Apple’s third-party payment proposal isn’t enough for Dutch regulators


The Netherlands Authority for Consumers and Markets (or ACM) has reportedly rejected Apple’s proposed App Store changes that would let dating app developers use third-party payment systems, according to 9to5Mac and the Coalition for App Fairness. The Dutch regulator ordered the change in December and has been going back and forth with the company over how it should be implemented — and charging Apple millions in fines along the way. Now, Apple could face further penalties.
According to a journalist’s tweet translated by 9to5Mac, the regulator says Apple’s most recent proposal for letting developers use third-party payment systems is an “improvement” over its previous ideas, but it’s still “not sufficient to comply with European and Dutch regulations.” Apple and the ACM did not immediately reply to The Verge’s request for comment.
Apple’s latest proposal, which it submitted on March 27th, said that dating app devs could use either a third-party payment system or Apple’s, not both, and that developers would have to warn users they were about to interact with a system that Apple didn’t control. The same is true if the developer sends users to its site to complete a purchase.
Apple also said that developers using alternative payment systems would still owe the company a 27 percent commission on in-app sales, compared to the 30 percent it takes from most in-app payments using its own system. (If the developers made less than $1 million in revenue a year, that’d be highly unfavorable compared to Apple’s Small Business Program rate of 15 percent.)
Apple had previously proposed that dating app developers — the only people affected by the ACM’s order — should have to submit separate versions of their apps for the Netherlands. Its plan in March dropped that requirement after the regulator rejected the previous proposal for being “unreasonable.”
In late March, the ACM said it was evaluating Apple’s proposal after fining the company approximately $55 million. The regulator said it “may impose another order subject to periodic penalty payments (with possibly higher penalties this time around)” if it found that Apple’s proposal wasn’t sufficient. It had been evaluating penalties on a weekly basis, charging the company €5 million (around $5.6 million) each week it didn’t comply — up to a maximum of €50 million (around $55 million at the time). Now that the cap has been reached, the regulator is reportedly working on additional penalties, saying that the originals “did not have the desired result.”
The Coalition for App Fairness has applauded the ACM’s decision. The advocacy group is made up of companies like Epic Games, Spotify, Basecamp, and Match Group (which makes dating apps such as Tinder, Match.com, and OkCupid) who are opposed to the App Store’s high fees and role as the singular place to get software for iPhones and iPads. In a statement released on Monday, the group said that it “stands ready to support the ACM as it continues to seek fair treatment and remedies for developers,” even as Apple “continues to dig in its heels to protect its monopoly power at all costs.”
The coalition also said that Apple’s rejected proposal “imposed unnecessary requirements creating friction with the aim to discourage dating app developers from taking advantage of the ACM order.”
The Netherlands Authority for Consumers and Markets (or ACM) has reportedly rejected Apple’s proposed App Store changes that would let dating app developers use third-party payment systems, according to 9to5Mac and the Coalition for App Fairness. The Dutch regulator ordered the change in December and has been going back and…
Recent Posts
- Reddit is experiencing outages again
- OpenAI confirms 400 million weekly ChatGPT users – here’s 5 great ways to use the world’s most popular AI chatbot
- Elon Musk’s AI said he and Trump deserve the death penalty
- The GSA is shutting down its EV chargers, calling them ‘not mission critical’
- Lenovo is going all out with yet another funky laptop design: this time, it’s a business notebook with a foldable OLED screen
Archives
- February 2025
- January 2025
- December 2024
- November 2024
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- September 2018
- October 2017
- December 2011
- August 2010