[Zenst]

With Apple holding a lot of cash offshore awaiting for a favourable way to onshore it, combined with the political eagerness to bring chip production onshore. Those two aspect may well pan out to a situation in which the accountants see it as a win win.

Even then, do Apple use enough chips to justify running a fab, let alone one that would be locked into the node of the time. I really don't see it happening for many reasons and the only reason they would - would be some tax break incentive to onshore some of the money they have offshore in that it pays for itself, win or fail.

[valuearb]

They would be better off paying the taxes. Making chips isn’t a tax dodge, it’s a hugely expensive many year commitment.

[toast0]

> With Apple holding a lot of cash offshore awaiting for a favourable way to onshore it

I don't think that's relevant anymore. My understanding is that the 2017 TCJA required prior unrepatriated earnings to be recognized and taxed over eight years (so still ongoing) and future foreign earnings not subject to US tax (except if the foreign tax is below the corporate alternative minimum tax rate). As a result of those changes, there's no need to hold cash offshore.

[ideamotor]

I can absolutely see both parties wrapping a flag around an investment tax credit for building a fab in the US. To the person saying taxes don't matter because it's expensive -> The more capital cost the better if they can use that to offset taxes.