Apple has introduced new App Store guidelines for developers in Brazil, allowing for alternative payment methods and third-party marketplace distribution following a settlement with the country’s antitrust regulator, CADE. Critics, including Epic Games and the Coalition for App Fairness, argue the new fee structure—which includes commissions ranging from 10% to 21%—remains anticompetitive and effectively penalizes developers who choose to bypass Apple’s native billing systems.
What are the new rules for developers in Brazil?
Under the terms finalized with Brazil’s Administrative Council for Economic Defense (CADE), Apple now permits developers to use third-party payment processors for digital goods and services. Previously, developers were largely restricted to Apple’s In-App Purchase (IAP) system.
The updated fee schedule is tiered based on the chosen payment method:
- Apple IAP: Developers using the native system pay a 5% processing fee on top of a standard App Store commission of 10% to 21%.
- Third-party In-App Payments: Developers opting for external payment processors pay a commission between 10% and 21%.
- External Links: Apps that direct users to an external website for payment are subject to a commission between 10% and 18%.
- Alternative Marketplaces: Developers distributing apps through third-party storefronts must pay a 5% "Core Technology Commission" on sales.
How do Brazil’s terms compare to the EU and Japan?
The regulatory landscape for Apple varies significantly by region. The Brazilian agreement mirrors the model Apple implemented in Japan last year, which relies on a commission-based structure for external payments.
This differs sharply from the European Union’s approach under the Digital Markets Act (DMA). In the EU, Apple was forced to allow alternative marketplaces and third-party payments with a different fee structure, including the controversial Core Technology Fee. While Apple maintains that its Brazil and Japan models are "better terms" for developers than those mandated in the EU, industry advocacy groups disagree.
Why are Epic Games and the Coalition for App Fairness criticizing the changes?
The Coalition for App Fairness—a group that includes Spotify, Epic Games, and Match Group—contends that these policies do not foster a competitive environment. In a statement, the group argued that the high fees and tracking requirements effectively act as a "new tax on commerce," ensuring Apple retains a dominant market position even when developers use outside services.
Epic Games characterized the move as an attempt to "thwart competition." The company stated that the fees are designed to make distributing outside the App Store financially unattractive for developers. Despite these concerns, Epic Games confirmed it intends to move forward with plans to launch the Epic Games Store on iPhones in Brazil, citing its ongoing efforts to open the mobile ecosystem to more competition.
Key Takeaways
- Regulatory Context: The changes stem from a legal settlement with CADE, Brazil’s competition watchdog, intended to address antitrust concerns.
- Fee Structure: Apple retains a commission on sales even when third-party payment systems or alternative marketplaces are used, ranging from 5% to 21% depending on the specific implementation.
- Industry Stance: Major developers and the Coalition for App Fairness argue the new rules are "anticompetitive" and discourage the use of alternative payment options through high costs and burdensome technical requirements.
- Market Outlook: Epic Games continues to challenge these policies globally, maintaining that they are designed to maintain Apple’s control over the iOS ecosystem rather than provide genuine choice for consumers and developers.