Apple’s disassembly robot Daisy makes striking gold a little easier

iphone

1,900 kg of aluminum, 770 kg of cobalt, 710 kg of copper, and 11 kg of rare earth elements – that’s just a fraction of what Apple’s disassembly robot Daisy can recover from old iPhones.  Crucial to the construction of circuit boards, batteries, cameras, haptics and other pieces that keep our smartphones running, these precious metals are often left untapped because consumers aren’t recycling their old electronics or facilities don’t have the means to easily recycle them. Apple, however, is trying to change that with its recent commitment to minimize its negative impact on the environment through initiatives like its trade-in “GiveBack” recycling program and investments in R&D to create machines like Apple’s disassembly robot Daisy. The recycling robot was five years in the making and was unveiled last week in Austin, just in time for Earth Day 2018.

Lisa Jackson, Apple’s VP of Environment, said, “What we’ve learned is that the technology for recycling hasn’t really advanced much. (Daisy) is one of the ways that we’re going to make real progress in our goal to mine less from the Earth and use more recycled and renewable materials in-product.” And boy, is recycling worth it. Experts note that “urban mining” or recovering materials from discarded electronics is more efficient than extracting metals from natural mining. Frederico Magalini, an e-waste researcher and managing director at UK sustainability firm Sofies, explains that there is 80 times as much gold in one ton of recycled cellphones than in a gold mine. He also adds that recycling electronics is more sustainable than plastic recycling: “Historically, metals have value, and you can recycle metal forever. For plastic, it’s different because every time you recycle the plastics, the mechanical properties don’t necessarily remain the same.”

As the benefits of recycling electronics become more apparent, the way we recycle those devices will improve as well. Two years ago, Apple’s recycling robot Liam was 100 feet long and composed of 29 robots. Now in 2018, its successor, Daisy, is a third of the size and made up of only five robots. In fact, old parts from Liam were used to construct Daisy. More compact and efficient, Daisy is able to dismantle nine different versions of the iPhone at a rate of 200 iPhones per hour, unlike Liam which could only deconstruct the iPhone 6.

Currently, Apple’s disassembly robot Daisy is one of a kind in the world. A second Daisy is expected to be installed in the Netherlands and the disassembly robot will likely be rolled out in other parts of the Apple global empire. Apple CEO Tim Cook said, “We’re going to keep pushing the boundaries of what is possible with the materials in our products, the way we recycle them, our facilities and our work with suppliers to establish new creative and forward-looking sources of renewable energy because we know the future depends on it.

Developing ways to improve recycling of electronics? Did you know your R&D experiments could be eligible for the R&D Tax Credit and you can receive up to 14% back on your expenses? To find out more, please contact a Swanson Reed R&D Specialist today or check out our free online eligibility test.

Who We Are:

Swanson Reed is Texas’ largest Specialist R&D tax advisory firm, offering tax credibility assessments, claim preparation, and advisory services. We manage all facets of the R&D tax credit program in Texas, from claim prep & audit compliance to claim disputes. 

Swanson Reed regularly hosts free webinars and provides free IRS CE and CPE credits for CPA’s.  For more information please visit us at www.swansonreed.com/webinars or contact your usual Swanson Reed representative

Issues Facing Multinationals After Apple’s Tax Headlines

CaptureTAX

Apple in Ireland

This week Apple has taken a blow from the European Commission as the EU demands Apple pay their withstanding taxes to Ireland to the tune of about 14.5 billion US dollars. While Apple would be the one with a large bill, the focus lies heavily on the Irish government for what the EU defines as selective treatment or creating a special benefit for an individual or company. However, Ireland refuses to claim the taxes. Why?

By accepting the $14.5 billion Ireland will put at risk its reputation for being a cheap and stable market in which to perform business. As of 2014, Ireland had $350 billion or 311 billion euros of foreign direct investment which was 165% of GDP. Despite what is sure to be a costly fight with the European Commission, Ireland can not afford to lose these large investors. This, in effect, will damage Ireland’s relationship with the many multinationals functioning there such as Facebook and Google who have their European headquarters in the country.

Apple & the Big Brother

Apple CEO, Tim Cook, has issued a clear letter addressing Europe’s Apple community stating that the opinion issued by the European Commission has no factual basis as Apple pays the taxes it owes. The company continued to say that as nearly all of Apple’s R&D (research and development) is performed in California the vast majority of their profits are taxed within the US. This year Apple is lined up to spend about $10 billion on R&D increasing their research spending by about 30% from 2015. The letter concluded by drawing attention to proactive rather than retroactive lawmaking and by committing to further investment in Ireland and the European market.

Why has the US government supported Apple in this fight? For some time there has been conversation regarding the repatriation of profits being made abroad. While bringing the era of parking money offshore to an end would be beneficial for the US, allowing Apple to pay the sum would potentially add to the federal deficit. Additionally, Washington has stated its concern regarding the European Commission encroaching on US Government Jurisdiction. However it seems that not only the US is getting involved.

Bigger Fish to Fry

This is only the beginning of much more to come – governments worldwide have been struggling with how to tax the intangible multinationals and now the conversation has been opened. The question is; will these multinationals be forced to pay for their previous agreements or will rulings move from the current period forward?

If you would like to discuss the R&D Tax Incentive further, please do not hesitate to contact one of Swanson Reed’s offices today.