Apple has proposed a new commission structure that would allow it to collect up to 15% on purchases made through external links inside iOS apps, even when the final transaction takes place outside the App Store’s payment system. The proposal was submitted to a US federal court as part of Apple’s ongoing legal dispute with Epic Games over how developers can direct users to alternative payment methods.
The proposal comes after the US Supreme Court rejected Apple’s request to pause the lower-court proceedings. Apple had been seeking to delay the case while the Supreme Court considers another part of the dispute concerning whether the company violated a court order by imposing fees and restrictions on external purchases. The new filing sets out the commission rates Apple believes should apply to transactions completed outside its own payment system.
Apple Proposes Tiered Commission Structure
Under Apple’s proposal, the maximum commission for standard apps would be 15%.
The company has proposed lower rates for certain categories of developers and transactions.
| Category | Proposed Commission |
|---|---|
| Standard apps | 15% |
| Small Business Program apps | 5% |
| Video Partner Program | 10% |
| News Partner Program | 10% |
| Mini Apps Partner Program | 10% |
| Subscription renewals | 10% |
The proposed rates would apply to purchases initiated through links or other mechanisms inside iOS apps that send users to external payment systems.
How External Purchases Work
Under Apple’s traditional App Store model, users make digital purchases through Apple’s in-app payment system, with Apple collecting a commission from developers.
The court dispute has focused on whether developers should be allowed to direct users to payment systems outside Apple’s ecosystem without Apple collecting a commission.
Traditional App Store Model
User
↓
iOS app
↓
Apple in-app purchase system
↓
Payment
↓
Apple collects commission
↓
Developer receives remaining revenue
External Payment Model
User
↓
iOS app
↓
External payment link
↓
Developer website or third-party payment system
↓
Payment outside App Store
↓
Apple’s proposed commission still applies
The second model is at the centre of Apple’s dispute with Epic Games.
Apple’s Standard Proposed Rate Is 15%
For standard apps that currently fall under Apple’s 30% App Store commission, Apple is proposing a 15% fee for qualifying purchases made through external links.
That would represent a reduction compared with Apple’s previous external-purchase fee structure, which had reached 27%.
The proposal therefore gives developers a lower rate than Apple’s standard in-app commission while still allowing Apple to collect revenue from transactions that happen outside its payment system.
Small Developers Could Pay 5%
Developers participating in Apple’s Small Business Program would face a proposed 5% commission on qualifying external purchases.
Apple’s Small Business Program generally covers developers that meet Apple’s eligibility requirements and provides a reduced App Store commission.
The proposed 5% external rate would therefore give eligible smaller developers a substantially lower fee than the standard 15% rate.
Proposed Developer Structure
Standard developers
↓
15%
Small Business Program
↓
5%
Partner programmes and subscription renewals
↓
10%
The final rates will depend on the court’s decision.
Apple Also Proposes 10% for Several Categories
Apple’s proposal includes a 10% rate for developers participating in its Video Partner Program, News Partner Program and Mini Apps Partner Program.
Subscription renewals would also be subject to a proposed 10% commission.
The structure creates different rates depending on the type of developer, programme or transaction involved.
The Proposal Is Part of the Epic Games Legal Battle
The dispute originates from Epic Games’ long-running challenge to Apple’s App Store policies.
Epic has argued that Apple unfairly restricts developers from directing users to alternative payment systems and charges excessive commissions.
Apple has defended its App Store model and the fees associated with its ecosystem.
Epic vs Apple
Epic challenges App Store rules
↓
Dispute over payment systems
↓
Court orders Apple to allow external links
↓
Apple introduces external-purchase fees
↓
Epic challenges Apple’s compliance
↓
Court proceedings continue
↓
Apple proposes new commission structure
The dispute has continued for several years and remains one of the most important legal battles over mobile-app economics.
Apple Previously Charged Up to 27% on External Purchases
Apple had previously introduced a 27% commission on purchases made through external links after a court order required it to allow developers to direct users toward alternative payment options.
Epic argued that Apple’s approach effectively maintained an App Store tax even when the payment occurred outside Apple’s system.
The dispute eventually resulted in further court action over whether Apple’s implementation complied with the earlier ruling.
A Court Previously Found Apple in Contempt
In 2025, the district court overseeing the case found Apple in contempt after determining that the company had willfully failed to comply with the court’s injunction concerning external payment links.
The ruling ordered Apple to stop collecting commissions on certain external purchases.
Apple appealed the decision.
The appeals process subsequently changed the legal landscape by allowing Apple to argue that it could potentially collect fees that covered legitimate costs associated with external transactions.
Apple Says Its Fees Compensate for Its Ecosystem
Apple’s position is that it should be allowed to collect a fee even when a purchase occurs outside the App Store payment system.
The company argues that developers benefit from Apple’s tools, technologies and broader software ecosystem.
Apple also maintains that its proposed rates are reasonable compared with fees charged by competing platforms.
Apple’s Argument
Developer uses iOS
↓
Apple provides operating system
+
Developer tools
+
App distribution
+
Security infrastructure
+
Technology services
↓
User discovers product through app
↓
User follows external purchase link
↓
Apple seeks commission
Apple says the proposed commission helps compensate it for the value and infrastructure associated with the iOS ecosystem.
Apple Compares Its Proposal With Google Play
Apple has pointed to Google’s treatment of external payments as a comparison.
According to Apple’s filing, Google Play charges a 20% rate for standard apps using link-out purchases, while certain programmes face a 15% rate and subscription renewals can face a 10% rate.
Apple is using these figures to argue that its proposed rates are not out of line with competing app-store policies.
| Platform/Category | External Purchase Rate Cited by Apple |
|---|---|
| Apple standard apps proposal | 15% |
| Apple Small Business Program | 5% |
| Apple partner programmes | 10% |
| Apple subscription renewals | 10% |
| Google Play standard apps | 20% |
| Google Play special programmes | 15% |
| Google Play subscription renewals | 10% |
Apple’s comparison is part of its argument to the court rather than a final determination of what fee it will ultimately be allowed to charge.
Epic Games Opposes Apple’s Proposal
Epic Games has opposed Apple’s attempt to collect commissions on external transactions.
Epic’s broader argument is that allowing Apple to charge a fee on payments made outside the App Store would continue to restrict meaningful competition between Apple’s payment system and alternative options.
The company is expected to challenge Apple’s proposed structure as the court evaluates what commission, if any, Apple should be allowed to collect.
The Core Dispute
Apple
↓
Claims ecosystem value
↓
Wants commission
VS
Epic
↓
Argues external payments should remain independent
↓
Opposes Apple’s external fee
↓
Court decides permissible structure
The outcome could affect thousands of developers operating in Apple’s US ecosystem.
Why the 15% Proposal Matters for Developers
The proposed fee could significantly affect developers’ economics.
Developers that currently pay Apple a commission through the App Store could potentially save money by directing customers to external payment systems, depending on payment-processing costs and the final commission approved by the court.
However, the savings would not necessarily equal the full difference between Apple’s in-app commission and the proposed external fee.
Developer Economics
App Store payment
↓
Apple commission
+
Payment processing
↓
Developer revenue
External payment
↓
Apple proposed commission
+
External payment costs
↓
Developer revenue
The financial benefit will therefore depend on the final commission, payment-processing expenses and the type of developer.
Small Developers Could See a Larger Difference
For developers eligible for Apple’s Small Business Program, the proposed external commission would be 5%.
That could create a potentially attractive alternative to traditional App Store billing for some businesses.
However, developers would still need to consider payment processing, customer acquisition, fraud prevention, refunds, taxes and other costs associated with operating their own payment systems.
Subscription Businesses Could Be Affected
Apple’s proposed 10% rate for subscription renewals is particularly important for businesses that generate recurring revenue.
Subscription-based apps often have long-term relationships with customers, meaning payment economics can significantly affect lifetime revenue.
Subscription Model
Customer acquisition
↓
Subscription
↓
Monthly or annual renewal
↓
Recurring revenue
↓
Apple proposed 10% external commission
↓
Developer retains remaining revenue
The economics could become more attractive for some developers if external payments are easier to implement and the final commission remains below Apple’s standard in-app rate.
The Decision Could Change App Store Economics
The court’s decision could influence how developers price digital products and subscriptions on iOS.
If external payment systems become economically viable, developers could potentially offer different pricing structures depending on where a customer completes a purchase.
Potential Market Change
External payments become cheaper
↓
Developers increase use of external links
↓
Apple faces greater competition
↓
App Store payment economics change
↓
Developers gain more negotiating power
The degree of change will depend on the final court-approved fee and the rules governing how developers can present external payment options.
Apple Could Face Pressure on Its App Store Revenue
The App Store generates significant revenue for Apple through commissions on digital goods and services.
If more developers move transactions outside Apple’s payment system, Apple could lose part of that revenue.
The proposed external fee is therefore also a way for Apple to preserve some economic participation in transactions generated through iOS apps.
Apple Revenue Model
App Store users
↓
Digital purchases
↓
Apple payment system
↓
Commission revenue
OR
↓
External payment
↓
Proposed Apple commission
↓
Partial revenue retained
Apple’s proposal seeks to maintain a financial connection to external transactions.
Developers Could Gain More Payment Flexibility
One of the central objectives behind allowing external payment links is giving developers more choice.
Instead of relying entirely on Apple’s payment infrastructure, developers could potentially use their own websites or third-party payment providers.
Payment Choice
Apple payment system
OR
Developer website
OR
Third-party payment provider
↓
More payment options
↓
Potentially lower transaction costs
↓
Greater developer control
This could be especially valuable for large digital businesses with sophisticated payment infrastructure.
Consumers Could See More Payment Options
If developers increasingly use external payment systems, consumers could encounter more choices when purchasing digital products.
They might be directed to a developer’s website or another payment provider rather than completing every transaction within Apple’s system.
However, this could also introduce differences in payment security, refunds, subscriptions and customer support.
Security and Privacy Remain Important
Apple has historically argued that its integrated payment system provides security and privacy benefits.
External payments shift some responsibility toward developers and third-party payment providers.
App Store Payment
Apple infrastructure
↓
Integrated payment
↓
Security and privacy controls
External Payment
Developer or third party
↓
Alternative payment system
↓
Different security and privacy responsibilities
The court’s eventual rules could therefore affect not only commissions but also how developers communicate external payment options to customers.
Apple Could Still Retain a Major Advantage
Even if external payments become more common, Apple’s App Store remains the primary distribution channel for iOS applications.
Developers still depend on Apple’s operating system, developer tools, app-review process and access to its large installed user base.
This means Apple’s ecosystem could continue to provide significant value even if its control over payments becomes less comprehensive.
The Proposal Applies to the US Dispute
The current proposal is part of the US legal proceedings involving Apple and Epic Games.
Apple operates under different regulatory frameworks in other markets.
The European Union, for example, has introduced rules under the Digital Markets Act that have already forced Apple to make changes to its app distribution and payment policies.
Regulatory Landscape
United States
↓
Epic Games litigation
↓
Court determines external-payment rules
European Union
↓
Digital Markets Act
↓
Separate obligations
Other markets
↓
Local regulation
↓
Different App Store policies
Developers therefore may continue to face different payment rules depending on where they operate.
The Supreme Court Remains Relevant
The US Supreme Court has become involved in the broader dispute over Apple’s compliance with the earlier court order.
Apple had asked the Supreme Court to pause the lower-court proceedings while the matter moved forward.
The Supreme Court rejected that request, allowing the lower court to continue evaluating Apple’s proposed commission structure.
What Happens Next?
The federal court will need to determine whether Apple’s proposed rates are permissible and whether they comply with the relevant court orders.
The process could involve arguments from Apple, Epic and potentially expert witnesses concerning Apple’s costs, the value of its ecosystem and the competitive effects of external payment fees.
Next Steps
Apple submits proposal
↓
Epic responds
↓
Expert evidence
↓
Court review
↓
Potential ruling
↓
Possible appeals
↓
Final external-payment framework
The final structure could therefore differ from Apple’s current proposal.
Key Numbers at a Glance
| Metric | Figure |
|---|---|
| Proposed maximum external commission | 15% |
| Small Business Program rate | 5% |
| Partner programme rate | 10% |
| Subscription renewal rate | 10% |
| Previous external commission | Up to 27% |
| Standard App Store commission referenced | 30% |
| Apple Small Business App Store commission | 15% |
| Google Play standard external rate cited by Apple | 20% |
| Google Play special programme rate cited by Apple | 15% |
Infographic: Apple’s Proposed External Payment Model
APPLE APP STORE
↓
USER OPENS IOS APP
↓
DEVELOPER PROVIDES EXTERNAL PAYMENT LINK
↓
USER COMPLETES PURCHASE OUTSIDE APP STORE
↓
APPLE PROPOSES COMMISSION
↓
STANDARD APP
15%
↓
SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAM
5%
↓
PARTNER PROGRAMMES / SUBSCRIPTION RENEWALS
10%
↓
COURT DECIDES FINAL STRUCTURE
What It Means for Developers
The proposal could represent a meaningful reduction from Apple’s previous external-payment fee structure.
For some developers, particularly those with large transaction volumes, even a few percentage points can have a significant impact on profitability.
The biggest beneficiaries could be companies that already have sophisticated web-payment infrastructure and can move customers from app-based purchasing to external checkout systems.
What It Means for Apple
For Apple, the proposal attempts to preserve part of the economic value associated with transactions originating from its platform.
However, accepting lower external fees could also increase pressure on the traditional App Store commission model.
If developers can demonstrate that external payment systems are significantly cheaper, Apple could face greater pressure to reduce its standard rates or provide more flexibility.
What It Means for Consumers
Consumers could eventually gain more payment options and potentially encounter lower prices if developers pass payment savings on to customers.
However, external payments could also mean that users leave Apple’s integrated purchasing environment.
The impact on consumers will therefore depend on how developers structure pricing, subscriptions, refunds and customer support.
What Investors Should Watch
Investors should watch the court’s decision and any subsequent appeals because the outcome could affect Apple’s long-term App Store economics.
Key developments include:
- Final court-approved commission
- Apple’s external-payment rules
- Epic Games’ response
- Developer adoption of external payments
- Changes in App Store revenue
- Developer pricing strategies
- US Supreme Court proceedings
- Regulatory changes in other markets
App Store Economics Dashboard
Court ruling
↓
External commission
↓
Developer adoption
↓
Payment migration
↓
App Store transaction volume
↓
Apple services revenue
↓
Long-term ecosystem economics
The impact will depend heavily on how developers respond once the rules become clearer.
The Bigger Picture
Apple’s proposal represents another stage in the long-running fight over who controls digital payments on smartphones. The App Store has historically allowed Apple to maintain a significant share of digital transaction revenue, while developers and regulators have increasingly challenged the company’s control over payment systems. A court-approved external-payment framework could weaken Apple’s ability to capture revenue from transactions initiated through iOS apps, even if the company retains a commission.
The proposed 15% rate is therefore important not simply because of the percentage itself, but because it could establish a new economic model for transactions that happen outside the App Store. If developers find external payments sufficiently attractive, the change could encourage more businesses to shift purchases to their own websites and payment providers. That could increase competition around Apple’s payment system and potentially reshape the economics of mobile software distribution.
Looking Ahead
Apple’s proposal to collect up to 15% on purchases made through external links represents a significant development in its continuing legal battle with Epic Games. The company is proposing a tiered system that would charge 15% for standard apps, 10% for certain partner programmes and subscription renewals, and 5% for developers participating in its Small Business Program. The proposal follows years of litigation over Apple’s control of iOS payments and comes after the Supreme Court rejected Apple’s request to pause the lower-court proceedings. The court will now have to determine whether Apple’s proposed rates are permissible.
For developers, the outcome could determine whether external payment systems become a genuinely attractive alternative to Apple’s in-app purchasing system. A lower commission could encourage more developers to route transactions through their own websites or third-party payment providers, potentially putting pressure on Apple’s App Store revenue model. At the same time, Apple will continue to argue that its ecosystem provides value through distribution, technology, security and developer services. The eventual court ruling could therefore have consequences well beyond Apple and Epic, influencing the economics of mobile apps and digital payments across the wider technology industry.
Get the day’s top stories in your inbox
One concise email. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.
