Apple is replacing the patchwork of charges attached to alternative app distribution in the European Union with a new set of developer terms, simplifying its response to the Digital Markets Act while preserving commissions on transactions that take place outside its own App Store.

From 1 October, Apple will move developers distributing apps in the EU onto unified business terms and replace its per-install Core Technology Fee with a 5% Core Technology Commission on qualifying sales through alternative marketplaces and web distribution. The Initial Acquisition Fee and Store Services Fee attached to the earlier alternative-distribution framework will disappear.

Apps remaining in the App Store will face different rates depending on how payments are handled. Apple says purchases processed through its own in-app payment system will carry a 26% commission, falling to 15% for qualifying programme participants and subscriptions after their first year, while transactions processed through alternative payment systems inside an App Store app will carry lower rates.

Developers directing users from an App Store app towards an external purchasing destination will also remain within Apple’s commercial framework, with commissions applying to qualifying purchases following those referrals. The result is a simpler system than the one it replaces, although alternative distribution does not mean economic separation from Apple’s platform.

A simpler system is not a free one

The changes address one of the most contentious parts of Apple’s response to European competition rules: the complexity of charging developers that use the distribution and payment channels the DMA was intended to open. The previous approach created multiple fees, thresholds, and conditions, prompting criticism that nominally available alternatives could remain commercially unattractive once the full economics were calculated.

The European Commission fined Apple €500 million in April 2025 after concluding that its App Store rules breached the DMA’s anti-steering obligations, which are intended to let developers tell users about offers available outside a gatekeeper’s platform. Apple challenged the regulatory approach while repeatedly revising its European terms, leaving developers to follow a moving combination of legal obligations and commercial rules.

The revised structure removes some of that complexity, but it does not sever Apple’s revenue model from transactions carried out beyond the App Store. A developer distributing software through an alternative marketplace or directly from the web may avoid the traditional store commission, yet qualifying digital sales remain subject to the 5% Core Technology Commission.

Apple argues that such charges reflect the value of the underlying technology, tools, and services supplied to developers even where its store is not handling distribution. Regulators and developers have spent much of the DMA era contesting precisely where that value ends and the economic power created by control of iOS begins.

Alternative distribution widens

Alongside the fee changes, Apple is broadening the criteria for organisations that want to operate alternative marketplaces or distribute applications directly through the web. Eligibility routes include financial-stability requirements, established venture backing, public-company status, certain public or educational status, financial guarantees, or substantial existing installation volumes.

Those changes could widen the range of businesses capable of building distribution services around iOS, although Apple continues to control technical authorisation and notarisation. Apps distributed outside the App Store must still pass baseline checks intended to identify malware, serious security problems, misrepresentation, and other risks.

The European market consequently remains far from the open distribution model familiar on desktop operating systems. Apple has created routes that did not previously exist on iOS, but developers still have to navigate Apple-defined technical processes, reporting requirements, commissions, and eligibility conditions alongside the European rules that forced those routes into existence.

For software companies, the commercial effect will depend on their distribution economics rather than the headline percentage alone. A large subscription service with an established direct relationship with customers may judge the new structure differently from a smaller developer dependent on App Store discovery, while marketplace operators must generate enough volume to justify additional technical and operational overhead.

The European Commission has said it will monitor implementation, leaving little reason to assume that October will end the dispute. The DMA has already forced Apple to permit alternative stores, payments, browser engines, and other forms of interoperability in Europe; the next phase will show whether those alternatives can develop into meaningful commercial channels rather than simply becoming legally available options.