Did the tech bosses gamble?

Did the tech bosses gamble?

By Dr. Kyle Muller

When the US President Trump is inaugurated, they sought proximity to the power: the bosses of the big tech companies. But now Trump’s tariffs meet Apple, Meta, Google and Co. hard. Did you calculate yourself?

The moderator of the Bloomberg economic station sounds serious: “It is another day with one back and forth in the tech shares.” Especially in focus: the “Magnificent Seven” – this is what the seven largest US tech companies are called. These are Google, Apple, Nvidia, Meta, Tesla, Amazon and Microsoft.

But at the moment they look more like the shocked seven. Because they earn a lot of money abroad, in countries where the new US tariffs strike. “There are worries what this means for profits,” says a Bloomberg presenter.

The tech analyst Dan Ives is known for its Hawaii shirts and also colorful language images. The tariffs are an economic Armageddon, he says at CNBC. “I have spoken to so many tech people in the past few days. The greatest concern is uncertainty. What does that mean for the AI ​​revolution in the USA-where do we stand? It implodes and that has caused itself,” says Ives.

Processes run against the tech companies

Many tech bosses had searched the proximity to US President Donald Trump in recent months and donated millions of dollars to his party: Mark Zuckerberg from Meta, Jeff Bezos from Amazon, Sundar Pichai from Google or, of course, of course, Elon Musk. Zuckerberg announced on Instagram, Facebook or threads to end the fact checks in the USA. Everything in the sense of the Trump government.

So far, everything has only partially paid off for “Big Tech”. For example, Trump has withdrawn rules for the development of artificial intelligence – they were introduced by his predecessor Joe Biden. In addition, the new US Vice President JD Vance in Munich criticized the rules of the EU against hate speech on the net and said that he fears that free speech in Europe was on retreat.

But: Cartel procedures against Google, Meta, Amazon or Apple continue to run under Trump. They aim to smash or at least restrict the powerful corporations.

“Trump does what he wants”

Tikkok is also online in the USA, the app is a great competitor for US tech companies. In addition, the customs chaos is now. Apple is particularly affected. Apple designs its smartphones, tablets and laptops in California, but most devices are assembled in China.

“According to analysts, producing an iPhone in the USA should cost $ 3,000 to $ 3,500,” says Mark Gurman von Bloomberg. Therefore, Apple will never produce in the expensive USA. “Production is further shifted to countries outside of China. There are also tariffs, but lower than in China.” To India, for example, says Gurman. Nevertheless, the purchase price may increase.

Apple boss Tim Cook had negotiated a deal with the US government during Trump’s first term. Apple devices were excluded from tariffs. But Gurman states: “Trump does not seem to talk to companies this time about exceptions.

“The industry is against tariffs”

Ryan Petersen is the head of Flexport. The company from San Francisco advises companies on how to organize their supply chains. There is a general contempt in the tech community, he says. “I don’t know if they are publicly facing Trump. But the industry is against the tariffs that are not economically well -founded and the way they were introduced.”

In the EU, the advantages and disadvantages of a digital tax are currently being discussed again. And also in terms of possible retaliation measures from other countries, Petersen says: “The US tech industry is a natural goal. These are our best companies. That would be the right place to go back to the USA.”

Kyle Muller
About the author
Dr. Kyle Muller
Dr. Kyle Mueller is a Research Analyst at the Harris County Juvenile Probation Department in Houston, Texas. He earned his Ph.D. in Criminal Justice from Texas State University in 2019, where his dissertation was supervised by Dr. Scott Bowman. Dr. Mueller's research focuses on juvenile justice policies and evidence-based interventions aimed at reducing recidivism among youth offenders. His work has been instrumental in shaping data-driven strategies within the juvenile justice system, emphasizing rehabilitation and community engagement.
Published in