Apple Calls Out EU for Contradictory App Store Rules Under DSA and DMA

Apple recently sent a letter to the European Commission (EC), criticizing recent inquiries into whether the App Store complies with the Digital Services Act (DSA) amid the separate Digital Markets Act requirements that Apple has been required to put in place.

App Store vs EU Feature 2
The Commission asked Apple for information on how it locates fraudulent content, what it does to reduce the risk of financial scams in apps, and how it verifies the identity of businesses. It separately requested details on the policies Apple has in place to protect minors. Both requests were part of an inquiry into whether companies are complying with Digital Services Act requirements.

Apple's response, penned by Apple VP of Legal Kyle Andeer, answers all of the EC's questions and includes the relevant information to satisfy the request, but also points out the hypocrisy of questioning ‌App Store‌ consumer protections while requiring Apple to support sideloading functionality that isn't subject to those protections.

Andeer says that it is "difficult to square" the DSA investigations with the EC's "aggressive interpretation and application of the Digital Markets Act," and that the probe into Apple's ‌App Store‌ safeguards "defies all logic" in light of the DMA requirements. He also argues that the European Commission needs to enforce the DSA and DMA as a whole, rather than as separate policies.

It does not make sense for the Commission to press Apple to protect users, including minors, from fraud within the App Store while at the same time requiring Apple to create functionalities like link-outs and web views that increase the risk of fraud without necessary safeguards.

The Commission cannot both prohibit Apple from taking the steps it has found essential in mitigating the risk of scams and fraud on the App Store while simultaneously scrutinizing Apple for not providing even more measures to mitigate these risks on the App Store. It does not make sense for one EU law to encourage Apple to mitigate as much as possible the risk of exposing consumers to fraud or minors to potentially harmful apps through the App Store, only for another EU law to prevent Apple from using those same measures to mitigate the same type of risks just because they exist outside of the App Store. This paradoxical situation creates a regulatory structure that endorses leaving iOS and iPadOS users at risk if they choose not to use the App Store, when developers choose to use link-outs, or when users opt to use third-party products to interoperate with iOS or iPadOS. [...]

If the Commission does not consistently prioritise protecting consumers from online harms like fraud, or minors from online harms like pornography or other unsafe apps, in all enforcement contexts, including the DMA, nor use the tools it has at its disposal to resolve these fundamental frictions, the objectives of the DSA will be underachieved, no matter how sufficient Apple's measures are to comply with this specific regulation.

For context, the Digital Services Act requires very large online platforms like Apple to offer protection against disinformation or election manipulation, cyber violence against women, and harms to minors online. It also has provisions to counter fraud and mitigate dissemination of illegal content, among other requirements.

The separate Digital Markets Act requires Apple to support alternative app marketplaces and adhere to interoperability rules that Apple has continually argued weaken privacy and security. Andeer says that the Digital Markets Act "exposes users to fraud and scams" on third-party platforms, and the EC has been warned that the DMA enforcement is "reckless and even dangerous."

Apple's App Review team removed 37,000 apps for fraudulent activity in 2024, rejected 115,000 apps for unsafe experiences, and rejected 320,000 app submissions that copied other apps, were found to be spam, or misled users in some way. Further, 139,000 developer enrollments were rejected, and 146,000 developer accounts were terminated due to fraud concerns.

Popular Stories

Apple Logo Black

Apple Just Made Its Second-Biggest Acquisition Ever After Beats

Thursday January 29, 2026 10:07 am PST by
Apple today confirmed to Reuters that it has acquired Q.ai, an Israeli startup that is working on artificial intelligence technology for audio. Apple paid close to $2 billion for Q.ai, according to sources cited by the Financial Times. That would make this Apple's second-biggest acquisition ever, after it paid $3 billion for the popular headphone and audio brand Beats in 2014. Q.ai has...
Aston Martin CarPlay Ultra Screen

Apple's CarPlay Ultra to Expand to These Vehicle Brands Later This Year

Sunday February 1, 2026 10:08 am PST by
Last year, Apple launched CarPlay Ultra, the long-awaited next-generation version of its CarPlay software system for vehicles. Nearly nine months later, CarPlay Ultra is still limited to Aston Martin's latest luxury vehicles, but that should change fairly soon. In May 2025, Apple said many other vehicle brands planned to offer CarPlay Ultra, including Hyundai, Kia, and Genesis. In his Powe...
14 inch MacBook Pro Keyboard

Apple Changes How You Order a Mac

Saturday January 31, 2026 10:51 am PST by
Apple recently updated its online store with a new ordering process for Macs, including the MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, iMac, Mac mini, Mac Studio, and Mac Pro. There used to be a handful of standard configurations available for each Mac, but now you must configure a Mac entirely from scratch on a feature-by-feature basis. In other words, ordering a new Mac now works much like ordering an...
Apple Logo Black

Apple's Next Launch is 'Imminent'

Sunday February 1, 2026 12:31 pm PST by
The calendar has turned to February, and a new report indicates that Apple's next product launch is "imminent," in the form of new MacBook Pro models. "All signs point to an imminent launch of next-generation MacBook Pros that retain the current form factor but deliver faster chips," Bloomberg's Mark Gurman said on Sunday. "I'm told the new models — code-named J714 and J716 — are slated...
Apple MacBook Pro M4 hero

New MacBook Pros Reportedly Launching Alongside macOS 26.3

Sunday February 1, 2026 5:42 am PST by
Apple is planning to launch new MacBook Pro models with M5 Pro and M5 Max chips alongside macOS 26.3, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman. "Apple's faster MacBook Pros are planned for the macOS 26.3 release cycle," wrote Gurman, in his Power On newsletter today. "I'm told the new models — code-named J714 and J716 — are slated for the macOS 26.3 software cycle, which runs from...

Top Rated Comments

Analog Kid Avatar
13 weeks ago
Wow, it’s interesting to see Apple’s response here being questioned. Apple is getting right to the heart of what it means to tear down the walled garden. You can’t insist that everyone keep their back doors unlocked and then ask them to prove they’re protecting people from burglary.

And “Apple’s big and rich” isn’t a counter argument here. If the goal is a level playing field (DMA), different rules for big companies are inherently unlevel. If the goal was consumer protection (DSA) then making it easier for consumers to go to unregulated vendors is inherently less safe.
Score: 29 Votes (Like | Disagree)
locovaca Avatar
13 weeks ago
It’s not contradictory: monitor and enforce what is in your control, and you can’t maintain a dictatorship over what people can load on their hardware.
Score: 27 Votes (Like | Disagree)
I7guy Avatar
13 weeks ago
Nice rebuttal Apple.
Score: 23 Votes (Like | Disagree)
RichTF Avatar
13 weeks ago
Doesn’t seem contradictory — Big app store (i.e.: Apple’s) = Extra requirements to protect the masses of people that use it. Small app store (i.e.: Niche third-parties’) = Less legislation, because fewer people use it, and those that do will have made a more deliberate choice.

It will be interesting to see what would happen if a third-party app store did become as big as Apple’s. My guess is that it would also trigger the same sort of extra requirements, but we’ll probably never find out…
Score: 19 Votes (Like | Disagree)
surferfb Avatar
13 weeks ago

It says a lot when someone gets aggressively defensive when asked to prove they do the things they say they do.
It’s not an “aggressively defensive” letter and it’s perfectly reasonable to point out when someone is contradicting themselves, like “you’re telling us we’re not doing enough to prevent our users from being exposed to fraud here, but encouraging us to expose them to fraud over there.”

I’d argue that given their previous understanding of and answers to complex technical questions like “is MicroUSB a bad connector that shouldn’t be forced on everyone?”, “could making Microsoft give kernel access to third parties result in problems?”, and “if you force people to choose what browser they want to use, will it increase competition or is it only going to help the overwhelming dominant browser gain more market share?”, Apple might be doing the EU a favor by pointing the disconnect out - the regulators may not even understand that’s what they’re doing!

As I pointed out to you yesterday, the EU’s own cybersecurity agency says “only use the official App Store and don’t sideload apps” to stay safe online. Why is the EC forcing Apple to adopt practices that their own cybersecurity experts say make users less safe? And then they have the gall to insinuate Apple is the problem? I guess I missed when the EC regulated mirrors out of existence in the EU, but it’s clear they must have.
Score: 18 Votes (Like | Disagree)
jjrtiger Avatar
13 weeks ago

It says a lot when someone gets aggressively defensive when asked to prove they do the things they say they do.
What’s aggressive about pointing out hypocrisy?
Score: 16 Votes (Like | Disagree)