
Apple blocked Facebook's attempt to tell users about 30% App Store 'tax' - maydemir
https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-blocked-facebooks-attempt-to-tell-users-about-30-app-store-tax/
======
monkin
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24301332](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24301332)

~~~
dang
Also
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24313092](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24313092)

------
dathinab
This things are the actual problem with apple.

Having a rule which forbids you from anyhow state anything anywhere in the app
which might discourage people from buying on apple is a direct restriction of
the free marked.

And not the only one they have.

I still remember that apps had problems stating that they are compatible with
the peblle smart watch once apple brought out a smart watch.

~~~
scumbert
The free market is your ability to pick up your toys and focus on Android.
That's not a commentary on whether Apple is right or wrong, mind you, but
there's no questioning it's _their_ platform.

~~~
dathinab
No, this is a misconception.

There is no real choice except Android and iOs and you can't "carry over" apps
(and often content in apps, too) which you have bough.

Also Phones are not cheap and you can't switch your phone os between them.

This means that there is defacto no free marked between iOs and Android (as
you have no real choice and once you choose switching is problematic and
expensive). So the only choice we have is to enforce a free marked IN iOs and
Android.

Or with other words there is a marked for iOs apps and a different marked for
Android apps. Treating them as one marked is ignoring how the world works
2020.

~~~
scumbert
I am talking about developers here, not Joe Schmo who lives his life in one
ecosystem or the other.

~~~
salawat
True, but Markets aren't just constrained to specialists, and if by virtue of
more people becoming developer-esque, more people are buying into there being
an issue with Apple's business model, then there's an issue with Apple's
business model.

We're just now breaking into more widespread adoption of microelectronics as a
fact of life for the public where the newer generations have no concept of
there _not_ being these things. What was okay in the early adoption phase
isn't once you start getting established.

------
jkaplowitz
I wonder what would happen if Facebook and the other megacorps currently
objecting loudly to Apple's policies on this topic lobbied a government or two
to legislate mandatory disclosure of this 'tax' at point of sale, as well as
the restriction on mentioning app developers' other points of sale, overriding
any contractual agreements or corporate policies to the contrary.

For example, requiring language like this on the final confirmation screen
before completing each purchase:

"Legal notice: Apple will receive 30% of the price you pay to purchase this
app or to make purchases within this app. Apple does not allow this app to
mention or direct you to any other way of making purchases from this app's
developer which does not involve paying Apple 30%."

(Naturally the law would be written not to be specific to Apple or to the 30%
number, and a given app store's version of the notice could omit the parts
which don't apply to that store's policies.)

~~~
Ensorceled
Would that apply to Visa/Mastercard/Amex? Stripe/Chargify/PayPal? Would the
law require a break down of how much goes to Stripe and how much to Visa? How
about currency conversion, would that need to be listed? Bank processing fees
would need to be in there too ...

~~~
dahfizz
The difference is that the examples you give directly facilitate a financial
transaction, whereas Apple's situation is much closer to a tax where they
charge a high fee just because they have the power to do so.

~~~
richardwhiuk
Apple facilitates the transaction - they provide the store, the user
confidence, the marketplace and the users.

~~~
csande17
It's like the old saying goes: if you buy Apple, you're not the customer.
You're the product, and they'll sell you to Facebook for a 30% commission.

~~~
malka
you misspelled "Google" I think.

------
benologist
McDonalds didn't want nutritional information on hamburger wrappers, cigarette
companies didn't want health risks mentioned, Apple doesn't want consumers to
be conscious of how they pay $150/year to Apple for every $10/week
subscription. Transparency is good for consumers, not companies.

~~~
sosborn
Conflating tax with profit margin is a bit muchthough don't you think? If
Facebook wants this, they should be willing to indicate how much margin they
make on every ad buy they happily take money for.

~~~
X6S1x6Okd1st
How is this conflating tax with profit margin?

------
ianlevesque
It’s ridiculous that Apple takes 30% of a transaction between two independent
third parties, one of which may have no idea their virtual attendees are even
using iPhones.

~~~
raverbashing
It's just absurd that's _any_ transaction

For the app? Sure. Hosting, vetoing, version control, etc. (Even if we forget
that developers already have to pay $99 a year). I'm fine with that. I would
be more than fine if that $99 got more expensive the more app downloads you
had.

For just processing an IAP? With no volume discounts? It's ridiculous.

Sure, they don't want the "free app + unlocking IAP" but they could think this
better.

~~~
richardwhiuk
If they don't do IAPs, then the former charge will just be subverted by "Free
App with one time IAP".

That's already the case for most games - the game is free but most of the
stuff is hidden by IAPs

~~~
raverbashing
But you could differentiate one-off IAPs from subscription IAPs and from
"added value/purchase" IAPs

------
oneplane
What's with the obsession of calling everything 'tax'? It's not a government
and it's not doing anything else than making money on provided services, and
therefore it's not tax.

This whole euphemism and emotion thing is just getting in the way of reality
and proper discussion.

~~~
bluedevil2k
> A tax is a compulsory financial charge or some other type of levy imposed
> upon a taxpayer (an individual or legal entity) by a governmental
> organization

Apple pretty much is the government when it comes to the App Store. A single
entity, monopoly powers, no competition, makes all the rules and is allowed to
enforce them without penalty. “Tax” is a pretty apt term for the 30%.

~~~
randallsquared
> Apple pretty much is the government when it comes to the App Store.

It definitely is not. The defining feature of a government is the legitimate
use of violence. No actual or threatened violence, no government.

There are lots of reasons to be concerned about the App Store and Apple, but
let's not blur the lines between money voluntarily given to use a service, and
money given to avoid arrest and jail.

~~~
simongr3dal
To be pedantic, a government can be a collective noun for governing and ruling
bodies, state-affiliated or not. And Apple, the iPhone team, the iOS team, and
the App Store team are certainly governing how developers can act.

------
zeroimpl
If I buy a box of cookies from a grocery store for $3, should I expect a note
in the box which says I can buy them directly from the manufacturer for only
$2?

~~~
dathinab
It's fully legal, it's called UVP.

You state the price it "freely" cost on your product.

And if it cost somewhere more because additional costs is clearly visible.

Lastly this is not about saying "you can buy it cheaper there" but saying
"apple gets 30% of this". Which the difference between not so nice marketing
and making prices more transparent the later one is a fundamental part of a
(working) free marked...

~~~
graeme
Do you mean the mrsp?

That doesn’t tell you retailer vs. wholesaler vs. manufacturer share.

------
brightball
Just let Facebook put up a banner when you visit the site using Safari, “This
site is not accessible using Safari due to Apple’s failure to pay 30% of it’s
revenue for you to visit.”

Have fun with the wording of course, but a simple protest along these lines to
eliminate Safari use would be appropriate civil disobedience and would start
dramatically reducing the usefulness of iOS over time.

Consider it along the same lines as the old “IE6 No More” banners.

Ultimately, it’s the easiest way to hit back.

------
Fnoord
So, wait. Apple forbids Facebook to be transparent about why something the
customer wants to buy costs X. That's akin to saying the government would not
allow you to disclose sales tax. Informing the customer with transparency
about a sale should never be illegal.

------
systemvoltage
Just curious - Apple's 30% App fees have been around for over 12 years. Why in
last couple of months there is a huge uptick in bashing Apple for this?
Literally, every day there is a story about this on HN.

~~~
username90
The app store market is still growing exponentially as more and more people
forego a normal computer and uses their phone for all their computing needs. A
few years ago the market wasn't big enough for big powerful companies to
complain about, but apparently it is now.

------
fencepost
Facebook decided to fight it in the court of public opinion rather than go all
in like Epic, despite having probably stronger ground to do so. I find it hard
to imagine Apple terminating Facebook's developer account over this had they
persisted with the notice (or simply put in something saying "event purchases
are not allowed on Apple devices due to Apple's mandatory 30% processing
charge.")

------
dnautics
By way of comparison, the uber "tax" is also officiall 30%, last I checked.
Though arguably since uber is orchestrating physical things, with living
beings inside, their extraction of a bigger "tax" relative to apple would be,
in a non-market sense, justifiable on the grounds that, assuming they are
playing fair with insurance and such, they must take on greater liability per
unit sale.

------
mavsman
I'd like to say that when big corporations like this fight it seems the
outcome will be beneficial for users. Not sure if that will be true but I hope
it will be.

------
stephc_int13
Do apple pay 30% tax in any country? No they go out of their way not to pay
30%. So why should developers pay 30% to apple?

------
Simulacra
What percentage of revenue does Apple gain from the app store?

------
Ensorceled
People get annoyed by Apple doing this but Visa/Mastercard/Amex have been
doing this literally for decades ...

~~~
jacquesm
If VISA or MC or AMEX would charge 30% they'd be out of business instantly, on
a typical purchase that's _all_ of the profit margin. The only reason Apple
gets away with it is because they are virtual goods.

The thing you could compare it with is Telco's fees for using their billing
mechanism for virtual purchases.

~~~
Ensorceled
This article is about Apple blocking Facebook from telling people about the
fees, which is what Visa and MC have also been doing for decades.

~~~
jacquesm
Yes, but those fees are 1/10th of what Apple charges (or less).

------
Jabbles
I wonder what the cost of building and running the app store is? Apart from
the engineering costs and costs to run the servers, there are reviewers to be
paid, marketing, gift cards to be distributed, various tax and legal problems
that are hidden from app developers and the like.

And of course there's Apple's profit margin, which as capitalists I don't
think many people are denying outright.

It's very hard to separate this from the costs of the iPhone, but ofc since
all financial details are private anyway all we have is speculation.

What do people think would be a fair 'tax'?

------
boopmaster
Facebook gets zero sympathy from me. I don’t care how they gag unscrupulous
and invasive ad tech. Apple can trash FB dev keys too, and the world would be
a better place.

~~~
unicornfinder
I mean, it's possible to dislike both. I dislike Facebook but I still think
it's wrong that Apple is preventing them from informing users that that's
where the money is going.

------
factchecker01
[https://www.apple.com/ios/app-store/principles-
practices/#:~...](https://www.apple.com/ios/app-store/principles-
practices/#:~:text=Developers%20earn%2070%25%20of%20sales,Apple%20collects%20a%2030%25%20commission).

Free These are apps that users pay nothing to download or use. The developer
chooses to make them free or has some other business model not generated from
app revenue. Apple receives no commission from supporting, hosting, and
distributing these apps.

Free with advertising These apps are free for users to download and the
developer generates revenue from advertisements in the apps. Apple receives no
commission from supporting, hosting, and distributing these apps.

Free with in-app purchase These apps are free for users to download and users
can pay for additional digital features and content in the app with Apple’s
In-App Purchase system. Developers earn 70% of sales from in-app purchases and
Apple collects a 30% commission.

Free with physical goods and services These apps are free for users to
download and the developer generates revenue from the sale of physical goods
and services, such as purchasing clothing, having food delivered, or ordering
a ride from a transportation service. Apple receives no commission from
supporting, hosting, and distributing these apps, or from transactions for
physical goods and services in the app.

Free with subscription These apps are free to download and users can purchase
auto-renewing subscriptions inside the app. If developers choose to sell
digital subscriptions inside the app, they use Apple’s In-App Subscription
system. In that case, developers earn 70% of subscription sales for the first
subscription year, and Apple collects a 30% commission. After the first year,
the developer earns 85% for all successive years that the user remains a
subscriber, and Apple collects a 15% commission.

Paid These are apps that customers pay upfront to download from the store —
and include free updates. Developers earn 70% of sales from paid apps and
Apple collects a 30% commission.

