In This Article
Apple’s App Store fee structure has been the central battlefield of mobile economics since the Epic Games v. Apple ruling in 2021. As of May 2026, the picture is messier than ever: the EU Digital Markets Act has forced sideloading and alternative app stores on iOS, US courts have stopped short of mandating the same, and Apple has responded with a tangle of region-specific fees designed to protect the take rate.
This piece is a status update, not a polemic. We track what the rules actually require today, what Apple charges in each region, what developers are paying, and which alternative stores have meaningful share. We focus on practical impact for Android-side observers because the policy gravity here shapes what Google Play does next.
We have updated this piece quarterly since 2022. The May 2026 update reflects the EU DMA Core Technology Fee revision Apple announced in March, the recent US Department of Justice ruling on anti-steering rules, and Epic Games’s Q1 2026 store-share numbers.
TL;DR
Best fit: If you ship a mobile app outside Apple’s tent, watch the EU CTF (Core Technology Fee) revision and the US anti-steering ruling. Both are still moving, both affect your unit economics on iOS, and both shape Google Play’s pricing posture by 2027.
Good alternative: If you only sell on Google Play and have no iOS plans, you can mostly skip this. Google’s response has been to hold the 15/30 split with quiet exemptions; nothing in the Apple fight is forcing Google’s hand directly yet.
Skip if: You are looking for a verdict on who is right. The legal answer is region-specific and still pending in two of three major jurisdictions. The economic answer is that the 30 percent default is no longer sustainable in the EU and probably will not be in the US by 2027.
Where the rules actually stand in May 2026
EU Digital Markets Act: Apple must allow sideloading of iOS apps from notarized sources, must allow alternative app stores, and must allow alternative in-app payment systems. In effect since March 2024, expanded scope in March 2026. Apple complied with a complex fee structure (a 17 percent commission on app distribution, a 3 percent payment-processing fee for apps using Apple’s payment system, and a Core Technology Fee per install above 1 million per year).
United States: The Supreme Court declined to hear the final Epic appeal in October 2024, leaving the lower court’s anti-steering injunction in place. Apple must allow developers to link to alternative payment methods from inside iOS apps, but is not required to allow sideloading or alternative stores on the US market. Apple charges a 27 percent commission on payments made through alternative methods (down from 30, but still a significant tax).
South Korea, Japan, and the UK: All three have active or pending legislation similar in shape to the DMA. Apple has rolled out compliance frameworks in Korea (since 2021) and in the UK (effective late 2025).
Quick take
Apple’s strategy in 2026 is the same as in 2024: comply with the letter of each regional rule while preserving the take rate through fees that bite the same way. The Core Technology Fee is the cleanest example. It is technically compliant with the DMA, and it makes alternative distribution uneconomic for most freemium apps.
Google’s quiet posture (15/30 with a wider Small Business net) is the lesson. Hold the headline rate, broaden exemptions, avoid being the lightning rod. The Android side is not under the same pressure because sideloading was always permitted.
The fee math that actually matters
Inside the EU under the alternative business terms: 17 percent commission (down from 30), 3 percent payment processing if you use Apple’s system (you can skip this by using a third-party processor), and a Core Technology Fee of 0.50 euros per first install per year for any app exceeding 1 million annual first installs. The CTF is the most controversial part. For a free app with 10 million installs, the CTF alone is 4.5 million euros annually before any revenue.
Inside the US under the anti-steering injunction: developers can link to external payment pages but pay Apple 27 percent on any purchase made within seven days of clicking the link. The seven-day window applies to web purchases too if the user originated from the app. The net effect is a small reduction from 30 to 27, plus the friction of cross-device payment flows.
Outside the US and EU: Apple maintains the original 15/30 percent commission. The Small Business Program kicks in below $1 million revenue per year at 15 percent. Above that threshold, 30 percent applies. Subscriptions drop to 15 percent in year two and beyond regardless of size.
Alternative app stores and what they have done with the opportunity
Epic Games Store: launched on iOS in the EU in August 2024. Fortnite returned to iPhone the same week. Epic charges 12 percent and offered the first three months free for partner developers. As of Q1 2026, the store reports 28 million monthly active users in the EU, up from 8 million at launch.
AltStore PAL: independent store run by Riley Testut, focused on tipping-supported indie apps. Subscription-based for developers (1.50 euros per million installs). Has roughly 1.5 million EU users.
Setapp Mobile: Mac-style subscription bundle that includes 200+ premium apps for a monthly fee. Aimed at productivity users. About 400,000 EU subscribers in 2026.
Mobivention and Aptoide: legacy alt-store operators expanding their EU iOS distribution.
At a glance
| Region | App Store commission | Sideloading allowed? | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| EU (alternative terms) | 17 percent + 3 percent processing + 0.50 euros CTF over 1M installs | Yes, via notarized sources or alternative stores | Most disputed fee model; CTF makes free apps with mass installs uneconomic |
| US (anti-steering) | 27 percent on external payments, 30 percent on App Store payments | No | Linked external payments allowed; seven-day attribution window |
| UK (effective late 2025) | Following DMA-like model under CMA rules | Yes (limited) | Sideloading via notarization; details still being finalized |
| Japan (post-2025 law) | Modified to permit alternative payments | Yes (under specific licensing) | Less aggressive than DMA; smaller fee adjustments |
| South Korea | Original 30 percent for App Store payments; alternative payment available | No | First major market to require alternative-payment option (2021) |
| Rest of world | 15 percent under $1M annual; 30 percent above | No | Small Business Program available since 2020; subscription drops to 15 percent year two |
FAQ
Does the EU DMA apply to non-EU developers?
Yes, if you distribute in the EU. The DMA regulates Apple’s distribution behavior in EU member states, not the location of the developer. A US developer selling an iOS app in the EU is subject to EU rules for that distribution.
How does the Core Technology Fee work?
Each first install of your app in the EU above 1 million per year incurs a 0.50 euro CTF. Returning users do not count if they already counted in the prior 12 months. The CTF is paid by the developer regardless of whether the app is free or paid, and regardless of whether the user installed via the App Store or an alternative.
Has Spotify successfully challenged Apple’s fees?
Partially. The EU fined Apple 1.8 billion euros in March 2024 for anti-competitive behavior in music streaming. Spotify still pays the App Store commission on iOS but can now include external payment links in their app for EU users without Apple’s 27-percent vig.
What is the practical effect for Android users?
Most directly: alternative stores on iOS lower the political pressure on Google Play to drop its 15/30 split. Indirectly: developers who built dual-store practices for iOS often expand alternative distribution on Android too, which improves the Android side of the catalog.
Will the US ever require Apple to allow sideloading?
The legislation that would have required it (Open App Markets Act) failed in 2022 and again in 2024. The 2025 Senate version passed committee but stalled on the floor. The current Department of Justice antitrust suit against Apple targets iMessage interoperability and the green-bubble issue more than sideloading. Expect no major federal change before 2027.
The verdict
The Apple fee battle in 2026 is no longer about the 30-percent question. It is about how Apple has restructured the fee stack to maintain the same gross take under new regulatory regimes. The Core Technology Fee in the EU is the clearest example. It is technically DMA-compliant and economically equivalent to the original cut for most app categories.
For developers, the practical answer depends on app shape. High-volume free apps with monetization through ads or in-app purchases are punished by the CTF. Paid subscription apps benefit from the lower 17-percent commission in the EU. Mass-market free games (the Spotify, Netflix, and Fortnite category) often come out roughly even.
The real story is that Google Play has watched, learned, and chosen not to be the next regulatory target. The Android side has held 15/30 with a wider Small Business net and quiet exemptions for specific categories. The Android ecosystem benefits from the iOS-side pressure without absorbing the political heat. For broader Android-side context, our overview of mobile app economics walks through how app-store rules shape the platforms users live on.
How we put this guide together
We tracked the Apple v. Epic litigation chain through PACER, the EU DMA implementing regulations through the Commission’s official register, the UK Competition and Markets Authority’s mobile-ecosystem inquiry through CMA published reports, and the South Korean and Japanese laws through their respective government publications. Fee details come from Apple’s developer documentation for the EU alternative business terms and US anti-steering compliance, both updated through March 2026. Alternative-store install numbers come from each operator’s most recent public disclosure or filings. We refresh this analysis every quarter as the regulatory and economic picture shifts.
