Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
70,473
42,176


Apple has asked the UK Court of Appeal to overturn a £1.5 billion ($1.76 billion) antitrust ruling that found the company overcharged millions of App Store users, escalating one of the most significant competition cases ever brought against the company in the country (via The Guardian).

app-store-blue-banner-uk-fixed.jpg

The application follows a decision in October by the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT), which concluded that Apple abused its dominant position by charging excessive commissions on App Store purchases between 2015 and 2024. The tribunal found that Apple's control over app distribution on iPhones and iPads allowed it to impose commission rates of up to 30% that were higher than would have prevailed in a competitive market, resulting in consumer harm estimated to be worth £1.5 billion.

The case was raised as a collective action on behalf of approximately 36 million British consumers. Under UK collective proceedings law, eligible consumers are automatically included unless they opt out, meaning that anyone in the UK who made App Store purchases during the relevant period could be entitled to compensation if the ruling stands.

In its judgment, CAT said Apple should have charged lower commissions, estimating that rates of around 17.5% on app sales and 10% on in-app purchases would have been more appropriate. The tribunal acknowledged that this assessment relied on "informed guesswork" based on the evidence presented.

Apple strongly disputes that approach. After the October ruling, the company sought permission from CAT to appeal, but the tribunal refused in November, concluding that Apple had not met the legal threshold to challenge its decision. Apple has now applied directly to the Court of Appeal, which has the authority to grant permission even where CAT has declined.

Apple said it disagrees with the ruling and argues that the tribunal took a flawed view of the app economy. In a previous statement responding to the decision, the company said the App Store operates in a "thriving and competitive app economy" and provides developers and consumers with security, privacy protections, and access to a large marketplace. Apple also noted that most developers now pay a reduced 15% commission and that the App Store facilitated more than $55 billion in sales in the UK last year.

If Apple's appeal is rejected and the ruling is upheld, the £1.5 billion award will be distributed among eligible UK consumers, with individual payouts likely to be relatively small but collectively significant.

Note: Due to the political or social nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Political News forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.

Article Link: Apple Appeals $1.8 Billion UK Antitrust Ruling Over App Store Fees
 
The case was raised as a collective action on behalf of approximately 36 million British consumers.

Without knowing how many App Store users there are in the country, this number means little. Eventhough it's a large number.

Apple also noted that most developers now pay a reduced 15% commission and that the App Store facilitated more than $55 billion in sales in the UK last year.

Could Apple be more dense? The over ruling clearly states "...between 2015 and 2024, and they lowered their 30% to 15% much later than 2015. Mini apps were cut in half just last November https://www.cnbc.com/2025/11/13/apple-announces-new-program-that-cut-mini-app-fees-in-half.html
 
"We estimate you should have charged less" Yeah, and the government could charge less taxes, too. Source? I made it up.

No matter what you think of this rulling, you have a good point. When regulators and governments get in the business of deciding what is a fair price you are headed down a slippery slope.

I suspect, when the dust settles from all these laws and rulings, small developers will be no better of and possibly worse off, and those making big money are likely also not to see any benefits and may ultimately also be worse off.

Based on oat experience even if Apple lowered the commission devs will pocket the difference.

Which is what we saw with the 30 -> 15% drop as developers pocketed the windfall. If you call Apple greedy clearly the developers are also greedy. This whole fight is about who gets what cut of the pie, not lowering costs for consumers.
 
Which is what we saw with the 30 -> 15% drop as developers pocketed the windfall. If you call Apple greedy clearly the developers are also greedy. This whole fight is about who gets what cut of the pie, not lowering costs for consumers.
How do you know consumers are not seeing lower costs? Is it because the price to purchase or subscribe to an app didn't go down?

There are other ways this can lower costs for consumers. An app developer could cancel a planned price increase. Future price increases could be smaller and/or less frequent.
 
How do you know consumers are not seeing lower costs? Is it because the price to purchase or subscribe to an app didn't go down?

There are other ways this can lower costs for consumers. An app developer could cancel a planned price increase. Future price increases could be smaller and/or less frequent.
Did it happen? Not some hypothecating about what could happen.
 
How do you know consumers are not seeing lower costs? Is it because the price to purchase or subscribe to an app didn't go down?

Exactly. The prices stayed the same, so I can say with some certainty consumers did not see lower prices.

There are other ways this can lower costs for consumers. An app developer could cancel a planned price increase. Future price increases could be smaller and/or less frequent.

Given that I've rarely seen any small developer raise prices, unless it is to go to a subscription model, that I am pretty confident in my assertion.

Part of the problem is consumers have been conditioned to expect apps to be cheap, often less that 5 - 10 Euros, or even 1 Euro, so developers are constrained in how much the can raise prices, so a drop in costs is kept by them and not passed on to consumers.

Past behavior is a pretty good indicator of future behavior. Overall, I think it's a safe statement that lowering small developer costs will not result in lower prices for consumers.

Edit: typo
 
Last edited:
To a lot of Americans, anything left of “hunting the homeless for sport” is Socialism.
Americans are tired of being told to feel bad for everyone and everything bad in the world is their fault. 🇺🇸

UK is ultra socialist and communist. Checkout YouTube on “cities in England”. They should not be using our American 🇺🇸 technology.

May be Huawei suits them best NOT Apple anymore. They use them and they cry. Apple should pull out of Europe.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.