SATURDAY, OCTOBER 10, 2026|No. 18173
App Store · Antitrust

Apple and Epic Games Clash Over App Store Fee Structure for External Purchases

Apple has proposed a new fee structure for digital purchases made outside its App Store, a move Epic Games argues goes beyond court mandates.

A screenshot of the Apple App Store interface.
A screenshot of the Apple App Store interface.
1 sources
Pipeline ingest
3 reads
Positive / Neutral / Negative
1 countries
Related coverage

In a new filing in its long-running legal dispute with Epic Games, Apple has proposed a structure that would allow it to collect fees on digital purchases made via external links that don’t use the company’s in-app purchase system. Epic has already responded, saying that Apple’s request is “far outside of the bounds” of the court’s guidance.

Right now, Apple cannot take a commission on external purchases after California district court judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers ruled in April 2025 that found the company “willfully” didn’t comply with her 2021 Epic Games v. Apple injunction. However, a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel said that Apple should be able to charge a commission based on “necessary costs,” and Apple shared its proposal for fees in Thursday’s filing. (The Supreme Court has also said it will hear arguments about whether Apple willfully violated the April 2025 ruling.)

Under Apple’s proposal, it would collect:

  • 15 percent of fees from purchases in “standard apps”
  • 10 percent of fees for apps in the Video Partner Program, the News Partner Program, the Mini Apps Partner Program, and subscription renewals
  • 5 percent of fees from apps in the Small Business Program

However, Apple says its “necessary costs” to allow external purchases, as defined by the Ninth Circuit, “would be essentially zero.” The company argues that, based on an “expert analysis,” at the proposed rates, “it appears that large numbers of U.S. developers collectively accounting for the lion’s share of App Store revenue will be able to link out profitably.”

PAN's pipeline reviewed approximately 1 open sources for this article. No human editor reviewed this article before publication.

Related Reads

Show on timeline →

Earlier on PAN

More in Business →