Apple’s ongoing antitrust battle in India is being framed around a number that is hard to ignore: a potential $38 billion fine. But the figure, as dramatic as it sounds, is not the core issue. What is unfolding is a deeper contest over who controls how money moves inside apps, and who sets the rules governing that control.
App Store model at the centre
The CCI has examined Apple’s App Store practices for several years, with findings pointing to a system that leaves developers with limited flexibility. According to a confidential investigation report reportedly seen by Reuters, Apple’s ecosystem effectively forces developers to use its in-app purchase system, making the App Store an “unavoidable trading partner”.
Developers must route payments through Apple’s system, where commissions can go up to 30 per cent. Alternatives are either restricted or absent. From the regulator’s perspective, this is less about platform management and more about controlling the economics within it.
Apple has maintained that it remains a relatively small player in India, where Android dominates the smartphone market.
Dispute over financial disclosures
The case has entered a more confrontational phase due to Apple’s response to regulatory demands. The CCI has sought detailed financial disclosures, including revenue linked to Apple’s ecosystem, to assess its influence and determine penalties.
Apple has not fully complied. Instead, it has challenged the framework under which such data is being sought, arguing that global financial information should not be included. This has created a deadlock, with regulators attempting to quantify impact while Apple questions the basis of that assessment.
Why the $38 billion figure matters
The headline figure stems from how penalties can be calculated under India’s competition law. Fines may be based on a company’s global turnover, rather than revenue generated within India.
For Apple, this significantly raises the stakes. Even a small percentage applied to global revenue can scale into tens of billions of dollars, leading to the $38 billion estimate.
Apple has opposed this approach, calling it disproportionate and arguing penalties should reflect its footprint in India. Regulators, however, view global turnover as necessary to ensure penalties remain meaningful for companies operating across markets.
A case years in the making
The current stage follows a case that began in 2021 with a complaint from a non-profit group. It later expanded as Indian startups, industry bodies and companies such as Match Group raised concerns over Apple’s App Store practices.
The central issue has remained consistent: Apple’s rules require developers to use its proprietary payment system while charging commissions of up to 30 per cent. Match Group, in particular, argued that this structure limits innovation and restricts service delivery in markets like India, where alternative payment systems are widely used.
By 2024, the investigation resulted in a report concluding that Apple had engaged in “abusive conduct” within its ecosystem. What followed was a prolonged phase of legal challenges, procedural delays and disputes over disclosures.
With a final hearing now scheduled, the case is moving closer to resolution.
Not just Apple: A broader regulatory pattern
India’s scrutiny of Apple follows a similar approach used in its case against Google. The Google Play Store investigation began in 2020 and concluded in 2022, with the CCI finding that Google abused its dominant position through its billing system and restrictions on alternative payments.
The regulator imposed fines and ordered changes, including allowing billing choices for developers. Google has challenged parts of the ruling, with appeals still ongoing.
A global shift in platform regulation
India’s case is part of a wider global effort to examine how Apple and Google control app distribution and payments.
In Europe, the Digital Markets Act has forced Apple to allow alternative app distribution and third-party payment options, altering how apps operate on iOS. Google has also faced repeated fines over Android-related practices.
In the United States, Apple’s dispute with Epic Games resulted in rulings that prevent it from blocking developers from directing users to external payment methods. Google faced a similar setback, with a jury finding parts of the Play Store ecosystem anti-competitive.
What happens next
The May 21 hearing could lead to financial penalties, changes to Apple’s App Store policies, or further legal challenges.
Beyond the immediate outcome, the implications could be broader. If the CCI’s case holds, it may open the door to alternative payment systems and reduce reliance on platform commissions.
For developers, this could mean greater flexibility. For users, it may translate into more payment options and potentially lower prices for digital services. More importantly, it signals a shift in how digital platforms are regulated in India.
