Resultados 1 a 6 de 6
  1. #1
    WHT-BR Top Member
    Data de Ingresso
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    17,966

    [EN] The massive subsidies/incentives behind Apple's massive manufacturing in China


    A hidden bounty of benefits for Foxconn’s plant in Zhengzhou, the world’s biggest iPhone factory, is central to the production of Apple’s most profitable product.

    How China Built ‘iPhone City’ With Billions in Perks for Apple’s Partner

    DAVID BARBOZA
    DEC. 29, 2016

    ZHENGZHOU, China — A vast, boxy customs center acts as a busy island of commerce deep in central China.

    Government officers, in sharply pressed uniforms, race around a maze of wooden pallets piled high with boxes — counting, weighing, scanning and approving shipments. Unmarked trucks stretch for more than a mile awaiting the next load headed for Beijing, New York, London and dozens of other destinations.

    The state-of-the-art facility was built several years ago to serve a single global exporter: Apple, now the world’s most valuable company and one of China’s largest retailers.

    The well-choreographed customs routine is part of a hidden bounty of perks, tax breaks and subsidies in China that supports the world’s biggest iPhone factory, according to confidential government records reviewed by The New York Times, as well as more than 100 interviews with factory workers, logistics handlers, truck drivers, tax specialists and current and former Apple executives. The package of sweeteners and incentives, worth billions of dollars, is central to the production of the iPhone, Apple’s best-selling and most profitable product.

    It all centers on Zhengzhou, a city of six million people in an impoverished region of China. Running at full tilt, the factory here, owned and operated by Apple’s manufacturing partner Foxconn, can produce 500,000 iPhones a day. Locals now refer to Zhengzhou as “iPhone City.”

    The local government has proved instrumental, doling out more than $1.5 billion to Foxconn to build large sections of the factory and nearby employee housing. It paved roads and built power plants.

    It helps cover continuing energy and transportation costs for the operation. It recruits workers for the assembly line. It pays bonuses to the factory for meeting export targets.

    All of it in support of iPhone production.

    “We needed something that could really develop this part of the country,” said Li Ziqiang, a Zhengzhou official. “There’s an old saying in China: ‘If you build the nest, the birds will come.’ And now, they’re coming.”

    American officials have long decried China’s support of its state-owned companies, calling the subsidies and other aid an unfair competitive advantage in a global marketplace. But the Zhengzhou operation shows the extent of China’s effort to entice overseas multinationals to set up production facilities in the country.

    Local and provincial officials, in an effort to create jobs and drive growth, have courted manufacturers with incentive packages that make it easier and cheaper to do business. Beijing, for decades, has encouraged such efforts at the national level, by developing special economic zones that offer tax breaks to multinationals and exempt them from costly and cumbersome rules.

    In this way, China is not unlike other countries, including the United States, where states and cities vie for companies. To compete in the era of globalization, multinationals, which face pressures from shareholders and customers, must seek the best opportunities, increasingly by relying on a highly interconnected supply chain spread across the world.

    But the reasons behind their choices are not always transparent. In China, the competition for companies is secretive and rarely exposed to public scrutiny or debate — and it is often focused on manufacturing partners, rather than multinationals themselves.

    China’s lure is strong. Dell, Hewlett-Packard and Samsung have all flocked to China to lower their production costs, bolster their bottom lines and tap into the world’s largest consumer market. And many rely on local manufacturing partners like Foxconn.

    While Apple came later than many technology companies, it now generates nearly a quarter of its revenues from sales in China and has some of the fattest profit margins in the business. As such, the Zhengzhou operation provides an especially illustrative look at China’s importance to American technology companies — and specifically iPhone production and more recently, Apple’s consumer sales.

    (continua)

  2. #2
    WHT-BR Top Member
    Data de Ingresso
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    17,966
    A 32-gigabyte iPhone 7 costs an estimated $400 to produce. It retails for roughly $649 in the United States, with Apple taking a piece of the difference as profit. The result: Apple manages to earn 90 percent of the profits in the smartphone industry worldwide, even though it accounts for only 12 percent of the sales, according to Strategy Analytics, a research firm.

    It is difficult to tally the total value of government benefits for the Zhengzhou operation, or to determine the exact effect on the profits of Foxconn or Apple. The subsidies aren’t disclosed by the Chinese government or Foxconn. They aren’t available in public records. And Apple says it was not a party to Foxconn’s negotiations.

    The confidential government records obtained by The Times detail multiple meetings over several years in which Zhengzhou city officials discussed their “support” for iPhone production, calling the benefits a “preferential policy.” The records offer a snapshot of those benefits, including the specific aid for Foxconn in multiple areas, like infrastructure, labor, taxes and exports.

    As China’s largest private employer, Foxconn, a Taiwanese company, has enormous leverage in the negotiations for those incentives. The company’s size and scale — and the sway that they afford in China — is connected to Apple. Foxconn is Apple’s largest supplier. Apple is Foxconn’s largest customer.

    The two companies are intertwined in Zhengzhou. When the factory opened, Apple was Foxconn’s only customer here. Even now, the American technology company accounts for almost all of the production at the Zhengzhou plant, where about half of the world’s iPhones are made. Apple is also the main exporter using the customs facility here.

    In response to questions, Apple said it was aware of the government’s infrastructure support. But the company added that it had no knowledge of specific grants, subsidies or tax breaks given to its manufacturing partner.

    Foxconn, in a separate statement, said it was grateful for the support of the government, noting that it was “no different than similar tax breaks all companies get in locations around the world for major investments.”

    A growing backlash against globalization puts Apple and other big multinationals directly in the sightlines of two increasingly combative giants: the United States and China.

    President-elect Donald J. Trump has vowed to bring down the full force of the government on American companies that move jobs overseas, threatening punitive tariffs on the goods they sell back at home. Apple has been a frequent target of Mr. Trump, who said during the campaign that he would get the technology company to “build their damn computers and things in this country.”

    China, under the leadership of President Xi Jinping, is growing less tolerant and more suspicious of Western influence, particularly American technology companies and the huge influence they have over Chinese consumers. A state-owned publication called Apple one of the “guardian warriors” that have “seamlessly penetrated” China and may pose a threat to national security.

    China, no longer content with just being the world’s factory floor, is moving aggressively to develop its own technology giants. Beijing is pressuring local governments to cut subsidy programs that the country heartily encouraged even just a few years ago. And big exporters, courted and protected for decades by Beijing, now face broad scrutiny.

    Regulators shut down Apple’s iTunes Movies and iBooks Store last spring, just six months after the services were introduced in China. The Chinese authorities fined the technology giant for failure to fully pay its taxes. And Apple went through a national security review in China for the iPhone 6, delaying its release in the country.

    Apple is now engaged in the corporate version of shuttle diplomacy. In December, the company’s chief executive, Timothy D. Cook, along with other Silicon Valley executives, met with Mr. Trump in New York, part of an effort to build bridges with the incoming administration. It followed a similar good-will tour in China in August, when Mr. Cook sat down with the country’s vice premier at Zhongnanhai, the government’s walled leadership compound in what was once part of Beijing’s Imperial City.

    The two countries are playing a high-stakes game.

    Apple, like many multinationals, depends on a vast global supply chain that includes multiple companies and countries, each with its own expertise and advantages — a complexity that is often lost in the political debate over trade. The iPhone is a collection of intricate parts that are made around the world and assembled in China, spurring employment in many countries; Apple says it supports two million jobs in the United States.

    As China and the United States both brandish a new form of economic nationalism, they risk disrupting the system, without necessarily achieving their goals. And multinationals and their manufacturing partners would face serious financial trade-offs.

    As the Zhengzhou operation shows, China not only provides a large pool of labor; it also offers incentives that would be difficult to replicate in the United States or anywhere else. The trove of benefits in Zhengzhou flows through the production process for the iPhone, from the factory floor to the retail store.

    Foxconn receives a bonus when it meets targets for exports. Those subsidies, according to the government records, totaled $56 million in the first two years of production, when the factory was exclusively dedicated to the iPhone.

    The bonus is small on each of the tens of millions of iPhones produced during that period. But the subsidies add up: The government records list more than a dozen other forms of financial aid at the Zhengzhou operation.

    The Zhengzhou government eliminated corporate taxes and value-added taxes that Foxconn pays for the first five years of production; they are half the usual rate for the next five. The city lowered Foxconn’s social insurance and other payments for workers, by up to $100 million a year.

    The customs operation is also in a so-called bonded zone, an area that China essentially considers foreign soil, subject to different import and export rules. This setup allows Apple to sell iPhones more easily to Chinese consumers.

    (continua)

  3. #3
    WHT-BR Top Member
    Data de Ingresso
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    17,966
    Pursuing the iPhone

    Apple was late to China.

    In a bid to lower costs, some of the biggest American technology companies, including Compaq, Dell and Hewlett-Packard, began dismantling their domestic manufacturing in the 1980s and moving work overseas, largely to Asia. Not Apple.

    Rather than close plants, Apple decided to build them — in Colorado, Texas and California. The plants were highly automated, with the walls painted white, just as Mr. Jobs liked them, and they were promoted as a symbol of American ingenuity.

    “This is a machine that is made in America,” Mr. Jobs trumpeted in 1984, after Apple opened a manufacturing facility in California to produce the Macintosh personal computer.

    Finances forced Apple to change course. As Mac sales plummeted and inventories began to bulge in the mid-1990s, Apple had to embrace outsourcing, something with which it had only just experimented. After Mr. Jobs returned to the company in 1997, he turned to his new operations chief, Mr. Cook, who had recently joined from Compaq, to figure out how.

    Under the direction of Mr. Cook, Apple shifted more business to Foxconn, then an up-and-coming Taiwanese contract manufacturer that had started to gain a following among big American brands like Compaq, IBM and Intel. The partnership freed up Apple to focus on its strengths — design and marketing. Apple would come up with a new idea, and Foxconn would find ways to produce millions of units at a low cost.

    “They have brilliant tooling engineers, and they were willing to invest a lot to keep pace with Apple’s growth,” said Joe O’Sullivan, a former Apple executive who worked in Asia.

    When Apple’s sales took off after the introduction of the iPod in 2001, Foxconn had the heft and expertise to meet the demand that accompanied each hit product. Foxconn’s factories could quickly produce prototypes, increase production and, during peak periods, hire hundreds of thousands of workers.

    Foxconn’s founder, the Taiwanese billionaire Terry Gou, provided political clout. Over the years, he frequently visited China to meet local officials and members of the decision-making Politburo to lobby for subsidies, cheap land, workers and infrastructure for facilities that churned out iPods, iPads and iPhones.

    “The reason Foxconn’s so big is Terry Gou,” said Tony Fadell, a former Apple executive who helped design the iPod. “He said he’d create the manufacturing, and the Chinese government would give him some of the money to do it. As Terry grew with the Apple business, no one else could compete.”

    After the first iPhone was rolled out in 2007, Foxconn moved to expand production and began scouting new locations around China — unleashing a fierce competition among cities eager for the business. Officials from various regions camped out at hotels in Shenzhen, where Foxconn had its main operations.

    “These have become like Olympic competitions,” said Gao Yuning, who teaches public policy at Tsinghua University in Beijing.

    The Zhengzhou government saw the factory as a huge opportunity for development in an area that had been bypassed by China’s boom. Officials wanted to rebrand a place derided as a source of migrant laborers and unfairly tarnished as a land of thieves and counterfeiters.

    City officials lavished money and favorable investment terms on Foxconn, according to the government records. They promised discounted energy and transportation costs, lower social insurance payments, and more than $1.5 billion in grants for the construction of factories and dormitories that could house hundreds of thousands of workers.

    The city created a special economic zone for the project and provided a $250 million loan to Foxconn. The local government also pledged to spend more than $10 billion to vastly expand the airport, just a few miles away from the factory.

    “We know that China has all sorts of policies to promote development, and this one ticks all the right boxes,” said Barry Naughton, an authority on the Chinese economy at the University of California, San Diego.

    The city moved quickly. Factories were built, licenses were approved and assembly lines began operating in August 2010, just a few months after the government signed the deal. In Zhengzhou, the Chinese government effectively took a huge tract of land on the barren, dusty plains of central China and transformed it into a sprawling industrial park.

    “I was impressed,” said Jeff Williams, Apple’s chief operating officer, who was part of the early discussions about setting up a factory. “They were very focused.”

    Made, and Sold, in China

    When Apple first moved into China, the country was largely a low-cost production site. It quickly evolved into one of the world’s biggest consumer markets, with more than a billion potential customers.

    But Apple initially had to take the “Hong Kong U-turn” to get its products into the hands of Chinese consumers.

    Since China began opening its economy to the outside world in the 1980s, the government’s policies have encouraged manufacturing and exports with the creation of special economic zones. But those same policies have discouraged domestic consumption of overseas brands.

    Most products made in China by big multinationals had to be physically shipped out of the country and then brought back so that they could be taxed as imports — hence, the U-turn employed by many companies.

    In 2005, Apple’s best-selling portable music device, the iPod, was manufactured in southern China. To comply with the country’s stringent rules, iPods were loaded onto a cargo ship and sent to Hong Kong. Often, when the ship arrived, it was simply turned around and sent back to China.

    “This was really a legacy of China’s old export-oriented economy,” said Edwin Keh, the former head of global procurement at Walmart, who worked for the retailer and other multinationals in China for 20 years. “Back then, we built supply chains good at making things in the East and selling them in the West.”

    Apple and other multinationals wanted a better system.

    By the time Apple released the iPhone in 2007, China faced growing pressure to loosen its restrictions and give global companies easier access to its market. Apple and other companies believed that shipping goods to Hong Kong was a waste of time and energy. They wanted to send goods from the factory gate in China directly to their stores and distribution centers inside the country.

    In discussions with Zhengzhou officials, Foxconn insisted that the operation be located inside a bonded zone, equipped with customs right at the factory gate to facilitate iPhone exports. It also wanted the factory to be built within a few miles of the city’s airport, to expedite Apple’s global shipments.

    Although it wasn’t the first city to create such a cohesive operation, Zhengzhou provided a convenient system, since it would serve what would become the world’s largest iPhone manufacturing facility.

    A bonded zone functions much like a diplomatic territory, in that the government regards it as foreign soil. The zone eliminates the need for global brands to pay duties or taxes on imported components. And it makes it unnecessary to physically export the goods. In those zones, products can be imported and exported virtually at customs, without crossing a single border. After that, they can move swiftly around the country, or out to the rest of the world.

    As the final assembly point for the iPhone, China also functions as a base for Apple’s global tax strategy.

    In the Zhengzhou bonded zone, typically at customs, Foxconn sells the finished iPhones to Apple. After purchasing the iPhones, Apple then resells the goods to Apple subsidiaries. The process largely takes place electronically.

    The process also plays out with other Apple goods that are produced in the country. Apple can assign some profits on these goods to an affiliate in Ireland, a tax-advantageous locale, according to a 2013 American congressional report on the company’s tax practices. It is a practice commonly employed by many big technology brands and is not unique to China.

    “U.S. multinationals are the world leaders in tax avoidance strategies,” said Edward D. Kleinbard, the former chief of staff of the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation. “In doing so, they create stateless income — income that has become unmoored from the countries to which it has an economic connection.”

    According to the congressional report, the process allowed Apple to move tens of billions of dollars offshore and substantially reduce its tax bill, which one senator called the “holy grail of tax avoidance.” The European Union in August ordered Ireland to claw back more than $14.5 billion from Apple in unpaid taxes from a decade-long period.

    Apple said it follows all applicable tax rules, insisting that the company pays all its taxes. The company said it had made some changes to its tax procedures to comply with new laws, including registering a subsidiary in Ireland that previously had no tax jurisdiction. It is appealing the ruling in the European Union.

    In Zhengzhou, local officials have lauded the package of incentives provided to Foxconn, confident that the city’s iPhone production will continue to pay huge dividends.

    In August 2014, the city’s top leaders held a special meeting to discuss “deepening collaboration” with Foxconn, according to the government records obtained by The Times. They crowed that Zhengzhou was the “biggest production base for Apple iPhone worldwide.”

    There were 94 production lines producing the iPhone 6 and iPhone 5s, and the government said about 230 million smartphones had already been exported from Zhengzhou, making it one of the nation’s crucial export centers. Production capacity had reached half a million iPhones a day. The city’s tax revenue was rapidly rising.

    Officials had a name for it all: “Zhengzhou Speed.”

    (continua)

  4. #4
    WHT-BR Top Member
    Data de Ingresso
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    17,966
    A State-Recruited Army

    A crushing work force begins arriving for the early shift at 6:30 a.m. They travel by foot, by bus, by motor scooter and even by pedicab.

    They file steadily into dozens of factory sites, spread out across 2.2 square miles. At the peak, some 350,000 workers assemble, test and package iPhones — up to 350 a minute.

    Apple’s labor force, the size of a national army, relies heavily on the generosity of the Zhengzhou government.

    As part of its deal with Foxconn, the state recruits, trains and houses employees. Provincial officials call townships and villages to ask for help finding potential workers.

    “Every city’s department of labor and ministry of human resources is involved,” said Liu Miao, who runs a private recruiting center in Zhengzhou.

    The government pays recruiters a subsidy for every worker they hire, Mr. Liu said. “If the demand is high, then they will pay more,” he said. “If the demand is low, then the payment will be low, too.”

    Cities like Zhengzhou have handed out subsidies to manufacturers in the hope of driving economic gains. But increasingly those local interests don’t align with the national agenda, creating a raft of uncertainty for multinationals operating in China.

    As the economy slows, Beijing has started to shift its development path away from manufacturing and exports and toward innovation and consumption. It wants to empower Chinese brands and foster homegrown technology.

    To advance its cause, Beijing has started to rethink the investment policies that support overseas companies. In November 2014, China’s State Council, the country’s cabinet, directed local governments to evaluate and eliminate any preferential treatment, including subsidies and tax breaks that benefited multinational exporters.

    The threat prompted a pushback, mostly notably by Foxconn which, along with other international businesses, fought to keep existing incentives. Since then, Beijing has backed off the issue.

    But the broad trend lines are clear: Overseas companies will no longer get the welcome they once received. The Chinese government is tightening access to its huge market and pressuring Western technology companies to advance domestic goals — in a coordinated action that one congressional study in the United States called a new form of “techno-nationalism.”

    “The government wants to know what you can give to China,” said James McGregor, who lives in Shanghai and has for decades advised American companies operating in China. “And they have the market and the muscle. They’re not playing around anymore.”

    Chinese regulators have been penalizing overseas companies, like the American mobile chip giant Qualcomm, which was forced to reduce prices for companies that sell smartphones within the country. It is a market increasingly dominated by Chinese brands like Huawei and Xiaomi that undercut Apple and Samsung on price.

    China is also scrutinizing Western technology companies over national security issues. Beijing has increased oversight of the internet with new cybersecurity rules and forced state companies to reduce spending on overseas technology. It pressed Apple to hand over its source code. Apple said it refused.

    Apple has agreed to the government’s request to store more of its local data on Chinese servers. It must also undergo “security audits” on new models of the iPhone before gaining approval to sell the product.

    Beijing also expects American companies to help develop China’s own capabilities. Apple is teaming up with UnionPay, a state-backed financial services company. It has invested $1 billion in the Chinese ride-hailing service Didi Chuxing, which has significant backing from state companies.

    Mr. Cook, Apple’s chief executive, has also carefully cultivated Apple’s image as a big employer, a good corporate citizen and a major economic contributor. He comes to China regularly. He has donned factory uniforms and walked the assembly line in Zhengzhou. He has courted regulators, the heads of state telecom giants and the country’s top leaders, including Mr. Xi.

    In an interview with Chinese state television last year, Mr. Cook explained how Apple was planting trees in the country, calling the effort a “pillar of its environmental strategy.” He detailed plans to build a massive solar project to power Apple’s stores, headquarters and offices throughout the country. He also boasted about creating over three million jobs in China, half of them in manufacturing.

    At the Hall of Purple Light in the government’s walled leadership compound in Beijing, Mr. Cook promised in August to build the company’s first research and development center in the country and to support the government’s big focus on high-end manufacturing.

    Opposite him sat the vice premier, Zhang Gaoli. Beside him sat his partner. There was the chairman of Foxconn, Mr. Gou. Also present was the party leader of the province where Zhengzhou is located, Xie Fuzhan.

    Sui-Lee Wee contributed reporting from Zhengzhou, China. Zhang Ruoyao and Zhang Tiantian contributed research.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/29/te...conn.html?_r=1

  5. #5
    WHT-BR Top Member
    Data de Ingresso
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    17,966

    Investimento brasileiro em fábrica da Apple é um desastre

    Foxconn criou apenas uma pequena fração dos 100 mil empregos que o governo projetou, e a maior parte das vagas é de baixa qualificação

    Brad Haynes
    13 abr 2015

    A expectativa era que a produção do iPhone no Brasil marcasse uma nova era.

    Quando a taiuanesa Foxconn Technology acertou em abril de 2011 que fabricaria produtos da Apple no país, a presidente Dilma Rousseff e seus conselheiros prometeram que até 12 bilhões de dólares em investimentos nos próximos seis anos transformariam o setor de tecnologia brasileiro e o colocariam na vanguarda do desenvolvimento de telas sensíveis ao toque.

    Uma nova cadeia de suprimentos seria criada, gerando empregos de alta qualidade e derrubando os preços de cobiçados aparelhos eletrônicos.

    Quatro anos depois, no entanto, nada disso se tornou realidade.

    A Foxconn criou apenas uma pequena fração dos 100 mil empregos que o governo projetou, e a maior parte das vagas é de baixa qualificação.

    Há poucos sinais de que tenha sido catalisadora do setor de tecnologia brasileiro ou criado uma cadeia de suprimentos local.

    Os iPhones agora produzidos perto de São Paulo, os únicos feitos fora da China, custam aproximadamente 1 mil dólares para o iPhone 5S de 32 gigabytes sem contrato — entre os maiores valores do mundo e cerca de duas vezes o preço nos Estados Unidos.

    O fato de o Brasil ter tão pouco a mostrar sobre os investimentos da Foxconn indica a fraqueza de sua política industrial, definida por caros incentivos fiscais que levaram a um amplo déficit do governo sem impulsionar o crescimento.

    A economia brasileira está hoje próxima à recessão e a produtividade da força de trabalho brasileira está estagnada. As vendas de iPhones da Apple no Brasil ainda sobem.

    As remessas subiram mais de 40 por cento, para 2,9 milhões no ano passado, de acordo com a empresa de pesquisas Gartner.

    A Apple não quis comentar. Representantes do governo brasileiro e da Foxconn recusaram-se a comentar sobre por que os investimentos ficaram até agora abaixo das projeções iniciais.

    Enquanto a Foxconn aumentou a montagem de iPhones e iPads no Brasil durante 2012, colhendo benefícios fiscais, a empresa fez compromissos públicos. A companhia previu um investimento inicial de 1 bilhão de reais para criar um parque industrial de produção de componentes local em dois anos.

    A localização seria Itu, no interior de São Paulo.

    Hoje o local permanece vazio. Escavadeiras começaram a nivelar a terra no fim do ano passado.

    O vereador Givanildo da Silva, que ajudou na doação de aproximadamente 100 acres de terra para a Foxconn, desde então se virou contra o projeto.

    “As pessoas estão realmente frustradas”, disse. “Ainda estamos esperando todos aqueles empregos que até agora são promessas vazias.”

    A prefeitura de Itu disse em comunicado que deu todo o apoio necessário para levar a Foxconn à cidade, recusando-se a informar as razões para o atraso.

    A Foxconn disse em comunicado que a fábrica deve se tornar operacional até o fim deste ano, elevando sua força de trabalho a mais de 10 mil funcionários no Brasil, apesar de não fornecer o número atual de postos de empregos ou informar quantos trabalham atualmente nos produtos da Apple.

    A Foxconn tem atualmente cinco fábricas no país que fazem produtos sob contrato para várias companhias de tecnologia, incluindo uma unidade que produz aparelhos da Apple em Jundiaí, a cerca de 50 quilômetros de Itu.

    “A Foxconn continua investindo em nossas operações no Brasil”, disse a companhia em comunicado.

    “Estamos comprometidos com nosso objetivo de introduzir tecnologias inovadoras que permitem a nossos funcionários no Brasil focar em elementos de alto valor agregado.”

    Trabalhadores entrevistados do lado de fora da fábrica em Jundiaí disseram que ainda não há trabalho tão qualificado. “Você ouve ‘Foxconn’ e ‘Apple’ e logo pensa que é algo especial. Mas não há glamour lá. É um trabalho sem saída”, disse Andressa Silva, de 19 anos.

    Andressa testa iPhones na fábrica por cerca de 80 dólares por semana, cerca de 15 dólares acima do salário mínimo. Ela e diversos colegas reclamaram do trabalho monótono e da falta de oportunidades de ascensão.

    Evandro Oliveira Santos, líder do sindicato local de metalúrgicos, disse à Reuters que a entidade estava organizando uma greve na fábrica. Seria a quarta greve em quatro anos.

    O sindicato busca melhores condições de trabalho e desenvolvimento profissional para os aproximadamente 3 mil trabalhadores da fábrica.

    A Foxconn recusou um pedido de visita à fábrica, mas disse em comunicado que trabalha para atender os padrões internacionais, coopera com os sindicatos e ouve a opinião de funcionários.
    http://exame.abril.com.br/negocios/i...il-decepciona/

    "Em termos de mercado a Apple cresce, apesar de ter enganado os brasileiros"
    http://www.tudocelular.com/apple/not...xconn-itu.html
    Última edição por 5ms; 29-12-2016 às 07:38.

  6. #6
    WHT-BR Top Member
    Data de Ingresso
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    17,966

    Lei do Bem


    Dilma em visita ao presidente da Foxconn, em abril de 2011


    O que a Foxconn exige para investir US$12 bilhões no Brasil

    Felipe Ventura
    10 de maio de 2011

    ....

    A Foxconn quer que tablets recebam incentivos fiscais

    ...

    Em março, o ministro das Comunicações, Paulo Bernardo prometeu imposto zero aos tablets. O ministro da Ciência e Tecnologia, Aloizio Mercadante, diz que os tablets terão incentivos fiscais antes que o iPad seja fabricado no Brasil.

    ...


    A Foxconn continuou com suas exigências: eles querem um terreno grande o bastante para abrigar um “cluster” industrial – conjunto de fornecedores e transportadoras que complementam as fábricas da Foxconn. O campus da Foxconn deve ser cabeado com fibra ótica e dispor de Wi-Fi de alta velocidade. O custo de cabeamento onde ainda não há fibra ótica é cerca de R$120 por metro, segundo a FSP: não será algo trivial a ser feito, mas não parece impossível.

    A empresa também quer malha de transporte para levar os produtos mais rápido aos consumidores, além de prioridade em portos e aeroportos (terminais dedicados) e regime alfandegário diferenciado. Ou seja, eles não querem ter qualquer problema pra importar peças e vender os produtos prontos, seja para o Brasil, seja para o exterior. Eles só não devem ter um terminal dedicado às mercadorias da Foxconn, já que só a estatal Infraero opera terminais – e o governo não pode fazer exceções a uma só empresa. Veremos como isso se resolve.

    ...

    Contrapartidas: mais emprego e transferência de tecnologia

    O ministro Mercadante havia prometido 100 mil empregos diretos e indiretos nos próximos cinco anos, dos quais 20 mil para engenheiros. E será que a Foxconn vai mesmo gerar tanto emprego assim?

    ...

    http://m.gizmodo.uol.com.br/o-que-a-...nhar-com-isto/

    Medida provisória isenta tablets do PIS/COFINS

    Rubens Haruo Eishima em 17/05/2011

    Depois de muita conversa, promessas e até visitas para a China, o governo prepara para essa semana a medida provisória que estende aos tablets os mesmos benefícios concedidos aos computadores e notebooks.

    A medida já teria sido autorizada pela presidente, segundo o ministro das comunicações Paulo Bernardo.
    De acordo com o Ministério de Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação, a lei *não* prevê que empresas as quais recebem os incentivos fiscais repassem os descontos a consumidores. Hoje, Apple/Foxconn recebem incentivos da Lei de Informática (nº 8.248) e da Lei do Bem (nº 11.196), contudo a contrapartida acordada com o governo envolve a utilização de ao menos 20% de conteúdo local nas operações brasileiras, bem como o comprometimento de investir no país e gerar empregos.​
    Decreto zera alíquota de PIS/Cofins para smartphone
    9 Abril 2013

    A presidente Dilma Rousseff assinou nesta terça-feira decreto que zera as alíquotas da contribuição para o Programa de Integração Social (PIS) e a Contribuição para o Financiamento da Seguridade Social (COFINS) incidentes sobre a receita bruta decorrente de venda de smartphones, tipo de celular que permite acesso à internet. O incentivo ao setor é dado dentro do Programa de Inclusão Digital.

    ...

    A norma determina que o incentivo “alcança somente os bens produzidos no país conforme processo produtivo básico estabelecido pelos ministérios do Desenvolvimento, Indústria e Comércio Exterior, e da Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação”. Dentre as características técnicas necessárias do celular estão conectividade WiFi, aplicativo de navegação e e-mail, “sistema operacional que disponibilize kit de desenvolvimento por terceiros, tela igual ou superior a 18 centímetros quadrados e aplicativos desenvolvidos no país”, informou o ministério.

    ...

    Segundo o Ministério das Comunicações, a desoneração deve levar a uma redução no preço final ao consumidor de até 30% em relação aos smartphones importados, que pagam também Imposto sobre Produtos Industrializados (IPI). Os smartphones que fazem parte da chamada ‘Lei do Bem’, que dá incentivos tributários para a fabricação e venda de equipamentos eletrônicos no Brasil, também são contemplados. Essas empresas precisam estar inscritas no Processo Produtivo Básico (PPB), que estabelece porcentuais de conteúdo nacional das peças e dos serviços. A redução dos impostos deve implicar em uma renúncia fiscal de até 500 milhões de reais ao ano.

    O ministro das Comunicações, Paulo Bernardo, já havia adiantado na semana passada que a assinatura do decreto de desoneração dos smartphones aconteceria dentro de semanas e ainda em abril. A desoneração estava prevista para setembro do ano passado, quando a presidente Dilma Rousseff sancionou a Lei n° 12.715.

    De acordo com o ministro, o que atrasou a publicação da medida foi uma exigência do Tribunal de Contas da União (TCU), que estabeleceu novos critérios para liberar cortes nos impostos. Bernardo ... brincou com o atraso na publicação do decreto.”Queríamos aprovar a desoneração desde o segundo semestre de 2012, mas só na quinta-feira passada chegamos a um acordo”, disse ele.

    http://veja.abril.com.br/economia/go...ra-smartphone/

    21 de setembro de 2015
    Da Redação do site Tudocelular.com.br

    ...

    O iPhone mais caro do mundo?

    ...


    Ano passado o governo decidiu prorrogar para o fim de 2018 a desoneração de computadores, notebooks, tablets, modems e smartphones. A medida foi criada pela “Lei do Bem”, que zerou a alíquota de PIS/Cofins, de 9,25%, que incidia sobre a venda desses equipamentos no varejo. Com a desoneração, os varejistas pagam menos impostos e podem vender os eletrônicos a preços menores.

    A lei, instituída pelo governo federal em 2011, não desonera os fabricantes, que seguem pagando os mesmos tributos de antes. Apesar disso, para eles, a medida é muito vantajosa uma vez que possibilita a queda de preço e o aumento das vendas.

    O ministério também destaca que a medida é benéfica no sentido de estimular a formalização do mercado de trabalho do setor. “Esse programa teve grande efeito de combate à informalidade e ao contrabando”, afirmou o secretário do Ministério da Fazenda em entrevista à Folha de São Paulo.

    Esta lei nos forneceu um ótimo exemplo na hora de mostrar que os impostos não explicam, por si só, a razão dos altos preços no Brasil. De acordo com o subsídio dado aos tablets, pela “Lei do Bem”, e com isenção de PIS/Cofins e redução de IPI se montados no Brasil, os preços deveriam ter caído de forma considerável, e isso não aconteceu. Mesmo a pequena queda no período esteve muito mais ligada à concorrência entre as empresas do que a redução nos impostos.

    Em muitos casos o preço se manteve ou até mesmo aumentou. O iPad é o principal exemplo: a Foxconn recebeu incentivos fiscais para fabricar produtos da Apple no país. No entanto, o preço do iPad 3 não caiu nas lojas que vendiam o modelo brasileiro. Pior: o iPad 4 fabricado por aqui foi vendido por um preço até R$300 mais caro que o antecessor. Até o iPad 2 ficou mais caro na Apple Store online! Como explicar este fenômeno? Um aumento alto de preços no mesmo ano que estes produtos chegaram ser exonerados em até 15% pelo governo? Mais uma vez todo tipo de redução de impostos parece ter sido engolida pela tendência das empresas de praticar uma das maiores margens de lucro do mundo.

Permissões de Postagem

  • Você não pode iniciar novos tópicos
  • Você não pode enviar respostas
  • Você não pode enviar anexos
  • Você não pode editar suas mensagens
  •