Apple Proposes 15% Linkout Fees in Epic Filing, Drawing Sharp Rejection From Epic Games
Apple has proposed charging developers 15% on digital purchases made through external links that bypass its in-app purchase system, with a reduced 5% rate for apps in its Small Business Program, according to a new filing submitted to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on August 13, 2026. The Verge
Epic Games responded swiftly, calling the proposal "far outside of the bounds" of the court's guidance. Epic said it has roughly 60 days to file its formal opposition, supported by expert witnesses. The Verge
The filing was compelled by court action two days earlier. On August 11, 2026, the court denied Apple's request for a stay and required the company to file its proposed App Store fee structure within 24 hours. AppleInsider MacRumors
The proposal marks Apple's latest attempt to define what it owes developers who steer users to external purchase channels, a question that has wound through federal courts for more than five years. The original lawsuit, Epic Games, Inc. v. Apple Inc. (case No. 4:20-cv-05640, N.D. Cal.), produced a 2021 injunction requiring Apple to allow developers to link to alternative payment options. In April 2025, Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers ruled that Apple had "willfully" failed to comply with that injunction, finding the company was "blatantly" violating the court order, including by imposing a 27% commission on external link-out purchases. The Verge Reuters Courthouse News
Epic had accused Apple of breaking the law by charging fees for steering users and imposing restrictions on third-party stores, arguing that Apple must not charge any fees on purchases made outside of an app. Epic Games
The legal landscape shifted again when a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel ruled that Apple should be able to charge a commission on external purchases, but only based on "necessary costs." The U.S. Supreme Court then agreed to hear arguments on whether Apple willfully violated the April 2025 ruling. That case, Apple Inc. v. Epic Games, Inc. (docket No. 25-1311), stems directly from the commission dispute. The Verge Oyez
In its August 13 filing, Apple argued that its "necessary costs" to allow external purchases, as defined by the Ninth Circuit, "would be essentially zero." The company proposed linkout fees of 15% for standard apps and 5% for Small Business Program apps — a notable reduction from the 27% commission that drew the court's ire in 2025, but still a substantial take from transactions that never touch Apple's payment infrastructure. The Verge Oyez
Epic has characterized Apple's fee proposals as anticompetitive across multiple jurisdictions. In June 2026, Epic published a statement accusing Apple of announcing "anticompetitive terms and junk fees" that undermine alternative stores and payments, citing a 15% fee on purchases made via external links for seven days and a 5% fee on all purchases made in third-party app stores. In May 2026, Epic said Apple knows the federal court will force it to be transparent about how it charges its App Store fees, in connection with Fortnite returning to the App Store. Epic Games Epic Games
Epic has also pointed to Apple's conduct outside the United States. In the EU, Apple imposes a €0.50 Core Technology Fee on every app installed on iPhones and iPads once it crosses one million installs, a structure Epic has criticized as undermining the spirit of the Digital Markets Act. Epic acknowledged, however, that Apple significantly improved the process for installing alternative app stores in response to ongoing DMA enforcement. Epic Games Epic Games
The dispute now sits at the intersection of three concurrent legal proceedings: the district court's ongoing supervision of Apple's compliance with the 2021 injunction, the Ninth Circuit's "necessary costs" framework, and the Supreme Court's forthcoming review of Apple's willful violation. The district court will evaluate Apple's proposed fee structure against the Ninth Circuit's standard while Epic prepares its opposition. The Supreme Court case, docketed as 25-1311, will address whether Apple's post-injunction conduct, including the 27% commission that Judge Gonzalez Rogers found to be a "blatant" violation, warrants further remedies. The Verge Oyez
The tension in Apple's filing is hard to miss. The company concedes that the Ninth Circuit's "necessary costs" standard could theoretically permit a zero-dollar commission, then proposes a 15% levy anyway. The gap between "essentially zero" costs and a 15% take on every external transaction is the gap this litigation will now turn on. Epic's opposition, backed by expert testimony, will likely focus on that arithmetic.
For developers, the stakes are concrete. A 15% linkout fee still consumes a significant share of revenue from transactions Apple does not process, host, or secure. Whether that figure survives judicial scrutiny depends on how the district court interprets "necessary costs" and, ultimately, on what the Supreme Court decides in its first direct review of the Epic-Apple dispute. The 60-day clock is now running.
