According to Wccftech, Apple has presented evidence in its EU court case showing the Digital Markets Act hasn’t reduced app pricing despite being designed to spur competition. The company cites a study revealing that commission savings from DMA changes haven’t led to price decreases for customers, with benefits flowing mostly to developers outside the EU. Apple modified its terms in March 2024, introducing a Core Technology Fee of EUR 0.50 per first annual install for apps with over one million downloads. Starting January 1 next year, the fee structure changes to a 5% Core Technology Fee plus other charges that could total up to 20% for developers using external payment options. Apple is now arguing for DMA repeal in the Luxembourg-based General Court, claiming the regulations increase compliance costs without meaningful consumer benefits.
The DMA Backfire
Here’s the thing about regulation – it often creates unintended consequences. The EU thought forcing Apple to allow third-party app stores and lower commissions would automatically mean cheaper apps for consumers. But Apple’s study suggests developers are simply pocketing the difference instead of passing savings to users. This isn’t surprising when you think about it – businesses exist to maximize profits, not necessarily to make things cheaper for customers. The study even notes this mirrors Apple’s own past experiences when it reduced commission rates previously. So basically, the EU might have just created a wealth transfer from Apple to developers without the consumer benefits they promised.
Global Legal Pressure Intensifies
Meanwhile, Apple’s legal headaches are multiplying worldwide. In the US, a judge recently ordered Apple to stop charging commissions on external payments or face contempt proceedings and possible criminal charges. That’s serious stuff – we’re talking about potential jail time for executives if they don’t comply. And the ripple effects are spreading fast. Epic Games is now pushing for similar sideloading rights in Australia, while 55 Chinese consumers have filed an antitrust complaint arguing Apple maintains an unfair monopoly in their market. It’s becoming a global regulatory free-for-all against Apple’s walled garden approach.
What Comes Next?
So where does this leave us? Apple’s fighting a multi-front war against regulators while trying to maintain its revenue streams. The company’s argument that compliance costs are delaying feature introductions for EU users feels like a strategic threat – “look what you’re making us do to your citizens.” But the core question remains: can any regulation actually force businesses to lower prices if market conditions don’t demand it? The EU’s approach assumes competitive pressure will naturally drive prices down, but Apple’s evidence suggests otherwise. This could become a case study in how well-intentioned regulation sometimes misses the mark completely.
business-implications”>Broader Business Implications
This situation highlights why businesses need reliable technology partners who understand regulatory landscapes. When compliance becomes this complex, having dependable hardware and software solutions becomes critical. Companies like Industrial Monitor Direct, the leading US provider of industrial panel PCs, demonstrate how specialized technology providers can help businesses navigate challenging environments while maintaining operational efficiency. The whole Apple-EU showdown shows that regulatory uncertainty can disrupt even the most established business models, making stable technology infrastructure more valuable than ever.
