27%. That’s the commission Apple wants the Supreme Court to let it keep charging — just 3 percentage points below the original 30% that sparked the Epic Games lawsuit. Forget the legal jargon: Apple is betting the highest court in the land will save a fee structure that a federal appeals court already called a sham.
The 9th Circuit Didn’t Buy the 27% Dodge
In December, the 9th Circuit ruled that Apple’s 27% “link-out” commission violated the spirit of the original injunction. The order required Apple to let developers link customers to payment methods outside the App Store ecosystem. Apple complied — but only after tacking on a 27% surcharge for the privilege. The court called that fee a “prohibitive effect,” basically telling Apple it couldn’t circumvent the order by making alternative payments financially pointless.
Now Apple is asking the Supreme Court to reverse the contempt finding that threatens to block that 27% charge. The argument? Apple claims its fee is reasonable compensation for the App Store’s services. But the math doesn’t add up: a developer saving 3% (30% vs 27%) isn’t going to bother rewriting payment flows, which is exactly why the lower court ruled the way it did.
What a Supreme Court Win (or Loss) Means
If the Supreme Court takes the case and sides with Apple, the 27% fee becomes a blueprint for any platform under an antitrust order — obey the letter but keep the economics unchanged. If the Court declines or rules against Apple, the entire App Store commission model faces real pressure: developers could finally steer users to payment methods that cost them 0–3% instead of 15–30%.
Either way, this is Apple fighting to keep a few percentage points of margin on a multi-billion-dollar storefront. The irony? Epic’s original complaint was about 30%. Now the fight is about 27% — and whether a court order that had teeth can be filed down to a nub.
Source: Apple takes Epic fight over app store fees to the Supreme Court
Domain: arstechnica.com
Comments load interactively on the live page.