Apple Escapes Immediate EU Fines, But Penalties Still Likely

[MacRumors]

Apple will not face immediate financial penalties from the European Commission if it fails to meet its Digital Markets Act (DMA) compliance deadline on June 26, despite previously receiving a €500 million fine for violations related to the App Store.

The European Commission confirmed to Euronews that financial sanctions against Apple will not be automatically imposed once the company's 60-day grace period expires. The Commission spokesperson said that any further penalties will only follow a formal analysis of Apple's current conduct and a procedural exchange of findings between the regulator and the company.

Apple's grace period began in April 2025 and was part of an enforcement action taken after the Commission fined the company €500 million for breaching provisions of the DMA that require gatekeeper platforms to allow developers to inform users of alternative purchase options outside the platform's ecosystem. According to the Commission, Apple had prevented developers from steering users to alternative offers, thereby limiting user choice and competition in contravention of the DMA.

The DMA designates Apple as a "gatekeeper" platform subject to heightened obligations due to its entrenched market position. The legislation's objective is to promote fair competition and user choice by curbing exclusionary practices in digital markets. Apple, Meta, Alphabet, Amazon, ByteDance, and Microsoft are among the companies formally designated as gatekeepers under the regulation.

If Apple is ultimately found to remain non-compliant after the Commission's review, it may face periodic penalty payments of up to 5% of its average daily worldwide turnover for each day of continued violation. The DMA also allows for single-instance fines of up to 10% of annual global revenue, doubled for repeat offenses.

The European Commission has not provided a timeline for when its preliminary assessment of Apple's compliance will be completed, nor has it indicated when further enforcement actions might be taken. Until such a determination is made, Apple remains under the threat of potential financial penalties, but will not face immediate sanctions. The Commission's approach, as described to Euronews, is part of an "ongoing exchange" rather than a definitive compliance ruling.

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 Escapes Immediate EU Fines, But Penalties Still Likely

 

[germanbeer007]

Good. EU should back off.

 

[I7guy]

Doesn’t matter what Apple does. There will always be way to determine Apple is not j compliance with some part of its ecosystem.

 

[Ctrlos]

Spend money on fines or spend money on improving products in face of increased competition?

I know which I'd prefer.

Apple opening up their platform/s isn't particularly scary. It was the release of iTunes on Windows that stopped them staying a niche manufacturer of graphics industry hardware in the first place.

 

[I7guy]

Spend money on fines or spend money on improving products in face of increased competition?

What increased? Oh you mean from the pool of apples own app stored?

I know which I'd prefer.

I would like new functionality to not be handed to competition.

Apple opening up their platform/s isn't particularly scary.

It’s overreach by the eu.

It was the release of iTunes on Windows that stopped them staying a niche manufacturer of graphics industry hardware in the first place.

 

[uacd]

-

 

[contacos]

This seems like such a wishy washy law that just writes itself as it pleases them. It’s kind of insane.

 

[DocMultimedia]

Eventually Apple will have to make a decision on the affordability of the EU. Ditch them entirely when it becomes a negative income.

I'm guessing Europeans don't care since Android is what they like. So I've heard. 🤣

 

[Dr McKay]

EU should think about imposing a fine on Microsoft for being so dumb for not bringing at least some innovations to their obsolete OS, or Google for stealing from Apple for decades and then saying “oh you know Apple stole our widgets!”.

This is quite weird to see when fines are imposed for not sharing their own property with others. Apple should just opt for longer litigation and show all the patents straight into the faces of EU bureaucrats

Oh MacRumors…. Never change 🤣

 

[Ctrlos]

What increased? Oh you mean from the pool of apples own app stored?

I would like new functionality to not be handed to competition.

It’s overreach by the eu.

No more than the break up of AT&T back in the day that spurred on all sorts of innovation. Had we the internet back then maybe people would have defended rotary dialing and how dare the FTC open up the market for touchtone and cordless handsets. Damned authorities.

It was thanks to the antitrust case against AT&T that they were forbidden from commercialising Unix. They instead licenced it for academic research which led to the direct development of ARPAnet and the open Internet as we know it. And as we all know, Unix also underpins a very successful set of operating systems we all know and love....

There is not one case where forced opening of a platform or marketplace to extra competition did not benefit the consumer. It happened when Microsoft had to stop monopolising Internet Explorer (we got Chrome, Firefox and all sorts of neat browsers) and it happened when Apple got scared when they added 3rd party app portals and finally added emulator support to iOS.

Its not over-reach; its pro-consumer.

 

[Abazigal]

Hmm, no clear reason given for the stay of execution here. Everyone seemed pretty sure that Apple was in violation of the DMA and was practically begging for the EU to give Apple its "much-needed" spanking. 😛

Not trying to be sarcastic here. I can only wonder if this has anything to do with escalating trade tensions between the US and the EU.

 

[Ctrlos]

This is quite weird to see when fines are imposed for not sharing their own property with others. Apple should just opt for longer litigation and show all the patents straight into the faces of EU bureaucrats

Apple are the biggest company in the world and in direct, sole control over an entire industry worth hundreds of billions of dollars. That is too much power in one hand.

I won't post it again but AT&T once owned the entire communications infrastructure of the USA and their break-up fostered all sorts of innovations, from cordless telephones to the very open internet we write on.

Had the US state not intervened then the entire internet would be like the App Store now, a closed platform of corporate rules instead of an open platform of free expression. That wouldn't have been a good thing.

 

[I7guy]

No more than the break up of AT&T back in the day that spurred on all sorts of innovation.

What innovation? The overpriced carriers we have today. Innovation came out of lucent labs.

Had we the internet back then maybe people would have defended rotary dialing and how dare the FTC open up the market for touchtone and cordless handsets. Damned authorities.

It was thanks to the antitrust case against AT&T that they were forbidden from commercialising Unix.

Windows is commercialized. So what’s yours point?

They instead licenced it for academic research which led to the direct development of ARPAnet and the open Internet as we know it. And as we all know, Unix also underpins a very successful set of operating systems we all know and love....

There is not one case where forced opening of a platform or marketplace to extra competition did not benefit the consumer.

The breakup of AT&T did not benefit the consumer. Today we have nothing that 40 years of potential innovation should have given us. Ad far as everything g else its Monday morning quarterbacking.

It happened when Microsoft had to stop monopolising Internet Explorer (we got Chrome, Firefox and all sorts of neat browsers) and it happened when Apple got scared when they added 3rd party app portals and finally added emulator support to iOS.

Its not over-reach; its pro-consumer.

It’s not pro consumer. It’s overreach.

 

[I7guy]

Apple are the biggest company in the world and in direct, sole control over an entire industry worth hundreds of billions of dollars. That is too much power in one hand.

And it’s a consumer discretionary company meaning customers could stop buying Apple product and services tomorrow. So I disagree.

I won't post it again but AT&T once owned the entire communications infrastructure of the USA and their break-up fostered all sorts of innovations, from cordless telephones to the very open internet we write on.

And consumers didn’t benefit from it. I won’t go through my reasoning again.

Had the US state not intervened then the entire internet would be like the App Store now, a closed platform of corporate rules instead of an open platform of free expression. That wouldn't have been a good thing.

Hypothecation.

 

[k1121j]

At what point are Apples margins effected enough where the fines outweigh doing business in the EU? i have not kept a tally of the total fines but its sure seems like its in the billions at this point.

 

[cocky jeremy]

Apple are the biggest company in the world and in direct, sole control over an entire industry worth hundreds of billions of dollars. That is too much power in one hand.

I won't post it again but AT&T once owned the entire communications infrastructure of the USA and their break-up fostered all sorts of innovations, from cordless telephones to the very open internet we write on.

Had the US state not intervened then the entire internet would be like the App Store now, a closed platform of corporate rules instead of an open platform of free expression. That wouldn't have been a good thing.

Apple doesn't own the internet, and they don't want to. They just want total control over their own platform, and they should have it without a bunch of old, tech illiterate morons trying to hold them down.

 

[paradox00]

Doesn’t matter what Apple does. There will always be way to determine Apple is not j compliance with some part of its ecosystem.

Fully untrue. As an example, if the iPhone was as open as the Mac the EU would have no recourse. There are many things Apple could do, they just aren’t willing to do those things. The $3 trillion corporation isn’t a victim here.

 

[Abazigal]

Fully untrue. As an example, if the iPhone was as open as the Mac the EU would have no recourse. There are many things Apple could do, they just aren’t willing to do those things. The $3 trillion corporation isn’t a victim here.

I suspect that if the iPhone was as open as the Mac, it probably wouldn't have been anywhere near as successful as it is today. Just look at the state of android and the google play store today (higher incidence of piracy, malware and less developer support despite having greater market share). It's hard to take a look at that and go "Yeah, that's totally in the best interests of the consumer. Apple should totally copy that..."

 

[ToothBlueth]

I suspect that if the iPhone was as open as the Mac, it probably wouldn't have been anywhere near as successful as it is today.

So... you say their products are crap and people only buy them because they like techno-bdsm?

 

[Ctrlos]

Apple doesn't own the internet, and they don't want to. They just want total control over their own platform, and they should have it without a bunch of old, tech illiterate morons trying to hold them down.

In this analogy the App Store = The internet. Apple have sole control over a vast network that brings in hundreds of billions in revenue. Yes they built it themselves but then so did AT&T (via government contracts)

 

[Ctrlos]

And it’s a consumer discretionary company meaning customers could stop buying Apple product and services tomorrow. So I disagree.

And consumers didn’t benefit from it. I won’t go through my reasoning again.

Hypothecation.

You'd prefer the entire internet lives under the totalitarian yoke of a massive corporation rather than existing as an infinite number of free communities?! The sheer number of innovations that sprang up from the AT&T case is uncountable. Apple wouldn't event exist!

 

[I7guy]

You'd prefer the entire internet lives under the totalitarian yoke of a massive corporation rather than existing as an infinite number of free communities?! The sheer number of innovations that sprang up from the AT&T case is uncountable. Apple wouldn't event exist!

Nobody can make such assumptions by revisionist history. The sheer number of innovations that lucent labs and what came out of what is now bell works in holmdel nj, was game changing for society. Anyway I don't support the dma. I don't care how big apple is, nobody is forced to buy their products and services. They are popular for a reason and it is not due to any act of congress.

 

[Ctrlos]

The breakup of AT&T did not benefit the consumer. Today we have nothing that 40 years of potential innovation should have given us.

AT&T had control over the very phones people bought. It was theirs or nothing and they weren't interested in improving them. The FTC open up the market and we have digital handsets, cordless phones and modems that can do what they like with the network.

The open source licencing of Unix created the open internet. It eventually creates MacOS.

If AT&T had retained monopolistic control over the national communications infrastructure then there would be no cellular handset market at all. No competition. No innovation. You can trace every single computing innovation of the last 70 years back to that landmark antitrust case.

But I guess we were all better off with typewriters, rotary phones and posting letters.

 

[Ctrlos]

Nobody can make such assumptions by revisionist history. The sheer number of innovations that lucent labs and what came out of what is now bell works in holmdel nj, was game changing for society. Anyway I don't support the dma. I don't care how big apple is, nobody is forced to buy their products and services. They are popular for a reason and it is not due to any act of congress.

They make great products but they do still operate a hideous amount of lock-in. Every time Safari suggest a strong password you'll never remember if asked to type it on another device you've put an extra lock on the gate. It's helpful, but it's also insidious.

 

[I7guy]

AT&T had control over the very phones people bought. It was theirs or nothing and they weren't interested in improving them. The FTC open up the market and we have digital handsets, cordless phones and modems that can do what they like with the network.

The open source licencing of Unix created the open internet. It eventually creates MacOS.

If AT&T had retained monopolistic control over the national communications infrastructure then there would be no cellular handset market at all. No competition. No innovation. You can trace every single computing innovation of the last 70 years back to that landmark antitrust case.

But I guess we were all better off with typewriters, rotary phones and posting letters.

I'm not denying AT&T was a monopoly, but that is not the point. What we have today would have happened anyway, in another format or course. But I guess in the US we are better being overcharged and underserved by cellular communication, the roots of which started in 1940s.