I’m trying to understand whether Apple and Google’s 30% app store fee could be considered anti-competitive or even illegal. It feels like developers and small businesses are forced to give up a huge share of revenue just to reach users, and I need help figuring out what laws, court rulings, or regulations might apply. Looking for advice on whether these app store commissions are legal and what options developers have.
Short answer: the 30% fee is not illegal by itself.
What matters is market power and conduct. Antitrust law usually asks two things. First, does Apple or Google hold monopoly power in a defined market. Second, did they use it in an unlawful way, like blocking rivals or forcing in-app payment terms with no real alternative.
Apple:
In the Epic v. Apple case, Apple mostly won on federal antitrust claims. The court did not say the 30% cut itself was illegal. But Apple lost on California unfair competition law over anti-steering rules. Those rules blocked devs from telling users about cheaper payment options outside the app. Apple was ordered to allow more linking and pricing info. So, fee legal. Some restrictions, not legal.
Google:
Google faced a worse record in the Epic case against Google. A jury found Google maintained monopoly power in Android app distribution and in-app billing markets through restrictive deals and conduct. That does not mean every 30% fee is illegal. It means the surrounding behavior mattered a lot.
EU:
The Digital Markets Act hits this harder. Apple and Google face rules against anti-steering and self-preferencing. In Europe, platform owners have less room to force their payment systems and block rival stores.
For you as a dev, practical options are:
1. Use web payments where rules allow.
2. Push users to browser sign-up flows.
3. Track small business programs, both firms offer reduced rates around 15% in some cases.
4. Watch your state and country law, rules differ.
5. If you think platform rules harmed your business, talk to an antitrust lawyer, esp if you have docs showing coercion or exclusion.
So no, it is not a 'tax' in the legal sense. It is a private commission. It becomes a legal issue when tied to monopoly power, exclusionary rules, or unfair steering bans. That part is where devs have gotten some traction.
“30% tax” is great rhetoric, but legally it’s usually not a tax. It’s a private platform commission. That matters, because courts don’t ban “high prices” just for being high. They look at power plus exclusion.
Where I slightly part ways with @kakeru is this: people sometimes undersell how important lock-in is. If a platform controls access to iPhone users and heavily limits alternative payment paths or stores, the fee may be “lawful” in isolation but still part of an unlawful scheme. So the real issue is not just 30 percent. It’s whether devs have a realistic way around it.
In the US, the main buckets are:
1. Sherman Act antitrust claims
2. State unfair competition laws
3. Contract and consumer protection theories in some situations
Apple has done better in court than Google, but that does not equal “cleared forever.” Google’s loss showed juries can buy the theory that store rules + billing restrictions + exclusionary deals = monopoly maintenance. That’s a big deal.
Outside the US, the EU is much less tolerant of gatekeeper behavior. DMA rules are probly the biggest practical pressure point right now.
For devs, the options are mostly business/legal strategy:
- design for web checkout where allowed
- challenge anti-steering restrictions
- document any retaliation or coercive review behavior
- look at class actions or regulator complaints if harm is broad
- evaluate whether your claims are stronger under state law than federal antitrust
So, illegal? Not automatically. Potentially anti-competitive? Yeah, absolutely, depending on the surrounding restrictions and market facts.
Calling it a “30% tax” is politically effective, but legally I think @kakeru is right to frame it as a commission first. Where I’d push further is this: a commission can be perfectly legal at 30%, 40%, even 50%, if there is real competition. The legal problem starts when the platform can both set the toll and block roads around the toll.
That is why the best question is not “is 30% illegal?” but “what conduct makes the 30% unavoidable?”
A few useful distinctions:
- High fee alone: usually not illegal in US antitrust law.
- High fee plus anti-steering: much riskier.
- High fee plus no rival app stores or side loading: stronger monopoly story.
- High fee plus retaliation against developers who try alternatives: even worse.
Apple and Google are not in identical positions. Apple’s defense has generally been stronger because its model is wrapped into a closed device ecosystem argument. Google had a harder time because Android was marketed as more open while still allegedly using contracts and restrictions to protect Play billing and distribution.
Important practical point: illegality can come from remedies imposed by regulators even without a clean “30% is unlawful” holding. So developers should watch compliance rules, especially in Europe and some US states, not just blockbuster antitrust verdicts.
Pros of the '': can help organize legal research, fee comparisons, and jurisdiction notes if you are tracking options internally.
Cons of the '': not a substitute for an antitrust lawyer and won’t tell you whether your exact facts support a claim.
So no, the fee is not automatically illegal. But bundled with steering bans, store exclusivity, and payment lock-in, it can absolutely become anti-competitive conduct.