Apple vs. Epic: The Supreme Court Fight Over App Store Fees and External Payments

However, the ruling did not fully settle what Apple could charge if a purchase occurred outside its system.

Why Apple’s 27% Commission Triggered Contempt

After the injunction took effect, Apple updated its App Store rules to allow external payment links but imposed a commission of up to 27% on many purchases made through those links.

Epic argued this undermined the court’s order and effectively preserved Apple’s commission structure. The dispute led to a civil contempt ruling after courts concluded Apple’s implementation did not properly comply with the injunction governing external payment links.

The Ninth Circuit largely upheld the sanctions tied to that contempt ruling while sending some issues back to the lower court—particularly the unresolved question of what level of commission, if any, Apple may charge for purchases completed outside the App Store.

Epic’s Response to Apple’s Latest Move

Epic opposed Apple’s request for a Supreme Court stay, arguing that Apple had already lost key rulings in lower courts and had not shown sufficient grounds for emergency relief.

Epic told the Court that proceedings in the lower courts should continue while the Supreme Court decides whether to hear Apple’s appeal. According to Epic, delaying enforcement would simply prolong a system that courts had already ruled against.

Recent Developments in the Case

Several recent events highlight the current state of the dispute:

• May 2026: Apple filed an emergency application asking the Supreme Court to pause the Ninth Circuit mandate while it prepares a petition for review.
• Epic filed its opposition days later, urging the Court to deny the stay request.
• The Supreme Court declined to pause proceedings, meaning the lower courts can continue handling the unresolved commission questions while the appeal process continues.

Meanwhile, the commercial battle between the companies continues alongside the legal one. Epic Games has brought Fortnite back to Apple’s App Store in most markets worldwide after years off the platform, though the dispute over fees and platform rules is still ongoing.

Why the Case Matters Beyond Apple and Epic

Although the lawsuit began as a clash between a game developer and a platform operator, regulators and developers around the world are closely watching the outcome.

The central question—whether a platform owner can require its own payment system or charge fees on external transactions—could influence how mobile app marketplaces operate globally.

For now, the case remains unresolved. Apple is seeking Supreme Court review, lower courts are still determining what commissions may be charged on external purchases, and the broader debate over App Store power and developer freedom continues to evolve.