Huawei a Key Beneficiary of China Subsidies That US Wants Ended (afp.com) 195
From a report: A replica of the Palace of Versailles, medieval turrets, and spires rise across Huawei's new campus in southern China, a monument to the telecom giant's growing fortune -- and the benefits of state aid. The fairytale-like facilities rest on land that was sold by the local government at cut-rate prices to woo and bolster a strategic, high-tech company like Huawei. It is the kind of government largesse that has fanned US frustrations at China's industrial policies -- subsidies are a sticking point in protracted trade talks between the world's top two economies.
Huawei has become a major flashpoint in the trade war, with President Donald Trump taking steps to block the company's dealings with US companies, threatening its global ambitions. With the dispute shining a spotlight on China's technological shortcomings, the subsidies are a window into the kind of measures Beijing may step up as trade negotiations founder. Huawei's annual reports and public records show that it has received hundreds of millions of dollars in grants, heavily subsidised land to build facilities and apartments for loyal employees, bonuses to top engineers, and massive state loans to international customers to fund purchases of Huawei products. [...] Over the past 10 years, Huawei has received 11 billion yuan ($1.6 billion) in grants, according to its annual reports.
Huawei has become a major flashpoint in the trade war, with President Donald Trump taking steps to block the company's dealings with US companies, threatening its global ambitions. With the dispute shining a spotlight on China's technological shortcomings, the subsidies are a window into the kind of measures Beijing may step up as trade negotiations founder. Huawei's annual reports and public records show that it has received hundreds of millions of dollars in grants, heavily subsidised land to build facilities and apartments for loyal employees, bonuses to top engineers, and massive state loans to international customers to fund purchases of Huawei products. [...] Over the past 10 years, Huawei has received 11 billion yuan ($1.6 billion) in grants, according to its annual reports.
Right after USA (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Right after USA (Score:5, Insightful)
It's all about food security. There is a national security interest in making sure farms are kept in business. Most nations do not want to be reliant on food imports to feed their population. As a result, you see farming related protectionism in most developed nations. It simply makes sense, people die if they don't have enough food.
Re:Right after USA (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: Right after USA (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Before I get into how that's not the case, it seems a reasonable rule. I mean, cities are for dense living. Farms are for growing food. It's just efficient to concentrate growing in areas and living in other areas.
Also, most rules against gardens are HOAs, I'm not aware of any that are citywide. Which does not imply the converse, that most HOAs have rules against it. And those that do are mostly about people thinking they lower property values.
I guarantee that all those rules will go away during WWIII
Re: (Score:2)
It's just efficient to concentrate growing in areas and living in other areas.
Wouldn't it be more efficient to combine production and living in the same area, to minimize transportation and commuting?
Either way, the solution is to leave it up to the market, rather than government edicts.
Re: (Score:2)
No, it's not more efficient to combine them, because of economies of scale (e.g. large multi-million dollar combines). Most gardens are recreational, not productive in a significant way, and therefore make regulation via zoning laws and appropriate venue. Even if you disagree with the above, HOAs are the market, not government edicts.
Re: Right after USA (Score:2)
Nah. HOAs are microgoverments.
Re: (Score:2)
I assume because they exercise control over your life via a contract (well, not even over your life, just over what things can be done with a specific piece of real estate) you think they are a "microgovernment". Please draw a dividing line between an HOA and the company that employs you and regulates your behavior there. Is it also a "microgovernment"? In either case you're welcome not to join the HOA/employer, free to leave at any time (selling your house if like), free to sue if the contract is unenfo
Re: Right after USA (Score:2)
Assumptions, assumptions. Who said I'm okay with the government-like power corporations hold over employees? Certainly I did not. "Sanctity of contract" is an article of faith for naive anglo-american "libertarians". Few free thinkers indeed hold sacred that particular, pernicious element of Liberturdian faith.
Re: (Score:2)
I had to assume, because you've said nothing. You still said nothing. Explain why you're making the statements you're making HOAs are government, yada yada" or assume that I am not a mind-reader and will assume you use the same reasoning as most people who say things like you do.
Re: Right after USA (Score:2)
Whatever, brohamley.
Re: (Score:2)
It's just efficient to concentrate growing in areas and living in other areas. ... why put a farm hundreds of km away from a city, if you could be closer to the city? The only good reasons are: you want to live alone, or you need a special environment, e.g. like for rice fields or wine yards.
But an unnecessary efficiency
Re: (Score:2)
Poor people usually don't get/have to deal with HOAs.
In fact many HOAs prohibit renting.
Re: Right after USA (Score:2)
HOAs are usually found in relatively affluent suburbs where food is not a problem.
Re: Right after USA (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I hope so. I have read articles that state otherwise, but I would rather just be proven wrong. This is a great way for the community to come together, and also provide much needed nutrients.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The sad part is, that the best soil on the planet lives beneath cities.
People settled where there was food, wildlife to hunt, water, the list goes on. And those initial farming communities grew, and grew.. and continued to grow.
An example? Toronto / Southern Ontario. 100s of kilometers of massive city. And under it? The best farmland in all of Canada! Moderate seasons, right beside Lake Ontario with loads of rivers, not too hot, not too cold, loads of sun ... perfect! And now home to Canada's largest
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Right after USA (Score:2)
Controlled by the Democrat Party != "democratic"
Yup (Score:2)
Governments have been subsidizing food production for many millennia. It keeps people from starving. It will not stop now, and no one expects it to. Except the totally whacky libertarians.
Re: Yup (Score:2)
It's been many, many years since the world could not produce enough food for everyone. A more globalized and peaceful world doesn't need to worry about food security because - unless you are violating human rights all over the place - you can always import food from elsewhere.
Solution without a problem (Score:2)
Farming subsidies are a solution looking for a problem.
The problem of excess or deficit food was solved 10000 years ago when we domesticated cattle. In years we had excess food we fattened cattle and at well at Christmas. Years we did not have enugh we did not raise livestock and ate our food as plants.
It does not need a large government bureacracy and subsidies to meet with crop variations.
Also not every place in the world will have disasters at the same time. On an average world food output stays the same
Re: (Score:2)
On an average world food output stays the same so as long as we are OK with importing and exporting food without political considerations farm subsidies are not needed
But many are not ok with that. Remember the wheat embargo on Russia? Nearly lead to a WWIII.
Remember the lax hygiene laws and hormone laws and other stupid things in the US? And nevertheless they want to export to the EU and wonder why many products are outright banned in the EU.
USA tried to destroy local rice production in Japan. Rice farming
Re: (Score:2)
Farming is a low value add activity and modern countries like US and Japan with universal high school education should not be farming. It would give poorer countries a chance to climb out of poverty by exporting food to the US
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Right after USA (Score:5, Insightful)
It's all about food security.
Nope. It is about the Iowa caucuses.
If you ever want to be president, you have to support corn subsidies.
Re: (Score:2)
That makes sense... to a point. Unfortunately a heckuva lot of corn that is grown in the US is used to produce ethanol, so it isn't being used as part of the supply chain at all. But of course, woe to the President or Congresscritter that even whispers the idea of ending subsidies on that particular agricultural product.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Subsidizing corn to make ethanol all so that the US doesn't have to buy ethanol made from sugar cane that's cheaper from Brazil.
Or would that be subsidizing corn to use in foreign food aid programs that only allow the recipients to purchase American food, hurting the local farmers.
Or subsidizing corn to feed animals on massive feed lots to fatten them up fast. Never mind about animal welfare. Feeding the animals a diet they have never eaten naturally and crowding them together with no room to behave natural
Thx for strawman (Score:5, Insightful)
I am pretty sure that Huawei does not produce food, and none of the parent posts have complained about China subsidizing food production. Your post is a strawman.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I am pretty sure that Huawei does not produce food, and none of the parent posts have complained about China subsidizing food production. Your post is a strawman.
Every body subsidises farmers, what's a lot more interesting here is the extent to which US corporations are subsided with land at cut rate prices, special privileges and tax breaks to the point where they don't pay any taxes at all or even get tax refunds like Amazon did whilst having paid no taxes at all. All this while US corporations are legally allowed to bribe politicians (a.k.a. citizens united). Will the US reciprocate by fixing all these glaring issues in its own back yard? ... or does the US expec
Re:Thx for strawman (Score:5, Informative)
Every body subsidises farmers
New Zealand does not [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:3)
trusting politicians to be judicious is like trusting sailors not to get drunk on shore leave.
There is one difference: The sailors are spending their own money.
Re: (Score:2)
trusting politicians to be judicious is like trusting sailors not to get drunk on shore leave.
There is one difference: The sailors are spending their own money.
Alas even that is not always true: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Arrrrrr.... shiver my timbers.
Re: Thx for strawman (Score:2)
Most American people would love to stop subsidizing megacorps. Alas, in Soviet America workers have no rights.
Re: Right after USA (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I was not talking about China. They have some sort of Communist-Fascist-Capitalist hybrid system. I am not even sure if there are any truly privately owned businesses there. I was talking about the US. Subsidies should not be welfare for the rich. Or at the very least they should have to play by the same rules as welfare for poor people. If they start making too much money they should stop getting the subsidies. Anything more than say $1000 USD per month profit should disqualify them from subsidies.
Re:Right after USA (Score:5, Insightful)
It is not socialism if the Republicans do it.
Re: (Score:2)
And yet no support from me. Especially with regard to price regulation on sugar which enables what amounts to slavery on Florida sugar plantations.
Re: (Score:2)
I never implied that Farm Subsidies didn't have bi-partisan support. However most of the districts the benefit from such subsidies have elected Republican Representatives. So for Republicans to start yelling and screaming calling these Subsidies are part of the slippery slope of Socialism, is curtailed.
If you are a republican and assuming that your political stance is more then just because you chose to be a republican and let the parties ideology guide your thought. (much like how people favor a sports tea
Re:Right after USA (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Right after USA (Score:2)
would we be reading a similar article?
Probably not; how's your Mandarin?
Re: (Score:2)
Fun fact, Amazon is buying(renting?) office space in Manhattan for a major HQ... call it HQ3. I guess the people who said "cancel the tax breaks" were right.
Re: (Score:3)
And if Amazon had received several $Billion in tax breaks (the benefits of state aid) by building HQ2 in New York, would we be reading a similar article?
Amazon's handout fell through due to public pressure, but there are plenty of large US corporations that receive billions of dollars in handouts every year. For example, just Apple alone saved many tens of billions of tax dollars due to the repatriation holiday. Apple's return on investment paid for lobbyists far outstrips the best venture capital funds. At the local level, Apple saves tens of millions of dollars in tax rebates every year due to advantageous "arrangements." And, that's just one company.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Right after USA (Score:5, Insightful)
That is actually the reason for many of the tariffs on US goods entering the EU. It suits both sides because both want to maintain their own crop growing capability and thus food independence, so need to subsidise their own.
The biggest problem is US subsidies for things like fossil fuels and tech. The massive tax breaks companies get for building their facilities in a particular jurisdiction are illegal in the EU.
Re: (Score:2)
You say "tax breaks" like it's something other than the government not taking as much money from a private company as it says it can in order to stimulate a regional economy
Re: (Score:2)
You say "tax breaks" like it's something other than the government not charging a private company as much for services as it normally would in order to stimulate a regional economy
This seems to gloss over stuff a bit less while still sounding good for your point. HTH!
Re:Right after USA (Score:5, Insightful)
Taxes are not charity. They are fees for services provided. When a company gets a tax break its not like it gives up the services like access to roads, protection from cops and regulation so that they can have breathable air. They just get those services for free.
A tax break is not you getting to keep your money, its you not paying for services you are still consuming
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Subsidies are funded from taxes which poor people have to pay so that rich corporations can make more money. So that executives can put more gas in their yachts and buy another Ferrari every so often. It certainly does not help the poor. It's welfare for the rich. If you care about the poor it would be better just to give them the money directly so that they can actually have money to buy food. Welfare for the poor is a lot more defensible than welfare for the rich.
Re: (Score:2)
Subsidies are funded from taxes which poor people have to pay so that rich corporations can make more money.
Your ignorance of actual facts is truly amazing.
In 2016 (the latest year for which data is available) the top 1% paid more in taxes than the bottom 90%, 37.3% vs 30.5% of total taxes paid. The top 1% earned 19% of total income but paid 37% of the taxes so if anybody is paying for subsidies it is the top 1%.
Re: (Score:2)
US subsidies to large food corporations are driving small farmers in poor countries out of business and leading to rural poverty and farmer suicides as US subsidized cost of production is lower than even farmers working starvation wages.. All so that fat cats running farming corporations in the US can buy their third private jet. And its funded using taxes on the US middle class. Nothing is more eveil than farming subsidies.
Re: (Score:2)
are driving small farmers in poor countries out of business and leading to rural poverty and farmer suicides ... happened in India, no idea if that phase is over or is s
Only if in those countries subsidized american food companies do farming. Poverty and suicides are more the cause of genetical modified cotton etc. where the farmers where convinced/forced to take up a credit, buy seeds that grow sterile plants, agree to a long term selling contract for a to low price, and have to buy seeds every year again
Re: (Score:2)
They do because American food is so cheap to import local farmers cant compete
Re: (Score:2)
Also, destroying markets in other countries by dumping cheap corn based products there is not exactly helping them either.
Re: (Score:2)
When will USA stop subsidizing their corn and other farmers?
Ignoring food security is a profoundly stupid idea. If we relied on other countries for food they could blackmail us to the extreme. Think of how quickly China pulls out the rare earth metals card and just refuses to ship some. Now imagine doing that with food. Certain things are too important to ignore, food and energy both qualify.
Re: (Score:2)
Who does the US think it is that it can demand other countries to stop subsidizing important aspects of their economy while they continue to subsidize theirs?
Re: (Score:2)
In the modern world telecom and tech sector is almost as important as food production.
You are just 3 meals away from the end of civilization. It takes a shockingly short amount of time for things to break down. When things are working and people are largely fed then Facebook can have billions of dollars of value. When you're starving you'll trade it all for food.
Re: (Score:2)
Nice first post whataboutism...
Re: (Score:3)
Materially it doesnt make a difference to me if I am paying 50% of my take home for food and 20% as tax or paying 70% of my take home as tax so that 50% can be given to farmers as subsidies.
Re: (Score:2)
And before you say noone pays 70%, note I said 70% of take home so if I have a 40% tax rate I take home only 60% and 40 is roughly 70% of 60.
60% take home rate is pretty common when you add FICA,Fed,State income taxes as well as Medical Insurance and retirement deductions - heck my take home is only 50% of gross.
Re: And the $80B bailout of the US auto industry (Score:2)
A subsidy that gets paid back with interest isn't much of a subsidy. It's a federally guaranteed loan. Which the American people profited from.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
At first I thought you were joking until I read
> which yes, does make it superior for us to use.
At which point I started to worry you might actually be serious.
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing to do with any trade war.
Re: (Score:2)
Not to mention "education" with no real-world applications.
Or, to put it into context... (Score:5, Informative)
...about a 1/10th of the amount given to Boeing by the US government in State and Federal subsidies.
https://subsidytracker.goodjob... [goodjobsfirst.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. And we have to have the courage to admit that $1.6bn over 10 years is a vanishingly small number in comparison with Huawei's revenue over that same period of time.
Re: (Score:2)
also a vanishingly small number in terms of Boeing's revenue. Those are nice oranges, but they're not apples.
How is this any different? (Score:1)
U.S. companies also get these tax incentives and other such benefits from cities looking to get the company to build new local facilities. So Pot and Kettle IMO.
Ban AMD and TESLA too (Score:4, Interesting)
Almost every large American company has got land at cut rate prices and tax subsidies for setting up factories whether it was AMD in upstate New York or TESLA in Fremont or Solar City in Michigan.
Almost every govt gives subsidies to attract jobs. Heck US subsidizes farmers to keep growing corn nobody needs.
Almost every private company in the US has tech built on top of research done with NSF grants yet we dont accuse Intel or Apple to be agents of the US Govt.
Google, AT&T and Microsoft have all given up private data to Govt prosecutors under subpoena yet we dont accuse US companies of being unsafe to work with due to the US Cybersecurity law
Cisco has knowingly put in backdoors and shared the same with NSA yet we are not pressuring Europe to not use CISCO routers in the 5G Backbone.
Lets recognize what is happening here. US is losing its lead in tech and is fighting dirty using National Security as an excuse to try and keep the lead
Re: (Score:2)
And I don't really care. What part about realpolitik don't you guys get? The universe is not a charity, entropy and scarcity exist and the world ain't big enough for the both of us. You can use whatever argument you want to justify why we (being the western world in general and the US in particular should be on top), but ultimately it doesn't matter. I want my tribe to have a prosperous and comfortable life and everyone else can get fucked.
I'm fine with us doing everything we can to further out best inter
Re: (Score:2)
Realpolitik is all good but if we were going to compete only at the level of realpolitik China is always going to beat our ass with 4 times the population and a culture which puts science and business before sports.
The US wins because its believed to be the most fair country in the world, where an immigrant who comes to the country with nothing can have his grandson become the President (Trump). If we lose that moral leadership no longer will the cream of crop of each country want to immigrate to the US and
Re: (Score:2)
Lets recognize what is happening here. US is losing its lead in tech and is fighting dirty using National Security as an excuse to try and keep the lead
I cant work up any actual outrage over the fact that the US is looking after her own interests. I'm not even American.
Hang a tarp over it (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe we should just put some black tape over the Huawei name and logo so it doesn't upset us.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe we should just put some black tape over the Huawei name and logo so it doesn't upset us.
Perhaps that's and idea for the right wing snow flakes, myself I'm perfectly fine with Huawei logos.
Re: Hang a tarp over it (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm still waiting for the Russian mod-bombers to figure out that was a knock on their favorite president. I guess their algorithms only work if you explicitly use the name, "Trump", or the words "mushroom dick".
I guess we'll see.
Kinda like ... (Score:2)
... oil subsidies in the US?
Re: (Score:3)
Really [rollingstone.com]?
Study: U.S. Fossil Fuel Subsidies Exceed Pentagon Spending
Re: (Score:3)
https://www.motherjones.com/po... [motherjones.com]
https://www.cbo.gov/system/fil... [cbo.gov]
The tax preferences that explicitly target energy use and production are provided through three mechanisms: pref-erences in the income tax system, such as special deduc-tions, lower tax rates, and tax credits; preferences in excise taxes, such as excise tax credits; and Section 1603 grants in lieu of tax credits (see Table 1).6 In 2016, total energy-related support included the following amounts:
B$14.1 billion for energy-related preferences in the income tax code. Of that amount, preferences for renewable energy ($6.6 billion) accounted for the largest share, and those for fossil fuels ($4.6 billion), the second largest. The two most costly preferences were the credits for electricity production from renewable sources ($3.4 billion) and the credits for investments in solar and geothermal equipment, fuel cells, and microturbines ($2.6 billion).
We subsidize more (Score:2)
Welfare is a subsidy to Wal-Mart. The Interstate is a subsidy to trucking. Satellite launches are a subsidy to private space industry. Middle East military adventurism is a subsidy for oil. We literally pay farmers to throw out their crops as a subsidy.
If you add it up, the U.S. is far guiltier of subsidizing its international corporate interests than China is.
Re: (Score:2)
Wal-Mart has raised wages since you last looked at it. Infrastructure (aka Interstates) isn't subsidizing, it's enabling and a base government function. Satellite launches are for a purpose other than subsidies. Middle East adventurism is actually pretty mixed for oil. Farmer subsidies are important for the food supply and are a real subsidy.
Meanwhile, China subsidizes power to the point that it's cheaper to import marbles from China than to pay the electric bill at a US plant.
Basically (Score:2)
Re: Basically (Score:2)
So your argument is that Huawei is a patastate military contractor? Or a patastate provider of stultifying mass entertainment to keep the masses apathetic and confused?
Pot, kettle, black (Score:2)
The USA, a country that is famed for giving huge tax-breaks & subsidies to its own favoured industries, corporations, & billionaires, is complaining about China doing the same?
Yeah, just another comment the same as many of the above. The current administration are a bunch of a-historical, a-contextual incompetents.
This is awful (Score:2)
The USA should be ashamed of what they've allowed to occur with Amazon's courting of state governments for their 2nd HQ.
Wait, what are we talking about? Hua-who-now? Same deal. Also bad.
A replica of the Palace of Versailles, medieval tu (Score:2)
A replica of the Palace of Versailles, medieval turrets, and spires rise across Huawei's new campus
.....Why? That just seems silly.
Re: (Score:2)
.....Why? That just seems silly.
Pffft, you are silly.
Why not? First of all: they have the money. Secondly: it looks good!! Thirdly: it most likely is fun.
And if you look at this, it is a tourist attraction as it is even inside a copy of Versailles
https://sputniknews.com/videoc... [sputniknews.com]
So they probably even make money with it.
WTO rules (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Be careful what you wish for because Chinese companies, and those from other countries, could ask for the same thing that American companies get in the US. Once you start playing that game you open yourself up to going to the WTO on the wrong side of a complaint.
Lots of Chinese companies are subsidized/dump (Score:2)
Re: Lots of American companies are subsidized/dump (Score:2)
Maybe the American people are tired of China buying our treasonous politicians with suitcases full of cash in dark parking lots?
Re: (Score:2)
And of course, the federal government controls local government policies, and ergo, things like this should factor into national trade policy negotiations. *facepalm* (I seriously hope you are a Brit, then it at least makes sense how you could totally misunderstand federalism.)
Re: Crony capitaism and the constitution (Score:2)
Didn't you hear? The Constitution was repealed in late 2001.