remember I talked about a single supply chain.... this is a good example
Mr. Lamy said if trade statistics were adjusted to reflect the actual value contributed to a product by different countries, the size of the U.S. trade deficit with China—$226.88 billion, according to U.S. figures—would be cut in half.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...902413796.html
Not Really 'Made in China'
The iPhone's Complex Supply Chain Highlights Problems With Trade Statistics
By ANDREW BATSON
BEIJING—One widely touted solution for current U.S. economic woes is for America to come up with more of the high-tech gadgets that the rest of the world craves.
View Full Image
CPHONE
Associated Press
Researchers estimated the iPhone added $1.9 billion to the U.S. trade deficit with China last year. Above, an Apple store in Palo Alto, Calif.
Yet two academic researchers estimate that Apple Inc.'s iPhone—one of the best-selling U.S. technology products—actually added $1.9 billion to the U.S. trade deficit with China last year.
How is this possible? The researchers say traditional ways of measuring global trade produce the number but fail to reflect the complexities of global commerce where the design, manufacturing and assembly of products often involve several countries.
"A distorted picture" is the result, they say, one that exaggerates trade imbalances between nations.
Trade statistics in both countries consider the iPhone a Chinese export to the U.S., even though it is entirely designed and owned by a U.S. company, and is made largely of parts produced in several Asian and European countries. China's contribution is the last step—assembling and shipping the phones.
So the entire $178.96 estimated wholesale cost of the shipped phone is credited to China, even though the value of the work performed by the Chinese workers at Hon Hai Precision Industry Co. accounts for just 3.6%, or $6.50, of the total, the researchers calculated in a report published this month.
A spokeswoman for Apple said the company declined to comment on the research.
[1215iphone] European Pressphoto Agency
Two academic researchers have found that Apple's iPhone actually added $1.9 billion to the U.S. trade deficit with China last year.
The result is that according to official statistics, "even high-tech products invented by U.S. companies will not increase U.S. exports," write Yuqing Xing and Neal Detert, two researchers at the Asian Development Bank Institute, a think tank in Tokyo, in their report.
This isn't a problem with high-tech products, but with how exports and imports are measured, they say.
Experience WSJ professional
Editors' Deep Dive: China Experts Offer Another Take on Trade Surplus
Access thousands of business sources not available on the free web. Learn More
The research adds to a growing debate about traditional trade statistics that could have real-world consequences. Conventional trade figures are the basis for political battles waging in Washington and Brussels over what to do about China's currency policies and its allegedly unfair trading practices.
"What we call 'Made in China' is indeed assembled in China, but what makes up the commercial value of the product comes from the numerous countries," Pascal Lamy, the director-general of the World Trade Organization, said in a speech in October. "The concept of country of origin for manufactured goods has gradually become obsolete."
Mr. Lamy said if trade statistics were adjusted to reflect the actual value contributed to a product by different countries, the size of the U.S. trade deficit with China—$226.88 billion, according to U.S. figures—would be cut in half.
To correct for that bias is difficult because it requires detailed knowledge of how products are put together.
[CHIPHONE]
Breaking down imports and exports in terms of the value-added from different countries can lead to some controversial conclusions. Some U.S. lawmakers, for instance, argue China needs to let its currency rise significantly against the U.S. dollar in order to reduce the trade gap between the two nations.
The value-added approach, in fact, shows that sales of the iPhone are adding to the U.S. economy—rather than subtracting from it, as the traditional approach would imply.
Based on U.S. sales of 11.3 million iPhones in 2009, the researchers estimate Chinese iPhone exports at $2.02 billion. After deducting $121.5 million in Chinese imports for parts produced by U.S. firms such as chip maker Broadcom Corp., they arrive at the figure of the $1.9 billion Chinese trade surplus—and U.S. trade deficit—in iPhones.
[CHIPHONE]
If China was credited with producing only its portion of the value of an iPhone, its exports to the U.S. for the same amount of iPhones would be a U.S. trade surplus of $48.1 million, after accounting for the parts U.S. firms contribute.
Other economists say some aspects of the researchers methodology may have led them to overstate their case. The study, for example, assumes that companies such as Toshiba Corp. and Samsung Electronics Co. that make components for the iPhone wholly assembled them in their home countries.
But many of Apple's suppliers have manufacturing facilities in China, so it's likely that some portion of the components they build for the iPhone are made in China as well.
The latest results are broadly similar to analyses made by the Personal Computing Industry Center at the University of California, Irvine, of the trade and manufacture of another Apple product, the iPod. That research also found that Chinese labor accounted for only a few dollars of the iPod's value, even though trade statistics credited China with producing its full value.
In a speech in September in New York, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao cited that research to argue that trade tensions between the U.S. and China are overblown. Many of China's exports are products that are made in China on contract for foreign companies, he said, so the U.S. shouldn't criticize China for running a big trade surplus.
"Foreign-funded enterprises, including those of the United States, are major beneficiaries" of this system, Mr. Wen said.
—Loretta Chao contributed to this article.
Write to Andrew Batson at andrew.batson@wsj.com
Read more: Tech Supply Chain Exposes Limits of Trade Metrics - WSJ.com
Last edited by xinhui; 17 Dec 10, at 01:14.
“the misery of being exploited by capitalists is nothing compared to the misery of not being exploited at all” -- Joan Robinson
remember I talked about a single supply chain.... this is a good example
“the misery of being exploited by capitalists is nothing compared to the misery of not being exploited at all” -- Joan Robinson
Just want to mention that I have never owned a single Apple product. NOT ONE.
Our export strength is heavy machinery and certain farm products. Not gadgets.
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.
Something like 55% of all Chinese exports are owned by US companies shipping to the US. So if the value added by giving China full credit when they only get small value would drop Chinese GDP by 10% easy.
The point of the article..is pointing out the problem with the existing stat model in measuring trades. The same need to apply to everyone. GM imports its engines from plants in Canada, transmissions from Korea, and yet its finishing car is still credits US as the source.
Also, the 30% component from Japan for the I-pad, assume ti is all "mode in Japan" which is not case as the article pointing out.
"What we call 'Made in China' is indeed assembled in China, but what makes up the commercial value of the product comes from the numerous countries," Pascal Lamy, the director-general of the World Trade Organization, said in a speech in October. "The concept of country of origin for manufactured goods has gradually become obsolete."Other economists say some aspects of the researchers methodology may have led them to overstate their case. The study, for example, assumes that companies such as Toshiba Corp. and Samsung Electronics Co. that make components for the iPhone wholly assembled them in their home countries.
But many of Apple's suppliers have manufacturing facilities in China, so it's likely that some portion of the components they build for the iPhone are made in China as well.
I posted this on another thread yesterday.
The company I work for has 46 R&D sites worldwide, part of our product is R&D for state of the art software in aircraft design, highest in our design food chain is our peers in Russia and Pakistan.Take chip design as a case and point. Generally an OEM buys IP from five to six design shops, after integration, the OEM send the chip to a foundry. The foundry in turn adds its own IP on top. Yeah, try to debug it. so, they outsource the Silicon-on-chip to yet another EDA shop for regression test(s). All those shops can be every where.
Thus, it is not a good idea to just making up numbers of post them. the fact is, no one has the actual number.
“the misery of being exploited by capitalists is nothing compared to the misery of not being exploited at all” -- Joan Robinson
If it is credited as the assembly as the final source, it wouldn't affect US auto sales much as the vast majority of autos the US exports are assembled in other countries. Most of the finished goods the US exports are in defense and civil aviation which are vast majority value based in the US. Most of US exports are services where the money flows back to the HQ minus low value outsourcing.
I get your point that China is criticized too heavily for its trade deficit. I am just bringing up the point that their economic status is a bit overated as well. In comparison to the US, their finished product exports will dwarf America which is mostly in services now. The US statistics are closer to reality while China's are grossly exagerrated.
Yup, no one seriously into econ will use GNP as the only measuring tool.
And the Chinese leadership is the first one keep reminding people that China's influence is over stated.
In a speech in September in New York, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao cited that research to argue that trade tensions between the U.S. and China are overblown. Many of China's exports are products that are made in China on contract for foreign companies, he said, so the U.S. shouldn't criticize China for running a big trade surplus.
"Foreign-funded enterprises, including those of the United States, are major beneficiaries" of this system, Mr. Wen said.
“the misery of being exploited by capitalists is nothing compared to the misery of not being exploited at all” -- Joan Robinson
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Share this thread with friends: