This is one outlet's own report from 9to5Mac — the article as it was filed. Other outlets are covering the same event; open the full story to compare every source side by side.
See the full story · 2 sourcesThis is one outlet's own report from 9to5Mac — the article as it was filed. Other outlets are covering the same event; open the full story to compare every source side by side.
See the full story · 2 sourcesGo to the 9to5Mac home page Switch site 9to5Toys 9to5Google Logo 9to5Google Electrek Drone DJ Logo DroneDJ Space Explored About Privacy Toggle social menu Toggle dark mode Search for: Submit Toggle search form Forums Store Podcasts Apple@Work Happy Hour 9to5Mac Daily Overtime iPhone iPhone Mac Mac MacBook Pro MacBook Air iMac Mac mini Mac Studio Mac Pro iPad iPad Pro iPad Air iPad mini iPad iPadOS Watch Apple Watch Apple Watch Ultra Apple Health Apple Watch SE Vision Vision Pro visionOS Music and TV Apple Music AirPods HomePod Apple TV Guides Reviews How Tos AAPL Apple Store Apple Arcade Apple Card Apple Silicon Apple One Apple Fitness+ CarPlay Siri HomeKit Toggle dark mode AAPL Company Epic Games Apple proposes commissions of up to 15% for off-App Store purchases in the US Marcus Mendes | Aug 13 2026 - 3:05 pm PT 2 Comments Apple has submitted its proposal for the fees it should be allowed to charge for purchases made outside of the App Store system in the Epic Games case . Here are the details.
Following several attempts to pause the District Court proceedings that will determine what fee, if any, Apple can charge for purchases made outside of the App Store’s IAP system, the company has now submitted its proffer with the proposed fee structure.
Apple’s submission came just as the Supreme Court denied the company’s request to pause the lower-court proceedings while it reviews whether Apple can be held in contempt for charging a 27% commission on off-App Store purchases, after Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers issued an injunction requiring the company to let developers direct users to alternative purchasing methods.
Apple argued before the lower court and, later, before the Supreme Court, that the Court’s decision could affect the outcome of the fee-setting proceedings and that the proceedings should therefore be put on hold until the Court issues its decision. However, the Supreme Court denied Apple’s request, allowing the lower-court proceedings to continue while its review is underway.
As a result, Apple has now submitted its proposal, which calls for:
According to Apple, “fact and expert evidence with respect to these proposed commission rates are concurrently submitted”. The company adds:
“Based on expert analysis, 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 at the proffered rates, resulting in substantial competitive pressure on IAP, a goal this Court has repeatedly emphasized. And at these rates, Apple can recover at least some compensation for the value that its IP-protected tools, technologies, and services provide to developers, which the Court and the Ninth Circuit have also repeatedly acknowledged as legitimate and procompetitive.”
Apple added that its “proposed linked-out commission can also be compared to commissions for app stores that compete with the App Store,” including Google Play, Samsung Galaxy Store, and Amazon’s Android App Marketplace.
The company also noted that “the Google Play Store charges linked-out rates of a 20% “standard” rate, a 15% program rate, and a 10% subscription rate—and Epic agreed to those rates.“
Apple says that it still believes the rate-determination proceedings should be paused while its case is pending before the Supreme Court, and added that it submitted the proposal only to comply with Judge Gonzalez Rogers’s instructions.
The company also noted that the Ninth Circuit had reversed the District Court’s outright ban on commissions for linked-out purchases and said such commissions are problematic only if they are effectively prohibitive.
With the proffer now submitted, Epic will now have a chance to respond, while Apple is expected to file its brief in the Supreme Court by September 14.
You can read Apple’s full remand proffer below.
What do you think of Apple's proposed fees? Let us know in the comments.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Check out 9to5Mac on YouTube for more Apple news:
Expand Close comments Expand Close comments Guides AAPL Company Breaking news from Cupertino. We’ll give you t…
Marcus Mendes is a Brazilian tech podcaster and journalist who has been closely following Apple since the mid-2000s.
He began covering Apple news in Brazilian media in 2012 and later broadened his focus to the wider tech industry, hosting a daily podcast for seven years.
AIPROPX is an independent multi-source news index — we track, compare, and connect coverage from across the web into one place you won't find anywhere else.