Apple loses German antitrust appeal; heightened regulatory oversight likely

Apple’s App Tracking Transparency
A ruling by Germany’s Federal Court of Justice on March 18, 2025 upheld a 2023 decision by the German Federal Cartel Office (Bundeskartellamt). This decision classified Apple as a “company of paramount cross-market significance for competition,” a designation under Germany’s Competition Act that subjects major tech firms to heightened regulatory oversight. The ruling stems from years of debate about Apple’s market dominance, particularly its control over the iPhone ecosystem, including the App Store, and how this influence potentially stifles competition in Germany, a key European market.
Background and Core Issue
In April 2023, the Bundeskartellamt determined that Apple’s extensive financial resources, vertically integrated ecosystem (hardware, software, and services), and dominant position in the smartphone market warranted special scrutiny. This designation is part of a 2021 amendment to Germany’s Competition Act (Section 19a), aimed at proactively curbing the power of digital giants before their practices cause irreparable harm to competition. Unlike traditional antitrust approaches that require proof of consumer harm (as in the U.S.), European and German regulators can intervene based on the potential for anti-competitive behavior.
Apple appealed this classification, arguing that it faces robust competition in Germany (e.g., from Android) and that its business model—centered on user privacy and security—should not be penalized. The company also requested that the Federal Court of Justice consult the European Court of Justice to align the ruling with EU law, a request the court rejected. On Tuesday, the German court affirmed the Cartel Office’s stance, solidifying Apple’s status under this stricter regulatory regime for the next five years (until April 2028, unless overturned).
Key Points of Contention
• Market Dominance: The court considers Apple’s iPhone ecosystem as a closed, vertically integrated system that locks users in and limits competitors’ access to its platform. This includes the App Store, which is the sole distribution channel for iPhone apps, giving Apple significant gatekeeping power, according to the German court.
• App Store Practices: Regulators have flagged Apple’s App Tracking Transparency (ATT) framework and other policies as potentially anti-competitive. For instance, the Cartel Office is investigating whether Apple’s rules favor its own services (self-preferencing) by imposing stricter data-tracking requirements on third-party apps than on its own.
• Broader Ecosystem Control: Apple’s control extends beyond apps to hardware, software updates, and payment systems, creating a “walled garden” that competitors argue restricts innovation and market entry.
Ramifications for Apple
The ruling has significant implications for Apple’s operations in Germany and potentially beyond:
Stricter Oversight and Potential Fines:
The designation allows the Bundeskartellamt to impose preemptive measures to curb anti-competitive behavior, rather than waiting for harm to materialize. This could include mandates to alter App Store policies, such as allowing third-party app stores or equalizing tracking rules.
Violations could lead to substantial fines, though the exact penalties remain unspecified at this stage.
Operational Changes:
Apple may be forced to loosen its grip on the iPhone ecosystem in Germany. For example, regulators could demand changes to in-app payment systems (beyond what the EU’s Digital Markets Act already requires) or mandate interoperability with rival services.
The ongoing probe into ATT could result in Apple having to rewrite its privacy policies to apply uniformly to its own apps, potentially weakening its competitive edge in advertising.
Precedent for Europe:
While this ruling is specific to Germany, it aligns with broader EU efforts under the Digital Markets Act (DMA), which also targets Apple as a “gatekeeper.” Germany’s proactive stance could embolden other EU countries to pursue similar measures, amplifying pressure on Apple across the bloc.
The rejection of Apple’s request to involve the European Court of Justice suggests national regulators may act independently of EU-wide frameworks, complicating Apple’s legal strategy.
Financial Impact:
Apple’s App Store generates significant revenue through its 15-30% commission on in-app purchases and subscriptions. Any mandated changes — such as allowing alternative payment systems or app stores — could erode this income stream in Germany, a market with millions of iPhone users.
Combined with existing EU fines (e.g., the €1.8 billion penalty in 2024 for App Store music streaming rules) and the €13 billion Irish tax repayment ordered in September 2024, these regulatory challenges could collectively cost Apple billions.
Reputation and Strategy:
Apple has long touted its privacy-focused model as a differentiator. If regulators force changes that dilute this (e.g., by altering ATT), it could undermine not only Apple’s marketing narrative, but, more importantly, user privacy.
The company may need to adapt its global strategy, balancing compliance with maintaining its ecosystem’s integrity, a task made harder by varying regulations across regions.
This ruling is part of a global wave of scrutiny on Big Tech. In the EU, the DMA already mandates third-party app stores and bans anti-steering rules (preventing apps from directing users to external payment options), changes Apple implemented reluctantly in 2024. In the U.S., a 2024 Supreme Court decision upheld a ruling allowing alternative payment links in apps, threatening Apple’s commission structure. Germany’s decision adds yet another layer, signaling that even within the EU, national regulators may push beyond the DMA’s scope.
For Apple, the immediate task is navigating these German controls while its designation lasts (until 2028). Long-term, the company faces a fragmented regulatory landscape that challenges its tightly controlled ecosystem — a model that has helped to fuel its success, but now attracts relentless governmental scrutiny. The outcome of the Cartel Office’s ongoing investigations, particularly into ATT, will likely clarify the practical scope of these “stricter controls” in the coming months or years.
MacDailyNews Take: Apple does not track users across third-party apps and websites, selling user tracking data to other companies, which is precisely why Apple’s apps do not display the App Tracking Transparency prompt to obtain the users’ permission to allow the collection of end user data and the sharing of it with other companies for purposes of tracking across apps and web sites.
Apple employs on-device intelligence and other features to minimize the data that the company collects in Apple’s apps, browsers, and online services, and the company does not create a single comprehensive user data profile across all of our apps and services.
More info: https://www.apple.com/privacy/docs/A_Day_in_the_Life_of_Your_Data.pdf

‎
Please help support MacDailyNews — and enjoy subscriber-only articles, comments, chat, and more — by subscribing to our Substack: macdailynews.substack.com. Thank you!
Support MacDailyNews at no extra cost to you by using this link to shop at Amazon.
The post Apple loses German antitrust appeal; heightened regulatory oversight likely appeared first on MacDailyNews.