Brazil halts sales of charger-less iPhones, fines Apple $2.3 million

I have, I aim for OEMs, and I don't have any issue. So why wouldn't the system message just say it's broken then vs. not compatible. Both are completely different.

A little off topic, but why do i sense arrogant prissiness in your message? Are you an iPhone dev? Did I offend you? Or do you have an iPhone across your ass? Got your charger wires in a bundle?

Apple's main argument is that the smaller iPhone package without the charger allows for nearly twice the amount of boxes that can fit onto a shipping pallet. Apple has steadily reduced the size of the packaging for all of their products over the years. Well, except for the iPod Sock that never altered its packaging....

Brazilian here... the ruling does not apply to Samsung because they backpedaled and send you the charger free if you request one, and most of their phones come with one anyway. The “charger on demand” approach seems like a good compromise, IMO. Don't know if any other manufacturer tried to pull it off besides Apple and Samsung on the Brazilian market.

Also consider that iPhones are nowhere near as ubiquitous in Brazil as they are in the US, so the "everybody has a charger" thing does not work as well around here, certainly not to the Apple-spec chargers (they cost US$ 36 around here, BTW. The cable is another US$ 41). USB-C is getting a lot more common recently, but anecdotally I also wouldn't call it prevalent over micro-USB yet.

I won’t touch on the merit (or lack thereof) of the ruling, just giving some perspective on how it’s perceived around here.

Yep. Selling something you can't use should be a 100% shutdown business shutdown event.

I have a box too -- mainly filled with barrel-plug chargers and a lot of older USB chargers with miniUSB/microUSB connectors hardwired to the plug.

Sometimes I reuse them by pulling out a plug to replace a gadget's burnt-out 5V adaptor, like my dad's large very expensive balcony LED ornament that had a weather-damaged plug. Verify amperage is sufficient for a pre-PD-era "dumb" charger -- chop off the wire, and hardwire 5V to 5V (or even add a modern USB connector!) and it works great.

I also do the reverse too -- I also sometimes USB-ify some old 5-volt (+/-10%, 4.5-5.5V) LED table ornaments. LED decorations that formerly came with barrel connectors or 5V hardwire by connecting a USB plug to the end of it that was chopped off an old USB cable. And then it works with any USB port, freeing it from its included proprietary charger!

Some of these ormanets are big and fancy (like 3 foot tall LED willow trees with two hundred warm lights as buds) -- the $50-to-$100 luxury stuff -- so they're worth USB-ifying if it fits in the power budget of USB. Better than chucking it in the trash if its proprietary plug goes AWOL!

("dumb" pre-PD delivery to convert non-USB 5V appliances to USB-powerable -- generally works for anything up to 5V 500mA for most USB ports, or 5V 900mA for USB3 ports, and up to 5V 2A for almost any wall chargers capable of charging tablets. A fun side effect is I can use a portable cellphone power bank to make almost any legacy wall-powered 5V LED ornament "cordless" -- useful for decorating a patio or campsite).

Even for PD, I can now use PD emulator dongles, to safely provide 9V, 12V, 15V and 20V barrel connections powered from any modern USB-C PD charger, even up to 100 watts. So I also recently USB-ified a 20 volt non-USB appliance for cheaper than buying a replacement power supply.

Is Apple willing to warranty my iPhone regardless of what third party charger and cable I use? Based on past experience I can easily see their service center writing off a lot of repairs as non-warranty because they have no record of you purchasing an Apple certified charger.

Come on Brazil, have some balls. $2.3million to Apple is loose change lost behind the fake meat stand. What a paltry sum of a fine. Apple should be fined $230million. And in this country Apple should fined $800million for doing the same thing.

Did they not reduce the price of the 11 when they came out with the 12, then? That’s what they consistently have done in the U.S.

I don't think the EU mandate is in effect yet-- I think that is in the same regulations around "all smartphones that support wired charging muct do so with USB-C", which kicks in 2024.

That said, maybe Apple and Samsung see that coming and think, "when this goes into effect, we'll save some money producing the chargers and we'll save some money shipping the phones around the globe, so why would we wait until 2024?"

But it has also been a while since chargers commonly were a one-piece unit. That most of them were a brick with a USB-A port with a separate A-to-C cable, then even those older bricks generally work when given an A-to-Lightning cable.

That said, my Ultra 22 came with a C-to-C cable (and no brick), so incompatible with every USB brick I own. But, my hordes of A-C cables all work fine with whatever bricks I have and all of my wireless chargers work fine too, so I just used those. Easy-peasy.

While that contradiction is a bit perplexing, it's by no means an insurmountable challenge. I fully expect that Apple's answer in Brazil will be to simply toss a separately boxed charger into the shopping bag with every iPhone purchase... and I also expect them to charge for it, as I doubt that the ruling forbids them from doing so. So from Apple's point of view, this just means that the price of every iPhone sold in Brazil just went up by the price of one high-margin charging brick.

There are still many in some less developed countries who are still using legacy USB chargers with their cheap-knockoff phones (most still use MicroUSB!). So their chargers with a hardwired MicroUSB plug don't work woth iPhone.

We are lucky to live in a country where chargers are not a luxury. Where you can often buy a universal 5W-10W detachable-connector charger for $3-$5 from a convenience store. But such modern charger is still more than the day's income of people in some countries. I wonder if there's increased frustration in countries (such as Brazil) that are still using the "recycled legacy USB" chargers that commonly ship with ultracheap Android phones just a few years ago.

In these countries, these sub-$100 Android phones are almost always micro USB even in 2022. Sometimes include recycled/refurbished older MicroUSB chargers that have the connector hardwired to the charger.

So I wonder if residents in Brazil are far less likely to have a charger supporting detachable charge cables, than in North America?

To solve such issues with concerned governments (whether we like them or not), Apple could include at least a basic USB charger (even just the 500mA sugar cube) in these countries to help seed the existence of detachable-connector USB chargers in such countries.

I'll just copy paste my comment on Gizmodo here:

Hello, Brazilian here. No, this wasn’t led by current stupid president at office, it’s a consumer protection thing. And I’ll add that yes, this makes total sense under our consumer protection legislation and how iPhones are perceived in Brazil, and under the same legislation all other cited examples should go the same route eventually - the ones with chargers, not earbuds or whatever.

Ok, so what is the justification. Here in Brazil we have consumer protection laws that goes against something that is known as “venda casada”, in English it’d be product tying. I think in the US this is looked upon much more from the anti-trust angle rather than consumer protection, but I dunno of past cases there, so forgive me if I’m wrong.

It makes sense if you understand the reality of the market here. Given Apple’s market share in Brazil in comparison to US, the reason behind why Apple has such a small market share here is not because Brazilians don’t like Apple crap or are not enticed by it’s hip advertisement and promises... it’s much more because Apple products in Brazil are luxury by definition. It’s not a standard consumer electronics company, it’s a luxury brand not unlike Prada, Louis Vuitton and others.

In order to explain this properly I’d have to extend my comment into exchange rates and minimum wage comparisons... but to make a brief summary of all of it, it goes like this: In order for an average Brazilian to buy the latest iPhone 13 Pro base model, he has to work almost 9 months at minimum wage.

If we consider US minimum wage to be the federal one, at 7 bucks an hour, and consider that every month has around 170 work hours, putting average monthly minimum wage in the US at 1190 bucks a month, the average American has to work less than a single month for the same iPhone 13 Pro base model.

So, you can imagine having to pay 9x the price effectively for a phone and you understand why it’s in the luxury category.

With that understanding, you now see how the same applies for chargers, cables and whatnot - the crappiest charger in Apple’s Brazil store is 191 reais (our currency), which at current currency exchange rates is around 36 something USDs, but is actually much more than that given the reality of Brazilian wages and whatnot. You won’t find many people here with mountains of chargers and cables tucked into a drawer because those are far too expensive to have in excess. I mean, of course there are people who have them, but it’s a very small percentage of well off costumers who can afford to be loyal to Apple here.

So, what happens is that in Brazil, the case of someone buying a new iPhone, and then having to also buy a charger afterwards because he/she doesn’t already have one is much more likely.
Which then falls into the consumer protection law case, where a company cannot sell a product that requires the costumer to buy yet another product/accessory from the same company only to then make use of it. In other words, a product has to be sold complete ready to use, unless explicitly told and clearly labeled otherwise (like products that needs batteries which don’t come with them).

I might be mistaken because I’m not a lawyer and haven’t been following the case closely, but I’m pretty sure that is Apple put in big letters in their iPhone boxes and advertisements that “charger is not included”, “this product requires a separate purchase of a charger”, and other guidelines and warnings like those, the lawsuit wouldn’t have been necessary. This is about clarity in marketing and sales too, not just about the charger being there or not.

Or, you know, Apple could just offer free chargers for those who don't already have one, sell iPhones without chargers at discount prices according to prices of their chargers with clear labeling and reasoning why, or a number of other options that wouldn't burden the consumer with having to buy chargers separately. I'd also like to remind people how much companies like Apple reinforce the belief that people need to buy official chargers for safety concerns and whatnot.

I'm pretty sure this lawsuit only came to light because Apple did none of that. They just started selling iPhones without chargers, and didn't make much of an effort to inform the end at retail consumer that they were doing that. In fact, after going through the step by step procedure for purchase in the online Apple store, I saw no clear indication there. They state that the phone and cable is included in the box, but there is no clear notice that a charger is not included, which would be mandatory as per consumer protection law here.

So there you go... I hope this bring a bit more understanding in the matter. Honestly, I think justice is right on this one, even though it might not make any sense in the US or EU nations.

Yeah but that does not work here in Brazil. Everyone will request one for free and resell it online. That's what Brazilians have always done long before Apple removed the charger: they don't keep the extra chargers and accessories, they just sell it for money. Do you see the currency difference between USD and BRL in the article? iPhones are very expensive here, so people try to cheapen it by selling everything that's not the actual phone.

When searching for these expensive electronics (iPhone, iPad, Mac, etc) on our eBay-equivalent (Mercado Livre, OLX) you need to filter by price otherwise you'll get plenty of listing for boxes and accessories rather than the actual product. And when you find the actual iPhone, it's just the phone without the box or anything else, sometimes not even the cable, or with a falsified cheap cable instead of the original.

Pretty much everyone I know does that. That's not new and it's probably not going to change either.

You can't really prove that either. You are comparing price when you should be comparing the profit margin. If cutting the charger saves Apple $5/device, but Apple put that extra $5 into some other part, then the math still adds up all the same.

EDIT: I did some quick googling, and it looks like the iPhone 12 saw a 21% jump in materials and manufacturing costs[1], but the MSRP stayed the same. So it sounds to me like eliminating the bundled charger made it easier for apple to keep the same price while selling more "phone".


1: https://www.counterpointresearch.com/bo ... iphone-11/

A while back, my brother purchased a new model iPad to replace his old model. A few weeks later, I asked how he liked it and he said he loved the performance but that it took ages to charge.

The problem was that he had simply used one of the "plenty of chargers" to hand and it wasn't supplying enough wattage. I mean, they all look basically the same except for a wee number printed in light grey on white.

I told him to use the one in the box and problem solved. Even though our conversation had taken place late at night, he didn't need to wait until the shops opened as he already had it. Convenient, no?

Another problem is people complain how expensive Apple kit is so given the option, many people will just buy the cheapest "compatible" device they can find. After all, they all work basically the same, right? Except that trying to buy chargers from hit sites such as eBay or Amazon will generally result in knock-offs. Even if they're not knock-offs, the quality of third-party chargers may not be as written on the tin.

About ten years back, Apple faced some bad PR from people using shoddy off-brand chargers and for a time, even had a special programme in place.

I like to imagine I'm relatively tech-savvy. There's a popular gadget news website I read most days but when confronted with purchasing a new iPhone for a relative, I'd no idea which charger I'd need to order as Apple sell a 35W, 67W, 140W, 12W, 20W, 30W, and 96W. If you use it with a charging pad, do you need a higher rated one? At what point is the extra wattage simply wasted? I ended up picking the wrong one and needing to go back and exchange it, which I wouldn't have done had it been in the box.

So we're asking people even less informed than me to suss out their optimal charger? As Richie Cunningham would say, "Yowza."

You have pretty much zero evidence to back that up. Apple's gross margin is very tightly controlled at 38-40% most of the time. If they do something that improves margin, like eliminating the charger, they also do something that reduces margin, whether that means using more expensive components elsewhere or not increasing the price as much with inflation or whatnot.

Do you have any evidence to back that up?

Look in the mirror.

I'm a phone. I'm expecting a 5v signal across pins 4 and 5. I'm not getting it.

Is the cable broken, or is it just not designed to send a 5v signal across pins 4 and 5? How can I tell?


I'm guessing you are projecting. I use a Google Pixel 3. I've never personally owned an iPhone. I'm a Windows dev.

I think you should spend some real time asking yourself why you "sense" that. It's not present on this end of the line.