SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A three-judge appeals panel rejected Apple’s request to pause an April 30 order banning the company from charging a fee on in-app iPhone transactions processed outside its once-exclusive payment system in a two-page decision issued late Thursday.
The setback threatens to divert billions of dollars in revenue away from Apple while it tried to overturn the order reining in its commissions from e-commerce within iPhone apps.
Apple sought to put the order on hold after it was issued by U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez-Rogers in a stinging rebuke that also held the Cupertino, California, company in civil contempt of court and recommended opening a criminal investigation into whether one of its executives had committed perjury while testifying in her Oakland, California, courtroom.
It marked another twist of the screw in a legal battle initiated nearly five years ago by video game maker Epic Games, which alleged Apple had turned the iPhone’s app store had been turned into a price-gouging monopoly. The antitrust case focused largely on the 15% to 30% commissions that Apple rakes in from a portion of the commerce conducted within iPhone apps under a system that prohibited app makers from offering alternative payment methods.
Apple is still seeking to overturn Gonzalez-Rogers’ ruling in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, but her order blocking Apple’s commissions on some in-app commerce will remain in effect while potentially leaving a dent in its profits.
“The long national nightmare of the Apple tax is ended,” Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney wrote in a post after the appeals court denied Apple’s request.
Apple didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
Although Gonzalez-Rogers mostly sided with Apple in her initial 2021 ruling in the case, she ordered the company to begin allowing apps to include links to alternative payment systems — a decision that withstood appeals that went all the way to the Supreme Court in 2024. Apple then complied by requiring commissions of 12% to 27%, provoking Epic to ask Gonzalez-Rogers to hold Apple in contempt of her order.
After holding a new round of hearings that unfolded over a nine-month period straddling last year and this year, Gonzalez-Rogers brought down another legal hammer on Apple.
