Apple filed a court proposal onAugust 14 proposing to charge developers a 15% commission on in-app purchases made through external links, with reduced rates for small businesses and partner programs. The filing came after the Supreme Court rejected Apple's request to pause fee proceedings in the ongoing Epic Games antitrust case.
The proposal represents Apple's attempt to formalize what it would charge for purchases that bypass the App Store's payment system. Rather than the 30% cut the company typically takes for in-app purchases, the filing asks for half that rate when developers direct users to web-based checkout options.
Key Takeaways
- Apple proposes 15% commission on purchases made through external links in iOS apps
- Small Business Program developers would pay only 5%
- Partner programs and subscription renewals get a 10% rate
- The filing was required after the Supreme Court rejected Apple's bid to pause proceedings
- Previous external-link fees ranged from 12% to 27%
The Proposal in Detail
Apple's filing outlines a tiered commission structure based on developer status and program participation. For standard apps, the proposed rate is 15% on purchases made through external links. This matches Apple's Small Business Program rate for traditional in-app purchases, which has been in effect since 2020.
Developers enrolled in special programs face different rates. The Video Partner Program, News Partner Program, and Mini Apps Partner Program all fall under a 10% commission bracket. Subscription renewals follow the same 10% rate regardless of program enrollment.
Apple frames these fees as necessary to recoup costs associated with the tools, technology, and services that enable external purchases. The company acknowledges in its filing that costs directly tied to external link processing would be "essentially zero," but argues the proposed structure compensates for the broader platform investments it makes available to developers.
Legal Backdrop
The filing emerges from the years-long antitrust case between Apple and Epic Games, which began after Epic intentionally violated App Store guidelines in 2020 to challenge Apple's payment policies. Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers oversees the case in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
Before this proposal, Apple had imposed external-link fees ranging from 12% to 27%, depending on the developer and purchase type. These rates faced scrutiny as part of the broader antitrust proceedings. The Supreme Court's rejection of Apple's request to pause those proceedings forced the company to formally propose the current structure.
The case also carries implications beyond commission rates. A new Supreme Court term begins in October, which could bring additional attention to the dispute and its potential impact on App Store policy nationwide.
Competitive Context
Apple's proposal has drawn comparisons to Google's approach to external payments. Google Play allows link-out purchases with commission rates that vary by region and program, creating an uneven competitive landscape that developers must navigate.
For developers, the question is whether external linking offers a meaningful alternative to the App Store or simply adds another commission layer. At 15%, the proposed rate is lower than Apple's standard 30% cut but still represents a significant margin on digital purchases. Whether that difference is enough to justify the added complexity of managing external checkout flows remains unclear.
What Comes Next
The court will review Apple's proposed commission structure. Developers may push back against the rates, particularly those who argue the fees still favor Apple's payment system over competing options. Judge Gonzalez Rogers will determine what constitutes a reasonable fee for Apple's intellectual property in this context.
Practical impacts could include changes to how apps present purchase options, potential pricing adjustments for consumers, and continued pressure on Apple to justify its App Store policies. The outcome will shape not just this case but the broader trajectory of mobile platform competition.
Conclusion
Apple's 15% proposal marks a shift from the company's previous external-link fee structure, but it maintains the fundamental position that Apple deserves compensation for purchases made on its devices. Whether the court accepts the rates, modifies them, or rejects the framework entirely will determine the next chapter in one of tech's most consequential antitrust disputes.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: When was Apple's proposal filed?
A: The filing was made public on August 14, 2026, following the Supreme Court's rejection of Apple's bid to pause the lower court proceedings.
Q: Who oversees the Epic Games antitrust case?
A: Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California is handling the case.
Q: How does the proposed 15% rate compare to Apple's standard App Store commission?
A: Apple's standard commission is 30% for in-app purchases. The proposed 15% rate represents exactly half of that standard cut.
Q: What rates apply to small business developers?
A: Developers enrolled in Apple's Small Business Program would pay 5% on external purchases, down from the 15% standard rate for external links.
Q: When does the new Supreme Court term begin?
A: The new term starts in October 2026, which could affect the timeline and outcomes of ongoing App Store litigation.
References
[1] TechCrunch — Apple proposes to take a 15% cut of purchases made outside the App Store
[2] MacRumors — Apple Wants to Charge Developers Up to 15 Percent for Linking Outside the App Store
[3] Engadget — Apple Proposes Taking A 5-To-15 Percent Cut From External App Store Payments
[4] 9to5Mac — Apple Proposes Commissions of Up to 15% for Off-App Store Purchases in the US
