compete with Chinese companies, but will likely reduce installation which will decrease revenues. Thoughts?

My thought is that I guess you arent aware of the massive dumping issue with regards to solar panels and the Chinese. I have no problems with tariffs when the tariffed country engages in the actions that the Chinese government has performed and still performs in this area.

I’m aware of it - i was trying to gauge y’all’s opinions because it is a complicated issue that fit within the current discussion here of being business friendly. It has the potential to impact businesses here in positive and negative ways.

What did I state that made you think I was unaware of those massive subsidies provided by China to its solar production companies?

Trying to shoehorn a move that has its underpinnings as protecting US manufacturers from massive dumping as not 'business friendly' is one clue that you may not be aware of the issue. My apologies for making that assumption.

The economics of 30 per cent on a panel to a US installation will be a minimal impact given the current ratio of materials/balance of system/installation cost and the current state of grid parity cost. Especially when the local area has feed in tariffs and/or cost offsets that promote solar.

And, this doesnt mean a 30 per cent price rise overall in the panels. It means about a 4-6 percent since those Chinese panels will be replaced with Malaysian, Singaporean, or Taiwanese panels at that 4-6 per cent more. The overall impact to a US installation from soup to nuts will come to about a 1.5 per cent rise in cost. If your installation is dependent on a 1.5 per cent issue on an ROI analysis, unless you are a 'oil is forbidden stuff' type person you shouldnt be installing, period.

It really is a non-impact move to US installers.

See - this is what I was trying to get at, an actual opinion on the matter, and I pretty much assumed you would have a well informed one. Thanks.

(01-23-2018 11:20 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 10:54 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 10:10 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 09:11 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 08:03 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Trump admin imposing 30% tarrif on imported solar cells (decreases a bit in years to come).

Business friendly? It will protect companies who have to compete with Chinese companies, but will likely reduce installation which will decrease revenues. Thoughts?

My thought is that I guess you arent aware of the massive dumping issue with regards to solar panels and the Chinese. I have no problems with tariffs when the tariffed country engages in the actions that the Chinese government has performed and still performs in this area.

I’m aware of it - i was trying to gauge y’all’s opinions because it is a complicated issue that fit within the current discussion here of being business friendly. It has the potential to impact businesses here in positive and negative ways.

What did I state that made you think I was unaware of those massive subsidies provided by China to its solar production companies?

Trying to shoehorn a move that has its underpinnings as protecting US manufacturers from massive dumping as not 'business friendly' is one clue that you may not be aware of the issue. My apologies for making that assumption.

The economics of 30 per cent on a panel to a US installation will be a minimal impact given the current ratio of materials/balance of system/installation cost and the current state of grid parity cost. Especially when the local area has feed in tariffs and/or cost offsets that promote solar.

And, this doesnt mean a 30 per cent price rise overall in the panels. It means about a 4-6 percent since those Chinese panels will be replaced with Malaysian, Singaporean, or Taiwanese panels at that 4-6 per cent more. The overall impact to a US installation from soup to nuts will come to about a 1.5 per cent rise in cost. If your installation is dependent on a 1.5 per cent issue on an ROI analysis, unless you are a 'oil is forbidden stuff' type person you shouldnt be installing, period.

It really is a non-impact move to US installers.

See - this is what I was trying to get at, an actual opinion on the matter, and I pretty much assumed you would have a well informed one. Thanks.

I take it we are in agreement that at *worst* it is a 'business-neutral' move as opposed to it being characterized as 'not business friendly"?

(01-23-2018 08:33 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 11:20 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 10:54 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 10:10 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 09:11 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  My thought is that I guess you arent aware of the massive dumping issue with regards to solar panels and the Chinese. I have no problems with tariffs when the tariffed country engages in the actions that the Chinese government has performed and still performs in this area.

I’m aware of it - i was trying to gauge y’all’s opinions because it is a complicated issue that fit within the current discussion here of being business friendly. It has the potential to impact businesses here in positive and negative ways.

What did I state that made you think I was unaware of those massive subsidies provided by China to its solar production companies?

Trying to shoehorn a move that has its underpinnings as protecting US manufacturers from massive dumping as not 'business friendly' is one clue that you may not be aware of the issue. My apologies for making that assumption.

The economics of 30 per cent on a panel to a US installation will be a minimal impact given the current ratio of materials/balance of system/installation cost and the current state of grid parity cost. Especially when the local area has feed in tariffs and/or cost offsets that promote solar.

And, this doesnt mean a 30 per cent price rise overall in the panels. It means about a 4-6 percent since those Chinese panels will be replaced with Malaysian, Singaporean, or Taiwanese panels at that 4-6 per cent more. The overall impact to a US installation from soup to nuts will come to about a 1.5 per cent rise in cost. If your installation is dependent on a 1.5 per cent issue on an ROI analysis, unless you are a 'oil is forbidden stuff' type person you shouldnt be installing, period.

It really is a non-impact move to US installers.

See - this is what I was trying to get at, an actual opinion on the matter, and I pretty much assumed you would have a well informed one. Thanks.

I take it we are in agreement that at *worst* it is a 'business-neutral' move as opposed to it being characterized as 'not business friendly"?

Pedantic semantic point: "business neutral" also "not business friendly" by definition? "Business neutral" also clarifies that it's not "business-unfriendly," of course, but "business neutral" and "not business friendly" are not mutually exclusive.

(01-23-2018 11:01 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 10:54 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 10:25 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 10:22 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-23-2018 10:15 AM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  I was referring to its overall impact on the economy.

So because a single piece of legislation likely won’t have a quantifiable effect on the US economy we shouldn’t be care about it? Not sure of your point - can you explain?

I was only answering your question about it being business-friendly. It will have negligible impact on business, except perhaps specifically for U.S. solar-panel manufacturers. I had no point beyond that.

That doesn’t really answer the business friendly question - unless being business friendly is only a macro-scale issue.
Also, this will affect solar panel installers, not just manufacturers, and could conceivably lead to reciprocation by the Chinese. Which, at that point, could start having macro effects. It isn’t as simple an answer - that’s why I posed the question.

Chinese will be hurt more in trade war. Their markets arent really known as being open in a macro-scale in the current environment. And, in a trade war, the 'loser' is more often the one with the larger balance of payments --- Chinese are well aware who is ahead in that score.

China will be hurt more than we will. They are in a much weaker position than many Americans fear. So is Russia, by the way. See recent Peter Zeihan videos.

But I still don’t want to see a trade war. What I would do is a VAT. A 20% VAT narrows a lot of price gaps and makes our exports more competitive.

There will be no trade war. Don't believe the hype.

How does a VAT counter dumping?

My econ-for-cheerleaders view re solar panels is the president just restricted supply in an industry that already has artificial demand. Business friendly in the crony-capitalist sense, I guess. But consumer unfriendly.

(01-24-2018 06:36 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  My econ-for-cheerleaders view re solar panels is the president just restricted supply in an industry that already has artificial demand. Business friendly in the crony-capitalist sense, I guess. But consumer unfriendly.

He hasn't restricted supply. It's a tariff, not a quota.