Apple has traditionally depended on China for the production of the bulk of its products, a tactic motivated by the nation’s low labor expenses, strong supply chain, and unparalleled manufacturing abilities. Nonetheless, in reaction to the imposition of significant tariffs on Chinese imports by the Trump administration, Apple started relocating some of its manufacturing to India — a transition that had already been underway prior to the announcement of the tariffs.

In spite of this shift, former President Donald Trump has expressed vehement disapproval of Apple’s strategy to bolster its manufacturing presence in India. During a press conference on Thursday, Trump disclosed a recent dialogue with Apple CEO Tim Cook, in which he conveyed his dissatisfaction.

“I had a slight issue with Tim Cook yesterday,” Trump stated. “I told him, ‘You’re my friend, I’ve treated you exceptionally. You’re bringing $500 billion here, but now I’m learning that you’re constructing all over India. I don’t want you building in India.’”

Trump went on to underscore his wish for Apple to augment its manufacturing domestically. “I said to Tim, ‘Listen, we’ve backed you while you established plants in China for years. Now it’s time to manufacture here. We’re not keen on you building in India — India can handle their own. We want you to invest in the United States.’”

While Trump’s comments may appear compelling, the situation is more intricate. Producing iPhones in the U.S. at the volume Apple needs would be very expensive and logistically challenging, if not currently unfeasible.

Trump did mention that Apple intends to grow its production operations in the U.S., although he did not go into details. In response, Apple has already proclaimed intentions to invest over $500 billion in the United States in the coming four years. This investment includes the establishment of a new facility in Houston, Texas, dedicated to server manufacturing.

As Apple continues to maneuver through global trade tensions and supply chain hurdles, the company’s manufacturing strategy remains a delicate balance between political influence and economic feasibility.