SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The New York Times (may be pay-walled) reports that Terry Gou, the CEO of Foxconn has confirmed rumours aired in December to the effect that the company is considering building an additional factory in the United States. Yahoo Finance UK says that the factory, if built, "could create about 30,000-50,000 jobs." The South China Morning Post reports that the facility, expected to cost more than $7 billion, would make dot-matrix displays (such as used in television sets and mobile phones) under the Sharp name. Mr. Gou remarked that:
While it is difficult to have a clear analysis of the economic outlook for this year, due to looming uncertainties, three factors can be seen as clues. First, the rise of protectionism is inevitable. Secondly, the trend of politics serving the economy is clearly defined, and thirdly, the proportion of real economy is getting increasingly bigger.
Speaking in November, Gou had called on the incoming U.S. leaders to refrain from protectionist policies, The China Post had reported.
Additional coverage:
Related:
Foxconn Plans to Replace Nearly All Human Workers With Robots in Some Factories
Foxconn Acquires Sharp at a Lower Price Than Previously Agreed
Sharp Accepts $6.25 Billion Takeover Bid from Foxconn, but Foxconn is Wary of Debt
Softbank to Invest $50 Billion in the US
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 25 2017, @08:13AM
In the US sales tax is not collected on components that are destined for resale. So all the raw materialss and parts that go in one end of the factory and come out the other as an assembled vehicle are untaxed. But in Europe VAT would still be collected on them. So cost of manufacturing in europe is higher.
(Score: 1) by shrewdsheep on Wednesday January 25 2017, @10:16AM
This statement is somewhat misleading. Every resale indeed contains VAT but the VAT due to the tax collector is the difference of the VAT for the sale minus the VAT paid for parts/services upstream (bought to make the product/service sold). This way the VAT collected in the end exactly equals the VAT of the final product (what seems to be paid by the vendor of a consumer product in the US) but it is distributed over the production chain proportionally to the earnings of every step. This strikes me both as a more logical and fair solution as compared to what is seemingly implemented in the US.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday January 25 2017, @03:49PM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves