Developers are crying foul at Apple's new EU App Store rules

Cal Jeffrey

Posts: 4,181   +1,427
Staff member
A hot potato: The EU's new Digital Markets Act (DMA) is forcing Apple to change how it conducts its app business. The law intends to open Apple's European ecosystem for sideloading and alternative payment methods. More importantly, it allows developers to create and release independent marketplaces for iOS, but not without a cost.

Under Apple's newly published rules, some developers could see their 30-percent App Store fee shrink or disappear altogether. If an app maker decides to distribute through a third-party marketplace, they can avoid the so-called Apple tax, as long as they have less than a million installs.

For example, a small developer with 900,000 EU downloads and making $5 million per year pays Apple nothing when using an alternative app store and payment method. Furthermore, it could use the alternative store in conjunction with the App Store at a 10-17 (normally 30) percent reduced fee if it wanted to widen its distribution channel.

So why do developers like Epic Games and Spotify call the new rules "hot garbage" and "extortion?"

According to the App Store's DMA restructuring, developers that have apps with over a million installs must pay a €0.50 ($0.54 US) Core Technology Fee (CTF) on every download over that first million. Additionally, downloads include app updates. So, if a user has an old, unused app that receives automatic updates, the developer is still on the hook for that CTF. Optionally, developers can agree to remain under the App Store's current provisions.

Developers are crying foul, saying the rules are anticompetitive and even illegal. Epic CEO Tim Sweeney called the CTF "Junk Fees."

"They are forcing developers to choose between App Store exclusivity and the store terms, which will be illegal under DMA, or accept a new also-illegal anticompetitive scheme rife with new Junk Fees on downloads and new Apple taxes on payments they don't process," Sweeney tweeted.

In a lengthy blog post, Spotify CEO Daniel Ek calls Apple's proposition "untenable" and says his company cannot afford the CTF, so it must stay in the walled garden.

"Spotify, like so many other developers, now faces an untenable situation. Under the new terms, if we stay in the App Store and want to offer our own in-app payment, we will pay a 17% commission and a 0.50 cent Euro Core Technology Fee per install and year. We cannot afford these fees if we want to be a profitable company, so our only option is to stick with the status quo. The very thing we've been fighting against for five years. This is extortion, plain and simple."

But are Sweeney and Ek being genuine, or is it that they feel they should pay Apple nothing, period? We were curious to see the bottom line for large companies, and it doesn't appear that the CTF will hurt them when contrasted with the current status quo.

Let's use Spotify as an example. In 2022, Spotify reported $9.668 billion in revenue. It also has a user base of 574 million users worldwide. However, the rules only apply to the EU market. Ek mentioned in his complaint that Spotify has about 100 million EU users, or about one-fifth of its user base. Assuming revenue in Europe is proportional, that would mean that it sees about a billion dollars from EU subscribers, but Apple caps revenue at $500 million.

Plugging these numbers into Apple's Fee Calculator reveals that if Spotify ditched Apple's payment processor, it would owe €127.2 million annually ($139.2 million) for the CTF fee, plus whatever it costs to run its payment system. This figure is less than the €138 million annually ($150 million) in App Store processing fees the company currently faces. It could bring costs down to about $4 million were it to also distribute through an independent app store.

Ek is disingenuous in saying the company must stay with the status quo because it "can't afford" the CTF model because Spotify would owe €11 million less per year under the new system than it pays now.

Of course, not all apps are created equal. The CTF could harm smaller developers who offer highly popular free apps unless they have a solid monetization strategy. Meanwhile, apps with user bases below one million stand to benefit the most.

Another issue of contention is Apple requiring a €1,000,000 letter of credit from an "A-rated" financial institution to create an alternative EU app store. However, some players are okay with that requirement.

Riley Testut already has plans to launch his "AltStore" in March when the DMA goes into effect.

"As a whole, I view this as positive for the platform," Testut told The Verge. "While [a €1,000,000 letter of credit] does significantly raise the barrier for entry, I've learned first-hand that running an alternative marketplace comes with a strong responsibility to protect users. By requiring proof of credit, this ensures marketplaces are at least legitimate businesses, reducing the risk of 'scam' marketplaces taking everyone's money and leaving."

It doesn't matter what companies and developers think about the proposed restructuring. Apple's legal team has undoubtedly weighed in to ensure it complies with the DMA. However, the European Commission will have the final say when it reviews the plan in March.

Permalink to story.

 
Well, we all knew Apple wasn't going to go easily. Honestly, I don't know how this has taken this long. It's not "some loading" it's called installing an application and we've been doing it for decades on our PCs. Smartphones have become so important in today's society that many people no longer have a typical PC and only have a smartphone.

But here is the thing, smartphones and tablets ARE PCs. Apple sells the iPad pro as a PC replacement. If these companies want us to replace our PCs with mobile ARM computers they better start giving us PC level functionality.
 
I'm surprised it took techspot this long to take up this story. The internet was losing their marbles last week over this.

Apple is just going to force the EU to implement stricter controls over app stores.
Well, we all knew Apple wasn't going to go easily. Honestly, I don't know how this has taken this long. It's not "some loading" it's called installing an application and we've been doing it for decades on our PCs. Smartphones have become so important in today's society that many people no longer have a typical PC and only have a smartphone.

But here is the thing, smartphones and tablets ARE PCs. Apple sells the iPad pro as a PC replacement. If these companies want us to replace our PCs with mobile ARM computers they better start giving us PC level functionality.
They'd much rather force locked down walled garden mobile OSes down your throat then give you freedom. The ability to install anything has been seen as a bug, not a feature, for years at Big Tech. See: MS's multiple failed attempts to sunset win32.
 
They'd much rather force locked down walled garden mobile OSes down your throat then give you freedom. The ability to install anything has been seen as a bug, not a feature, for years at Big Tech. See: MS's multiple failed attempts to sunset win32.
Well the MS push to windows 11 from W10 and all the games they played with windows in general has been making a legitimate push towards Linux and ive seen the steam deck create an exponential growth is usability for Linux. I think the days of big tech owning our devices is coming to an end. It's not even because Linux has gotten that much easier, its that big tech is missing people off enough that they're willing to deal with whatever shortcomings the open source community has.

If you want to put the work in then Linux can replace everything now but I don't think we'll see an "install and forget" Linux OS for another few years.

Someone like yourself could learn Linux in a couple weeks but we're still a few years off from "normies" being able to daily it.
 
The ability to install anything has been seen as a bug, not a feature, for years at Big Tech. See: MS's multiple failed attempts to sunset win32.

I wouldn't be surprised if in the near future Microsoft turn Windows into an app store forefront allowing installation only of Windows Store apps, and in the corporate side of things the corporate apps would also be installed from a Windows Server app store for internal licensing management and to keep Windows "Pro" (enterprise editions) from installing "rogue" apps from outside an app store.

Also won't surprise me if "DirectX for gaming" become a license backed feature that would be enable only in certain Windows subscription plans.

That's common place nowadays in the corporate world, it could be a breeze to bake it into the common user OS. The only thing separating us from this reallity is in-place regulations.

The future is subscription based even OS level, rest assured.
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't be surprised if in the near future Microsoft turn Windows into an app store forefront allowing installation only of Windows Store apps, and in the corporate side of things the corporate apps would also be installed from a Windows Server app store for internal licensing management and to keep Windows "Pro" (enterprise editions) from installing "rogue" apps from outside an app store.

Also won't surprise me if "DirectX for gaming" become a license backed feature that would be enable only in certain Windows subscription plans.

That's common place nowadays in the corporate world, it could be a breeze to bake it into the common user OS. The only thing separating us from this reallity is in-place regulations.

The future is subscription based even OS level, rest assured.
They've tried, multiple times. Windows 8 was going to use UWP apps and require store installations like you predicted, that's why steam for linux exists. They tried again with windows 10 S, and windows 11's SmartApp screening. Every time they try, it gets hammered, because the only reason to use windows is legacy APIs. Without them there is 0 reason to use windows over chrome OS, or macOS, or linux, ece.

Doesnt mean they wont try again, of course.
 
EU should make the rules, not Apple. Apple is acting like they are the goverment, making their own laws and "rules" about what other companies can do and taxing other companies. The whole point of this EU order was to stop that, but Apple didn't get the memo.
 
Back