Epic and Apple give a court opposite accounts of who is slowing the App Store fee case
Epic Games says Apple has scarcely produced documents nearly two months past the deadline behind its proposed 5% to 15% link commission. Apple disputes it, and the fee stays undecided while two courts each hold part of the case.
The Product Desk
Per $1 million of link-out sales, the proposed rates would cost $50,000 to $150,000, against $270,000 at 27%. In August, Apple proposed a commission of 5% to 15% on purchases through external App Store links, down from the 27% fee it introduced in 2024.
| Figure | Value | Note | Claim |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cost per $1M link-out sales at proposed rates, at least | $50,000 | up to $150,000 | 12 |
| Cost per $1M at 27% | $270,000 | 12 | |
| Apple's proposed external-link commission, at least | 5% | up to 15% | 3 |
What happened
- Apple says it agreed to Epic's later requests, including searches involving 27 individuals, and expects to substantially complete its production by November 25.
- Apple says only four senior executives set the rates: Tim Cook, Eddy Cue, Kevan Parekh and Carson Oliver, a count Epic disputes.
- Epic asked the court to impose a November 1 deadline for finishing production, and Apple says Epic did not first raise that date with it.
- Apple earlier asked to pause the lower-court case until the Supreme Court rules on contempt, and both courts rejected the request.
Why it matters
- cost On each $1 million of link-out sales, Apple's proposal would cost a developer $50,000 to $150,000, against $270,000 at 27%, and no rate in that range is set.
- constraint Apple's November 25 target lands 24 days after the November 1 deadline Epic wants, and Epic's formal response to the court comes only after it reviews the documents.
- contradiction Apple points to four executives and outside experts while Epic points to other teams, including non-US work, so the sides also disagree on how many documents exist.
Picture the person who owns the margin model for an app that sells subscriptions through a web checkout. The cell for the link-out commission needs a number, and Apple's August proposal of 5% to 15% [3] does not settle it. A lower court is still examining whether Apple can charge a commission on external-link purchases at all and, if so, how much [5]. Against the 27% fee Apple introduced in 2024 [3], the proposed range is 12 to 22 percentage points lower [11].
The documents set the pace of that case. Under the agreement governing the proceedings, Apple has to hand over internal papers showing how it reached the rates, and Epic uses them to examine the basis before it formally responds to the court [7]. In a joint status update the two sides gave very different accounts of that production [10]. Epic said "[n]early two months after its production deadline, Apple has scarcely produced any documents" [2]. It also said Apple's "continued unwillingness to commit to a date certain by which it will complete its production demonstrates that Court intervention is essential" [8]. 9to5Mac reports that Epic accuses Apple of "manufacturing" a pause in the proceedings; Apple disagrees [1].
Apple says it met its first obligation to produce documents explaining the rates [14]. It says Epic took weeks to submit additional requests [15], and that the process behind the new rates was much narrower than the one behind the original 27% commission, relying heavily on analyses by outside experts [19]. A separate dispute covers whether Epic can see documents on Apple's international commission policies [9].
The two accounts can both be partly true. Apple can have produced little since the deadline while Epic took weeks to widen its requests [2] [15]. The 9to5Mac report summarizes the joint filing and does not include a ruling on who is right, so the "manufacturing" charge stays an allegation.
For the person who answers for that cell on Friday, we'd plan at 15%, the top of Apple's own range, and treat anything lower as upside. The trade-off is symmetric. A team planning at 15% under-forecasts margin by up to 10 points of link-out revenue if the court settles at 5% [13], and a team planning at 5% overstates it by the same 10 points if the court settles at 15%. Neither end is assured, since the lower court is still deciding whether any commission applies [5].
We'd also run the decision at 27% and at 15%. If it comes out the same at both, the docket is background. If it flips, the choice depends on a ruling that still sits behind a production Apple expects to substantially complete on November 25 [16], so commit only spend that can be undone.
What to watch
- Any lower-court order that sets a production date or compels the international commission documents.
- Whether Apple's production, once it calls it substantially complete, is accepted by Epic or met with a new dispute.
- The Supreme Court's handling of Apple's argument that the original order never barred all commissions.
Clarity's read
What the record supports and how the coverage leans. The claims behind it follow.
Reality
- Evidence55
- Adoption
- Insufficient
- Hype gap
- Insufficient
- Incentives65
- Confidence58
Claim ledger
Ranked by verification strength, evidence, and original report placement.
- [1]
Epic Games is accusing Apple of "manufacturing" a pause in the legal proceedings over its proposed new App Store commission rates, and Apple disagrees.
- [2]
Epic said in the joint status filing: "[n]early two months after its production deadline, Apple has scarcely produced any documents".
- [3]
In August, Apple proposed a commission of 5% to 15% on purchases made through external App Store links, down from the 27% fee Apple introduced in 2024 after a court ordered it to allow developers to direct users to alternative payment methods.
- [4]
The court later found Apple in contempt of its order, and Apple is seeking to overturn that before the Supreme Court, arguing the order never forbade it from charging any commissions at all.
- [5]
While the Supreme Court considers Apple's challenge to the contempt ruling, a lower court is separately examining whether Apple can impose commissions on purchases made through external links, and if so how much it can charge.
- [6]
Apple recently tried to pause the lower-court proceedings until the Supreme Court reached a decision, and its requests were rejected by both the lower court and the Supreme Court.
- [7]
Under the agreement governing the proceedings, Apple was required to hand over internal documents showing how it arrived at its proposed rates, and the documents are meant to give Epic an opportunity to examine the basis for the fees before formally responding to the court.
- [8]
Epic said Apple's "continued unwillingness to commit to a date certain by which it will complete its production demonstrates that Court intervention is essential."
- [9]
There is also a dispute over whether Epic should have access to documents concerning Apple's international commission policies.
- [10]
In a joint status update, Epic Games and Apple present very different accounts of Apple's efforts to turn over internal documents explaining how it arrived at its proposed App Store commission rates.
- [11]
The proposed 5% to 15% range is 12 to 22 percentage points below the 27% fee.
- [12]
On each $1 million of link-out sales, the proposed rates would cost $50,000 (5%) to $150,000 (15%), against $270,000 at 27%.
- [13]
The spread between the top and bottom of Apple's proposed range is 10 percentage points.
- [14]
Apple says it had already fulfilled its initial obligation to produce documents explaining how it arrived at the proposed rates.
- [15]
Apple says Epic took weeks to submit additional document requests.
- [16]
Apple says it agreed to Epic's later requests, which included extensive searches involving 27 individuals, and expects to substantially complete its production by November 25.
- [17]
Apple asserts that only four senior executives were involved in determining the proposed commission rates: Tim Cook, Eddy Cue, Kevan Parekh and Carson Oliver.
- [18]
Epic disputes Apple's four-executive account and argues the decision was also informed by discussions and analyses from other Apple teams, including work on alternative commission structures in markets outside the United States.
- [19]
Apple maintains that the decision-making process behind the new rates was much narrower than the one behind its original 27% commission and relied heavily on analyses by outside experts rather than broader internal discussions.
- [20]
Epic asked the court to impose a November 1 deadline for completing document production, and Apple says this caught it by surprise because Epic did not first discuss the deadline with Apple.
- [21]
Apple's November 25 target for substantial completion falls 24 days after the November 1 deadline Epic asked the court to impose.
Get this ledger inside ChatGPT. Ask about any of our stories and the answer brings its figure, each claim’s verdict and the sources. Free, no account.
Sources
1 independent publisher whose own reporting we read for this story.
- 9to5mac.comApple and Epic clash over document production in latest App Store court filing
1 article · October 12, 2026
Topics and entities
Follow any of these and your For You feed starts watching them — no settings page required.
Topics
- Epic v. Apple litigationFollow
- App Store CommissionsFollow
- Legal discoveryFollow