
Apple tightens App payment control: Developers hit hard by "cutting off payments," clause 3.2(f) becomes the line of life and death
——Weak hardware growth forces a tough stance on the ecosystem, survival game under global anti-monopoly wave
Over the past two weeks, a mobile game developer in Shenzhen, China, has been almost sleepless. The social app he developed was removed from the App Store at 12:00 AM on April 1st due to being judged as violating Apple's 3.2(f) clause, causing the team's accumulated 200,000 users over two years to vanish instantly. "We didn't even get a chance to appeal; Apple's review process was faster than we expected."
Their experience is not unique. According to multiple developers who spoke to our newspaper, in the first quarter of 2025, cases of account suspensions due to "interfering with App Store operations" surged by 300% year-on-year, with social, gaming, and utility applications being hit the hardest. Behind this storm of account suspensions lies the dual pressure of slowing hardware sales growth for Apple and global antitrust pressures, reflecting the increasingly sharp contradictions between tech giants and developers.
I. The Account Ban Wave: From "Gray Survival" to "Indiscriminate Annihilation"
"In the past, we often said 'living for a year is not a loss,' but now being able to survive for half a year is already lucky," an anonymous developer said. According to statistics from the Mobile Developer Alliance, in March 2025 alone, the platform received more than 120 requests for help with account closures, of which 80% involved clause 3.2(f) - Apple prohibits developers from interfering with the normal operation of the App Store in any form, including in-app redirection to third-party payments, and site messages inducing users to pay on the official website.
The upgrade of the account blocking methods is astonishing:
-
Technical blockade: Apple tracks abnormal payment data through anti-cheating algorithms and blocks the IP whitelist used by developers to evade detection.
-
Report linkage: After a user or competitor reports an issue, Apple initiates an "unannounced re-review," reducing the account suspension period from 7 days to 24 hours.
-
Linked Punishment: If multiple accounts under the same developer's name are involved in violations, they may be "collectively punished" and banned.
"We used to operate in a covert way by 'guiding in-game mail to web payment,' but now Apple can track server records through links," a social app developer revealed. The "anti-censorship system" designed by his team over six months was rendered useless during the wave of account closures.
II. The background of the surge in payment transactions and Apple's response
1. Motivation for developers to bypass Apple's tax
-
Commission Pressure: Apple charges a 30% commission on subscriptions and in-app purchases (which drops to 15% in subsequent years), significantly impacting high-profit categories such as games and live streaming.
-
The gray area of third-party payments: Some developers circumvent detection through methods such as "official website guidance + whitelist blocking," but Apple has recently targeted and blocked such operations.
2. Apple's regulatory strategy adjustment
-
Policy Update: After the EU's Digital Markets Act takes effect in 2024, Apple will be forced to allow developers to inform users of external payment methods through channels such as email, but in-app redirections will still be prohibited.
-
Technical Countermeasures: Apple has strengthened its identification of domain name blocking and IP whitelists, and dynamically adjusts the review model through user behavior data (such as refund rates).
III. Hardware under pressure: service revenue becomes Apple's "new lifeline"
Apple's iron-fisted control over the payment ecosystem is closely related to the growth bottleneck of its hardware business. According to the Q1 2025 financial report, iPhone revenue was $69.1 billion, a decrease of 0.9% from the previous quarter, marking the third consecutive quarter of decline; while service business revenue (including App Store, Apple Music, etc.) reached $24.2 billion, an increase of 18% year-over-year, accounting for 25% of the company's total revenue for the first time.
Hardware slowdown forces service monetization:
-
Increased reliance on subscription-based models: Apple has raised its service revenue target to exceed $100 billion by 2027, with in-app purchases and subscriptions being its core profit sources (with commission rates as high as 30%).
-
EU Antitrust Pressure: The EU's Digital Markets Act in 2024 forces Apple to open up to third-party app stores, but at the cost of Apple having to charge a 12%-27% commission on each external payment, further squeezing profit margins.
-
China Regulatory Risk: Bloomberg reported on April 5 that the State Administration for Market Regulation is assessing an antitrust investigation into Apple's App Store and may require it to open up to third-party payments.
"Service business is Apple's firewall against hardware decline," said Toni Sacconaghi, an analyst at investment bank Bernstein. "Any action that threatens this revenue source will trigger a strong reaction from Apple."
IV. Developer Dilemma: Surging Compliance Costs and Survival Game
Faced with Apple's "payment siege," developers are forced to make a difficult choice between compliance and profitability:
1. Soaring compliance costs
-
Payment link transformation: The in-app purchase system needs to be fully integrated with Apple's IAP, increasing development costs by 40%-60%.
-
Commission burden: Subscription-based applications have a 30% commission in the first year, followed by 15%, with small and medium-sized developers' profits being compressed to single digits.
-
Legal risk: A European developer was fined 40% of his annual income for bypassing IAP, becoming a warning case for the industry.
2. The gray strategy fails
-
Official website payment "double-edged sword": Although Apple allows external payments to be notified via email, the user conversion rate drops by 60%, and it may trigger account suspension.
-
Web3 payment experiment: some developers tried to use cryptocurrency payments, but were removed by Apple due to compliance concerns.
"We are walking on a tightrope," said the founder of a tool app in Shanghai, "either accept low-profit compliance or gamble for short-term gains before being banned."
V. The global anti-monopoly wave: How long can Apple's "walled garden" last?
Apple's tough stance is facing regulatory attacks from multiple countries:
-
EU: Requires third-party app stores to be open by June 2025, or face a fine of 10% of global revenue (approximately $36 billion).
-
Brazil: Ruling that Apple must allow external payments, with violators facing a daily fine of $43,000.
-
United States: Epic Games v. Apple case enters final trial, and if Apple loses, it may be forced to open up third-party payments.
"The monopoly of Apple has hindered innovation," said Carlos Alves, president of the Brazilian Developers Alliance. "We demand fair competition, not paying a high price for 'ecological security.'"
VI. The Road Ahead: Rebuilding Trust or Accelerating Division?
In this game, neither side has an absolute advantage:
-
Developers: Small and medium-sized teams are being squeezed out, while leading companies are shifting towards subscription models and hardware bundling (such as game console integration).
-
Apple: Facing the dilemma of "user churn" and "heavy regulatory penalties," the growth rate of service business may slow down to below 10%.
-
User: Short-term payment options are limited, but in the long run, they may benefit from more transparent pricing and competition.
"This is not just a business issue, but also a reconstruction of the rules in the digital age," pointed out Mark Lemley, a professor of technology law at Stanford University. "If Apple cannot balance ecosystem control and openness, its 'walled garden' will eventually be torn down."