Apple confronted with new antitrust challenge in China over App Store dominance

20 October 2025

People walk past the Apple logo at a booth showcasing Apple's suppliers, during the first China International Supply Chain Expo (CISCE) in Beijing, China November 28, 2023. REUTERS/Florence Lo

A group of 55 iPhone and iPad users in China has lodged an antitrust complaint with the State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR), accusing Apple Inc. of abusing its dominant position in the Chinese digital market by mandating the use of its own App Store and In-App Purchase system. The complaint, filed on October 20, points to three main grievances: Apple forces users to buy digital goods exclusively through its In-App Purchase system, restricts app downloads to the official App Store, and levies commissions of up to 30 percent on in-app purchases.

The complainants, represented by lawyer Wang Qiongfei, contend that while Apple has loosened these restrictions in markets like the European Union and the United States under regulatory pressure, its policies in China remain rigid and monopolistic. This new administrative complaint follows a similar civil suit Wang filed in 2021 that was dismissed by a Shanghai court; he is still appealing that decision at the China Supreme People’s Court.

By shifting the focus from a civil lawsuit to an administrative complaint, the filing could trigger faster regulatory action. Wang stated that this route might move more swiftly through China’s executive-regulatory apparatus than the slower court system. The timing further amplifies the case’s significance: it comes amid mounting trade and technology tensions between Beijing and Washington, where scrutiny of U.S. tech firms in China has intensified.

Apple’s App Store model has long faced criticism for its closed ecosystem and high commission structure, but in China the stakes are amplified by the scale and strategic importance of the market. Analysts suggest that regulatory action here could signal a new front in global tech policy, one where Chinese authorities match the regulatory leverage exercised by Western jurisdictions.

For consumers and developers in China the implications are profound. If Apple is found to be in breach of China’s Anti-Monopoly Law, the company could face mandates to open its platform further, reduce commission rates, or allow alternative app distribution and payment systems. That could shift the economics of app development in China, where developers currently pay premium rates to participate in Apple’s ecosystem.

From Apple’s vantage point this is a thorny problem. The company has long defended its App Store policies as protective of user security and developer experience. But the Chinese challenge underscores how a one-size-fits-all global policy may falter when confronted with geoeconomics fragmentation and stronger regulatory assertiveness. Analysts see the case as a test of Apple’s ability to maintain its integrated ecosystem in a world that increasingly demands openness and local compliance.

For China the case fits a broader strategy: Beijing has recently investigated several foreign technology firms, using antitrust and data regulation as tools to assert control over strategic sectors. The complaint against Apple aligns with efforts to ensure foreign firms running dominant platforms align with China’s policy priorities.

What comes next is the essential question. SAMR could open a formal investigation, impose fines, or force structural changes. Any ruling will likely reverberate globally, because Apple’s App Store policies in China are closely linked to how the company manages its distribution and monetisation models worldwide. A Chinese mandate that Apple admit alternative app stores or payment channels could prompt regulatory ripple effects elsewhere.

For developers in China, especially small and independent creators, any loosening of Apple’s restrictions might lower barriers to market entry and reduce fees. But for Apple the challenger is balancing global brand integrity with regional regulatory compliance. As Chinese users and regulators press demands, Apple’s trade-offs could include systemic changes in how iOS is operated in its second-largest market.

Ultimately this episode represents a confluence of technology, regulation and geopolitics. It highlights how global digital platforms must navigate fragmented, sovereign regulatory landscapes. For consumers it raises new questions about choice, control and cost in digital services. For Apple it is a moment akin to several regulatory crossroads it already faces in Europe and the U.S. The outcome in China may well shape not just Apple’s business but the architecture of the global app economy.