Sources: the EU has determined that Apple's anti-steering rules for developers do not comply with the DMA, and plans charges against Apple in the coming weeks
Brussels to announce iPhone maker is failing to adhere to new rules designed to open up its app store to competition
Context & Ripple Effects
The reported action extends Brussels’ earlier scrutiny of Apple’s App Store terms, including its 2021 anticompetitive-behavior case over developer rules. It shifts the dispute into the DMA framework, which is designed to constrain gatekeeper control over how developers reach users.
The case’s direction was reinforced by the EU’s subsequent preliminary finding that Apple’s anti-steering terms breached the DMA, alongside scrutiny of developer fees. The issue is therefore not only whether Apple permits external offers, but whether its terms make that option commercially usable.
First-order effects
- Apple faces prospective DMA charges over rules governing developers’ ability to direct users to offers beyond the App Store.
- Developers gain a clearer regulatory basis to challenge restrictions on communicating alternative prices or purchase options to iPhone users.
Second-order effects
- Apple may need to revise both its steering rules and the terms attached to external transactions; the related fee probe raises the possibility that compliance will be assessed in practice, not just in wording.
- Other designated platforms will have to treat anti-steering design, disclosures, and charges as an enforcement risk, particularly where outside offers are technically allowed but economically constrained.
Third-order effects
- The case points toward DMA enforcement focused on the effective openness of platform commerce: access routes, messaging rights, and fees are becoming a single regulatory question.
- If this approach holds, platform gatekeepers’ control over customer acquisition and transaction economics will face more prescriptive oversight, though the eventual remedy remains dependent on the formal case.
The trend: European platform regulation is moving from broad competition complaints toward testing whether gatekeepers’ alternative-payment and customer-communication options work on commercially meaningful terms.