App makers including the Coalition for App Fairness are urging EU antitrust regulators to crack down on Apple over new fees they say undermine the bloc’s Digital Markets Act by keeping charges high even when developers use alternative app stores or payment systems. They argue that Apple’s latest approach to charging for access to iPhone users risks turning a landmark European law meant to open up digital markets into a technical exercise that leaves the company’s core business model largely intact.
EU Developers’ Complaint Against Apple’s New Fees
App developers have formally urged the European Commission to investigate Apple’s updated fee structure under the Digital Markets Act, arguing that the company is not complying with the law’s intent to loosen its grip on the iOS ecosystem. Groups such as the Coalition for App Fairness, which represents companies that rely on mobile distribution for products ranging from games to productivity tools, are pressing regulators to treat Apple’s new model as a fresh abuse of gatekeeper power rather than a good‑faith implementation of EU rules. In their view, the DMA was designed to give developers a meaningful choice in how they reach users, yet Apple’s current terms still tie that access to payments that flow back to Cupertino.
According to the developers’ submissions, Apple’s revised fees for distribution and in‑app payments still effectively force them to pay Apple even when they route users through rival app stores or external payment providers. The complaint, as described in reporting on app developers urging EU action on Apple fee practices, centers on the claim that Apple has simply shifted its revenue collection from traditional App Store commissions to a more complex mix of charges that follow developers wherever they go within the iOS environment. For developers that had hoped to use the DMA to bypass Apple’s financial terms entirely, the stakes are high, since the outcome will determine whether alternative app stores and payment systems can truly compete on price and flexibility.
How Apple’s Fee Practices Work Under the DMA
Under the DMA framework, Apple is required to allow alternative app stores and independent billing options on iOS devices in the European Union, but developers say the company has paired that opening with new categories of fees that still capture a large share of their revenue. One of the most contentious elements is a per‑install or “core technology” fee that applies even when an app is downloaded outside the official App Store, which developers say turns every new user into a recurring cost center payable to Apple. Instead of paying a straightforward commission on in‑app purchases, developers now face a layered structure in which distribution, access to Apple’s underlying technologies, and ongoing usage can each trigger separate charges.
Developers argue that these fees mean Apple continues to collect a significant share of app revenues despite the DMA’s requirement to allow alternative distribution and billing channels, leaving the competitive landscape largely unchanged. For a subscription service like a language‑learning app or a streaming platform, the economics of acquiring a user through a rival store may still be shaped by Apple’s per‑install charges, which can erode the margin that alternatives were supposed to deliver. The practical effect, according to the companies challenging the model, is that Apple’s role as a toll collector on the iOS ecosystem persists, and the DMA’s promise of lower prices and more innovation for consumers risks being diluted.
Developers’ Claims of Non‑Compliance and Harm
Developers contend that Apple’s fee model violates both the spirit and the letter of the Digital Markets Act by discouraging the use of rival app stores and independent payment systems that the law was explicitly designed to foster. In their complaints, they argue that if choosing a non‑Apple store or billing provider still triggers substantial payments to Apple, then the theoretical freedom granted by the DMA does not translate into real‑world competitive pressure. The Coalition for App Fairness and other groups frame this as a question of compliance, saying that Apple’s approach turns legal obligations into a pricing exercise that preserves its dominance rather than opening the market.
They also warn that the new fees could hurt smaller app makers and consumers by keeping prices high and limiting genuine competition in the EU app ecosystem, particularly for startups that lack the scale to absorb additional costs. A small productivity app or indie game studio that relies on thin margins may find that the combination of per‑install charges and other fees makes it uneconomical to experiment with alternative distribution, even if those channels promise better visibility or user engagement. For consumers, developers say the likely outcome is fewer choices, slower innovation, and subscription prices that remain anchored to Apple’s preferred revenue share, rather than reflecting the cost savings that true platform competition might deliver.
Regulatory Pressure and Possible EU Responses
The European Commission is now being pressed by developers to open or deepen enforcement actions against Apple over its compliance with the DMA, turning what began as a technical rule‑making process into a high‑stakes test of the EU’s ability to rein in powerful digital gatekeepers. Officials in Brussels are being asked to scrutinize not only whether Apple has ticked the formal boxes of allowing alternative app stores and payment systems, but also whether the company’s fee structure undermines the law’s core objective of promoting fair and contestable markets. For regulators, the challenge lies in distinguishing between legitimate compensation for platform services and pricing strategies that effectively lock in Apple’s control.
Developers are seeking potential EU responses that include orders requiring Apple to scrap or drastically alter the contested fees, along with the possibility of fines if regulators find non‑compliance with the DMA. They want the Commission to set clear boundaries on what kinds of charges a gatekeeper can impose when developers choose rival distribution or billing options, arguing that anything less would invite similar tactics from other large platforms. The outcome of this enforcement debate will shape not only the economics of app development in Europe, but also the credibility of the DMA as a model for regulating digital markets in other regions that are watching the EU’s experiment closely.
What Has Changed Since Earlier EU–Apple Clashes
Apple’s current EU fee practices differ from its pre‑DMA model in that developers now face new categories of charges even when they technically use alternatives to Apple’s App Store or in‑app payment system, rather than paying a single commission on sales processed through Apple’s infrastructure. Before the DMA, the company’s standard approach centered on a percentage cut of in‑app purchases and paid downloads, with limited scope for developers to steer users to external payment options. The shift to per‑install and core technology fees, which apply regardless of where an app is downloaded or how a transaction is processed, represents a structural change that developers say keeps Apple at the center of the value chain.
The latest push by app developers marks an escalation from earlier complaints about App Store commissions, focusing specifically on whether Apple’s DMA implementation is merely cosmetic or a genuine opening of the market. Where previous disputes revolved around the size of Apple’s revenue share and its rules on steering users to external payment pages, the current fight is about the very definition of compliance with a law that was crafted to curb gatekeeper power. If regulators accept Apple’s interpretation, developers fear that other large platforms will adopt similar strategies, turning future digital market reforms into exercises in rebranding existing fees rather than reshaping how competition works in practice.
