EU App Store Tiers and Core Technology Commission
Apple (Hacker News, MacRumors, MacStories, 9to5Mac, AppleInsider, ArsTechnica):
Today, we’re introducing updated terms that let developers with apps in the European Union storefronts of the App Store communicate and promote offers for purchase of digital goods or services available at a destination of their choice. The destination can be a website, alternative app marketplace, or another app, and can be accessed outside the app or within the app via a web view or native experience.
App Store apps that communicate and promote offers for digital goods or services will be subject to new business terms for those transactions — an initial acquisition fee, store services fee, and for apps on the StoreKit External Purchase Link Entitlement (EU) Addendum, the Core Technology Commission (CTC). The CTC reflects value Apple provides developers through ongoing investments in the tools, technologies, and services that enable them to build and share innovative apps with users.
[…]
By January 1, 2026, Apple plans to move to a single business model in the EU for all developers. Under this single business model, Apple will transition from the Core Technology Fee (CTF) to the CTC on digital goods or services. The CTC will apply to digital goods or services sold by apps distributed from the App Store, Web Distribution, and/or alternative marketplaces.
I find this really confusing, but I think when they say “single business model” they mean unifying the CTF and the CTC and the previous “alternative” terms for apps that are not using the traditional App Store model. There are still two models in that you can do the simple flat rate that’s the same throughout the world or the complicated and ever-changing EU model that supposedly satisfies the DMA.
By default, apps on the App Store are provided Store Services Tier 2, the complete suite of all capabilities designed to maximize visibility, engagement, growth, and operational efficiency. Developers with apps on the App Store in the EU that communicate and promote offers for digital goods and services can choose to move their apps to only use Store Services Tier 1 and pay a reduced store services fee.
They are being petty and saying that if you don’t pay for Tier 2, customers have to manually update your app, yet developers are forbidden from making their own auto-update system.
At this point, it’s unclear what exactly is meant by “Exact match”. […] What I found striking about the search differences between Tier 1 and Tier 2 is that in creating this distinction, Apple clearly considers App Store search to be a developer feature rather than a user feature. In other words, the user’s interest in finding an app via search is disregarded, and Apple is willing to be less helpful to users to the extent that app developers pay a lesser commission to Apple. A common talking point in defense of Apple’s App Store lockdown on iOS is that the App Store is supposed to be for the benefit of users rather than developers. Apple’s new policies give the lie to that notion.
If you agree to the Alternative Terms Addendum for Apps in the EU, your developer account will be assigned the StoreKit External Purchase Link Entitlement to enable the communication and promotion of offers. The agreement allows for two ways to offer digital goods or services for sale, and includes new business terms.
You can do the alternative terms with IAP for a reduced commission (vs. the rest of the world) or with external links/purchases (but then you have to pay the initial acquisition fee and the store services fee).
You can choose to use the App Store’s In‑App Purchase system or use options to communicate and promote offers for digital goods or services per EU storefront and per-app, which you can update by changing the entitlement election in Xcode by updating the property list key with a new app submission.
I think this is Apple’s way of saying that you can no longer give the user the choice of IAP vs. external purchase within the same app.
I’m pretty sure EU said CTF is not compliant, and the CTC won’t be compliant.
To me it seems like changes in framing and at the margins, rather than really addressing the core issues.
Apple always disagrees and always appeals, but these are pretty big changes. The introduction of a lower App Store tier with lower fees (but more spite?), combined with the reduced rates to the regular App Store fee structure, is especially fascinating. One has to wonder if Apple would’ve had as much trouble in the EU if it had made changes like this much sooner, but here we are.
Apple’s new EU App Store rules make my head hurt. Which is probably the point.
I wonder how many developers have seen all this churn and concluded that it’s better to just spend their time on Web apps.
I was a very motivated developer for Apple platforms in the past, but Apple’s handling of its monopoly and it’s “compliance” with the DMA are now making me take a serious look at Linux and Android.
Will Apple’s new EU fee structure pass this time?
It all boils down to: can an app trying to compete with an Apple app offer the same level of pricing that Apple has.
And the answer is, still, no. Apple still maintains the unfair advantage in both discoverability and in pricing, so by definition their proposal does not satisfy the DMA. It might reduce their rate from 30% to 12%, if you eschew App Store discoverability, but that’s still 12% more than any Apple app has to pay or needs to charge.
Apple’s distribution options will only be DMA compliant if and when e.g. a third party music app can match or undercut Apple Music’s pricing without wiping out its own profit margin.
Apple’s new terms might not be the colossal ‘fuck you’ the Core Technology Fee was to developers, but they amount to keeping the status quo, not truly enabling competition or following the law.
Previously:
- Critical Warning for External Purchases in App Store
- Court Orders Apple to Comply With Anti-Steering Injunction
- EU Fines Apple and Meta Over DMA Violations
- DMA Compliance Workshop: Notarization and Core Technology Fee
- DMA Compliance: Alternative App Stores But No Sideloading
3 Comments RSS · Twitter · Mastodon
Is it just me or is this intentionally baffling? Surely there is a better way than this simple 37 step plan.
Even the excerpted quotes are long. No one seems to be able to explain succinctly what Apple actually wants in any given situation.
Governing bodies should stop giving multi-billion transnationals the benefit of the doubt. All they do is draw things out with word games and malicious compliance.
Start with a €1 million daily fine, double it daily.
By day 9 or 10 Apple will either rush compliance or give up the market. Their choice.
Apple is Microsoft without an AI or Cloud Strategy.
@bart Of course there is a "better" way; the personal computer way. But where is the $$$ to line up Tim Cook's pockets with that way?
