Apple is facing yet another major antitrust challenge in Europe, and this one could end up costing the company hundreds of millions of euros. A long-running dispute over App Store fees is now cleared to move forward in the Netherlands after Europe’s highest court settled a key question: whether a Dutch court can even hear the case.
At the center of the dispute are two Dutch consumer foundations, Right to Consumer Justice and App Store Claims. They argue Apple has abused its dominant market position by charging third-party app developers fees that can reach 30 percent. According to the foundations, those commissions don’t just affect developers’ margins; they ultimately raise prices for consumers who buy apps or make in-app purchases.
Apple pushed back hard on where the lawsuit should be fought. The company said the case belongs in Ireland, because Apple’s EU App Store operations are run from there. Apple also warned that letting courts in different EU countries take on similar cases could splinter legal decisions across the region, creating a patchwork of rulings and copycat actions.
To resolve the jurisdiction fight, the District Court of Amsterdam asked for guidance from the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). The CJEU has now ruled that the Dutch court does have international and territorial jurisdiction. The reasoning is specific and practical: the App Store experience in question was aimed at users in the Netherlands, serving Dutch-focused app offerings to people using an Apple ID associated with the country.
That decision is a major turning point. With jurisdiction confirmed, the case can proceed in Amsterdam, and Apple could be exposed to roughly 637 million euros in potential damages. The foundations say the harm stretches to about 14 million iPhone and iPad users in the Netherlands who may have paid inflated prices because of the commission structure.
This Dutch case also lands at a moment when Apple is already under intense scrutiny across multiple countries and regulators, particularly as Europe enforces its landmark Digital Markets Act (DMA). The DMA targets large digital platforms deemed “gatekeepers,” a label reserved for companies that hold enough power to influence markets and potentially restrict competition. Apple has already been classified as a gatekeeper for key platforms including the App Store, iOS, and iPadOS, a designation tied to its user scale and control over app distribution.
Under the DMA’s remedies, Apple has been required to open the door to more competition on its devices in the EU, including allowing third-party app stores. Under mounting pressure, Apple updated its developer terms in March 2024, offering an EU program in which participating developers could pay a lower percentage of app-related revenue to Apple.
Apple has pointed to a study it cited while challenging the DMA in EU court, arguing that its revised developer terms reduced the average App Store commission by about 10 percent, creating cumulative savings of 20.1 million euros. Apple also highlighted that 86 percent of those savings went to non-EU developers. However, the same study noted a key point that regulators and consumer advocates often focus on: lower commissions don’t automatically mean cheaper prices for users. About 90 percent of developers either kept prices the same or raised them, and price reductions happened only 9 percent of the time, following patterns described as consistent with typical pricing behavior. The study also suggested this outcome matched Apple’s prior experiences when commission reductions didn’t translate into widespread consumer savings.
Meanwhile, Apple’s antitrust challenges aren’t limited to the App Store. The DMA gatekeeper framework includes financial and user thresholds, such as a market value around 75 billion euros (or meeting substantial EU revenue targets) plus at least 45 million monthly active end users and more than 10,000 yearly active business users. Companies that meet these criteria must notify the EU. Apple has reportedly told EU authorities that its Maps and Ads services have reached the threshold for review, meaning regulators now have a limited window to decide whether those services should also face gatekeeper obligations. If they are designated, Apple would have a defined compliance timeline to implement further remedies.
In Poland, the national competition authority UOKiK has opened a formal investigation into whether Apple may be applying its App Tracking Transparency (ATT) rules inconsistently. ATT is the system where apps typically must request permission before tracking users, using an anonymized device identifier meant to reduce personal data exposure. The allegation is that Apple may not be applying the same consent requirements to its own apps and platforms, potentially enabling personalized ads without the same level of user permission required of third parties. Polish officials have raised concerns that this could strengthen Apple’s competitive position versus independent publishers. Apple has previously said it does not misuse the identifier to deliver personalized ads, but Polish authorities remain doubtful, and other European countries have launched their own inquiries related to app tracking data.
Outside Europe, pressure is building too. In the United States, a court decision involving Epic has forced changes around external payment options and helped open a path for Epic’s Fortnite to return. While Apple has complied with the ruling, it has still signaled an intent to charge commissions on certain external payments, drawing sharp warnings from the judge about potential consequences if the practice continues.
Other markets are watching these outcomes closely. In Australia, Epic has sought court support to allow its apps to be sideloaded on Apple devices without commissions attached. And in China, a group of around 55 consumers has reportedly filed an antitrust complaint with the country’s market regulator, arguing Apple maintains a monopoly over app distribution and payments in China while allowing more flexibility, such as third-party app stores and alternative payments, in other regions.
For Apple, the Dutch App Store case is more than a single lawsuit. It’s part of a growing global push to challenge how the company controls app distribution, payments, advertising, and user tracking. With the EU’s top court now allowing the Netherlands case to proceed, Apple is heading into yet another high-stakes legal fight that could reshape how the App Store operates—and how much consumers ultimately pay.
