India beats China! surpasses Beijing in…, even US was surprised, Pakistan can't even think of it, it is about…
India has overtaken China in iPhone exports. In April 2025, India shipped 3 million iPhones to the US, which is a 76% increase. At the same time shipments from China declined by 76% and reduced their exports to just 900,000 units.
The shift started when US President Donald Trump's 30% tariff on goods manufactured in China. It made Chinese production expensive for Apple. India had only a 10% export tariff, and so it became a more favorable destination. Partners like Tata, Foxconn, and Pegatron have made India a manufacturing hub for Apple.
India is becoming a big for Apple in their global strategy. Factors like low labor costs and the 'Make in India' initiative have made the country a reliable manufacturing option.
Apple CEO Tim Cook stated that, after June 2025, most iPhones sold in the US will come from India. Plants in Tamil Nadu and Karnataka are already producing premium models. However, meeting the quarterly demand of 20 million units by 2026 will be a big challenge for India.
During 2024-25, India exported a record 11.5 million iPhones out of which 4.4 million units in March alone. These steps were taken by Apple to counter Trump's tariffs. Apple started pre-stocked inventory which also shows the strength of India's manufacturing strategy and infrastructure growth.
Although Trump threatened a 25% tariff on iPhones made in India, Apple is still firm on their decision.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
25 minutes ago
- Mint
Trump administration signals it will slash funds for long-delayed California high-speed rail project
LOS ANGELES — The Trump administration signaled Wednesday that it intends to cut off federal funding for a long-delayed California high-speed rail project plagued by multibillion-dollar cost overruns, following the release of a scathing federal report that concluded there is 'no viable path' to complete even a partial section of the line. Voters first authorized $10 billion in borrowed funds in 2008 to cover about a third of the estimated cost, with a promise the train would be up and running by 2020. Five years beyond that deadline, no tracks have been laid and its estimated price tag has ballooned to over $100 billion. In a letter to the California High-Speed Rail Authority, which oversees the project, Federal Railroad Administration acting Administrator Drew Feeley wrote that what was envisioned as an 800-mile system connecting the state's major cities has been reduced to a blueprint for 'a 119-mile track to nowhere.' After a $4 billion federal investment, the California agency 'has conned the taxpayer ... with no viable plan to deliver even that partial segment on time,' Feeley wrote. State officials defended what's known as the nation's largest infrastructure project and said they remain committed to construction, though it's not clear what funding would replace the federal support if it's withdrawn. Feeley noted the FRA could seek repayment of the federal funds but is not proposing to claw back those dollars at this time. Carol Dahmen, the state authority's chief of strategic communications, said in a statement that the federal conclusions are misguided and 'do not reflect the substantial progress made to deliver high-speed rail in California.' Dahmen noted that the majority of the funding for the line has been provided by the state and that Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom's budget proposal would extend at least $1 billion a year for 20 years to complete an initial segment of the line. State officials are focused on a stretch connecting the Central Valley cities of Bakersfield and Merced, which is set to be operating by 2033. The state agency has about a month to formally respond to the FRA, after which the grants could be terminated. State Sen. Tony Strickland, a Republican from Huntington Beach who is vice chair of the Transportation Committee, said that 'commonsense has prevailed" and urged the Legislature's dominant Democrats to redirect the funds from the rail line to lowering gas prices or investing in viable construction projects. 'Let's stop wasting California's hard-earned taxpayer dollars,' Strickland said. There is no known source for the billions of dollars that would be needed to complete the line. California High-Speed Rail Authority CEO Ian Choudri suggested in April that private investors could step in and fill the funding gap for the project that promised nonstop rail service between San Francisco and Los Angeles in under three hours. At the time, he acknowledged that even if funding is secured, it might take nearly two more decades to complete most of that segment. President Donald Trump said in May that his administration will not continue to fund the line. 'That train is the worst cost overrun I've ever seen,' Trump told reporters at the time, calling it "totally out of control.' This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
‘KILL the BILL': Elon Musk yet again explodes over Donald Trump's tax bill
lon Musk yet again launched a scathing attack on President Donald Trump's tax and spending bill on Wednesday (June 4), urging Americans to pressure their lawmakers to "kill" it. 'Call your Senator, Call your Congressman, Bankrupting America is NOT ok! KILL the BILL,' Musk wrote on X, formerly Twitter. In a previous post, Musk called for a complete rewrite of the bill: 'A new spending bill should be drafted that doesn't massively grow the deficit and increase the debt ceiling by 5 TRILLION DOLLARS.' 'This immense level of overspending will drive America into debt slavery!' In a post on June 4, Musk accused Republican House members of betraying fiscal conservatism and blamed the bill for expanding the national deficit. 'I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore,' he posted. 'This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination,' Musk wrote in a previous post. 'Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong.' Elon Musk also on May 28 voiced strong criticism of the so-called 'Big Beautiful Bill,' warning that it could worsen the federal deficit and undermine cost-cutting efforts led by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). In an interview with CBS, Musk said he was 'disappointed' by the tax and spending bill, which narrowly passed the House and is now pending a Senate vote. 'I think a bill can be big or it could be beautiful. But I don't know if it could be both,' Musk remarked in a preview clip posted online. He added, 'It increases the budget deficit and undermines the work that the DOGE team is doing.' Despite Musk's sharp rebuke, President Trump remains firmly behind the legislation. 'Passing THE ONE, BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL is a Historic Opportunity to turn our Country around,' Trump said in a social media post earlier. He's pushing for the Senate to pass the measure before July 4. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt brushed off Musk's comments. 'The President already knows where Elon Musk stood on this bill. It doesn't change the president's opinion. This is one big, beautiful bill and he's sticking to it,' she told reporters. The proposed bill, which has cleared the House and is now being debated in the Senate, includes major rollbacks to Biden-era subsidies for electric vehicles and clean energy — programs that benefit Tesla. It also slashes safety-net spending, while adding an estimated $2.5 trillion to the deficit over 10 years. Musk's vocal opposition comes just days after he ended his four-month stint leading DOGE, a Trump administration initiative to reduce federal spending. His brief tenure was marked by controversy and reportedly coincided with a dip in Tesla EV sales. On May 29, Musk officially confirmed his departure on X: 'As my scheduled time as a Special Government Employee comes to an end, I would like to thank President @realDonaldTrump for the opportunity to reduce wasteful spending.' Trump hosted a farewell at the White House on May 30, publicly thanking Musk: 'He's done a fantastic job,' Trump said at a joint press conference. The tech billionaire, once seen as a key Trump ally, appears to be distancing himself from politics. Speaking at the Qatar Economic Forum on May 20, Musk said he planned to reduce his political spending. 'I'm going to do a lot less in the future,' he said.
India Gazette
an hour ago
- India Gazette
As India and Pakistan eye each other, this superpower eyes the whole map
Beijing's close ties with Islamabad give it a level of influence over dealings with Delhi The recent terrorist attack in India's Pahalgam on April 22, 2025, which originated in Pakistan and resulted in the death of 26, mostly Hindu, civilians, has triggered another wave of heightened tensions between New Delhi and Islamabad. While public discourse has focused on terrorism and hostilities between the two nuclear-powered nations, a deeper analysis reveals the unmistakable imprint of another key actor - China's strategic calculus in the region. The relationship between Islamabad and New Delhi has evolved significantly in recent decades. Pakistani Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar travelled to Beijing days after the military standoff with Delhi and met his counterpart Wang Yi. The Chinese Foreign Minister called Pakistan an " iron-clad friend" and " all-weather strategic partner." China is pursuing a strategy that aligns with its regional interests - including economic engagement, defense cooperation, and influence-building. This strategy, logically, includes efforts to slow down India's rise. Pahalgam incident thus cannot be seen an isolated terrorist attack, but as a signal within a larger geostrategic landscape that is shaping Asia's future. Strategic Timing The flareup in South Asia has come at a time of major geopolitical developments. With the mass shift of Western companies like Apple away from China to India, India is poised to become the next big manufacturing hub. As global businesses explore alternatives to rising operational costs and geopolitical uncertainties in China, India is increasingly seen as a competitive option. Additionally, the proposed US tariffs may add pressure to China's manufacturing sector, which is already adapting to evolving global supply chains. For the strongman leader, Xi Jinping, sustaining economic growth and employment remains a top priority. Any escalation involving India could introduce uncertainty that might affect investor sentiment and infrastructure momentum. Regional instability could redirect global attention away from India's growth narrative toward internal and border-related concerns. China's close political, economic and defence ties with Pakistan - an economically vulnerable partner - gives Beijing a certain level of influence on the way Islamabad deals with India. New Delhi was compelled to act militarily, risking escalation and economic fallout. To India's credit, it managed to negotiate a ceasefire after achieving its key objectives of affecting 11 Pakistani air bases and nine terrorist camps and other strategic terrorist infrastructures against the popular sentiment against de-escalation. Economic factor Pakistan has been struggling with near to bankruptcy. Its foreign exchange reserves have fallen to $4.3bn, its lowest levels since February 2014. Despite a $2.4 billion bailout from the IMF - approved on May 9, when Islamabad and New Delhi were firing missiles at each other - the Pakistani economy is still in tatters. China's offer of financial and military aid to Islamabad at such times comes in more than handy. China's support for Pakistan is not circumstantial. It is also institutional and deeply entrenched. Between 2014 to 2024, China sold over $9 billion worth of advanced weaponry to Pakistan, accounting for around 80% of imported weapons, including J-10CE fighter jets, Wing Loong drones, LY-80 air defence systems, and naval assets. The operational use of these systems in the recent conflict, including Pakistani claims of downing Rafales using Chinese PL-15 missiles, has allowed Beijing to showcase its weapons systems in live combat. Beyond India, China's motivation also ties into its long-term strategic objectives in the Persian Gulf. Pakistan provides China access to the Arabian Sea via Gwadar port, a linchpin in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) and part of the broader Belt and Road Initiative. This maritime access offers China two significant advantages: a strategic military presence near key Middle Eastern shipping lanes and an alternative route for oil imports in case of a US-China maritime standoff in the South China Sea. Military-Industrial Complex benefits China's defence industry is another big beneficiary of the escalation. Claims by the Pakistan Air Force that Chinese-made jets outmanoeuvred India's French-built Rafales, regardless of their authenticity, have created a nationalist fervour in Chinese social media and boosted investor confidence. Stocks in Chinese defence manufacturers surged as hashtags like "J-10 shot down Indian warplanes" trended online, and praise for the PL-15 missile system flooded Weibo. Indeed, Beijing wants to use this as an inflexion point for its arms export ambitions. With Western suppliers often constrained by political alignments or human rights concerns, China's relatively unrestricted military exports offer an attractive alternative, especially in conflict-prone or authoritarian regimes across Africa, the Middle East, and parts of Asia. A perceived successful battlefield performance strengthens China's pitch as a reliable arms supplier. From shaping regional dynamics to advancing its defense exports and maintaining strategic interests in West Asia, China may perceive certain advantages in the current situation in the region. While the Pahalgam attack was carried out by terrorist actors, it may also reflect broader regional undercurrents in which multiple stakeholders play complex and calculated roles. Through India-Pakistan rivalry, China is executing a proxy strategy that would halt India's rise, safeguard its own economic interests and bolster its defence exports and regional clout. Beijing has much to gain and little to lose from this rivalry - as long as it stays just below the threshold of full-scale war.
