Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 408 posts

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#51

Post by NoPedantsThanks »

skygazer wrote: post #22
jrochkind1 wrote: post #4

Can anyone provide a link to context on what OP is talking about, for those who don't know it? I don't understand what Apple is actually doing from this tweet/thread. Are they are somehow managing to force even payment links from ordinary web sites in an ordinary web browser (Safari?) to go through them as payment processor? (How?) Or is this a new rule for app store apps (what is the new rule?) Or a new payment stru…

No. They’re allowing alternate payment processing with a link from an an iOS app to a webpage, and reducing their commission to either 12 or 27% representing a 3% discount for not doing the payment processing themselves. They’re basically following the ruling based on some California law being applied nationally that the Supreme Court declined to hear on appeal. The judge said Apple would have to allow links out to a…

I wonder how Apple thinks they're going to measure the transactions that take place. Simply clicking on the link and visiting the third-party-payment site doesn't prove anything, because the user could bail out before paying.

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#52

Post by kibwen »

montagg wrote: post #46
dvt wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is two big corporations arguing over which one makes more profit from you. This slightly oversimplifies the situation, as Apple's policy is pretty clearly anti-competitive and, more importantly, anti-developer. As a developer, you have to bump your prices because of the Apple tax. (And even as a consumer, prices are pushed up. Let's say you want to sell X for $10; too bad: you now have to sell it for $12 if yo…

It's legally settled, so, from a US law perspective, it's clearly not ant-competitive, and the US will need new legislation if that's not good enough. I figure you probably see this very clearly, but the problem is that a lot of people don't see it that way, and the law doesn't. Clarifying what is anti-competitive in your view, and crucially what other economic and competition trade-offs you're willing to make to rea…

We don't need to wring our hands over semantics here. If anyone could distribute software for iOS as easily as Apple can, then Apple would have more competition. Apple's actions arbitrarily prevent competition: it is anti-competitive. There is less competition because of Apple's policies. If they reversed policies, it would be more competitive. Whatever the law says, the reality is clear here.

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#53

Post by kibwen »

massysett wrote: post #48
ado__dev wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple's hardware is unmatched unfortunately.

Perhaps Apple’s hardware is unmatched in part because they profit from it by using the very mechanisms you don’t like. The engineering resources to focus on perfect hardware aren’t cheap. There is plenty of junk hardware out there that gives you more freedom.

If having good hardware means spending a lot on hardware development, then the price of the hardware can reflect that, rather than being subsidized by unrelated business segments.

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#54

Post by threeseed »

extheat wrote: post #44
threeseed wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://developer.apple.com/support/storekit-external-entitl... And there is more to this issue than people realise. Apple has had major lawsuits over the years [1] due to kids racking up large credit card bills via in-app purchases. And similar concerns exist for gambling apps. So this explains why they need to show such a large warning because they don't want to be held responsible for actions of a third party. Whi…

This sounds even worse for Apple. If it’s too easy to make an in-app purchase, why don’t they make it harder to complete one by adding password requirement for payments through their App Store? Of course they won’t do that because it hurts /their/ bottom line. Following this logic, letting people complete payments outside of Apples control should absolve Apple of the legal liabilities between payments made between th…

a) They always require your password for in-app purchases unless you disable it.

b) People have been conditioned over 15 years to treat all app purchases as being managed by Apple. So they expect refunds, disputes etc to be done in the App Store. This is changing. And so it's completely reasonable to clearly inform users about this. Because we have a long history of IAP being a major addiction vector.

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#55

Post by KingLancelot »

dvt wrote: post #5

Feels like Apple is really tempting fate at this point. They essentially won v. Epic (as of yesterday, SCOTUS rejected the appeal). I'm not sure why they feel so emboldened to add a 27% tax on web purchases as well. Completely wild, but I guess shareholder value must always go up.

[dead]

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#56

Post by NoPedantsThanks »

etchalon wrote: post #29
jrochkind1 wrote: post #4

Can anyone provide a link to context on what OP is talking about, for those who don't know it? I don't understand what Apple is actually doing from this tweet/thread. Are they are somehow managing to force even payment links from ordinary web sites in an ordinary web browser (Safari?) to go through them as payment processor? (How?) Or is this a new rule for app store apps (what is the new rule?) Or a new payment stru…

1. If you want to include a link to an website for payment of digital goods, you have to request an entitlement from Apple. 2. As part of that entitlement, you agree to pay Apple a 27% commission on any purchases made when users click those links, for up to 7 days after the link is clicked. 3. You agree to send Apple monthly sales reports. 4. You agreed to give Apple a right to audit your books at anytime. That's the…

"you agree to pay Apple a 27% commission on any purchases made when users click those links, for up to 7 days after the link is clicked."

So if the publisher says, "Click here for a renewal reminder and a 10% discount" and then sends a renewal E-mail on the 8th day, they're in the clear.

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#57

Post by threeseed »

NoPedantsThanks wrote: post #51
skygazer wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. They’re allowing alternate payment processing with a link from an an iOS app to a webpage, and reducing their commission to either 12 or 27% representing a 3% discount for not doing the payment processing themselves. They’re basically following the ruling based on some California law being applied nationally that the Supreme Court declined to hear on appeal. The judge said Apple would have to allow links out to a…

I wonder how Apple thinks they're going to measure the transactions that take place. Simply clicking on the link and visiting the third-party-payment site doesn't prove anything, because the user could bail out before paying.

Because iOS apps talk to the Notarisation Service on launch.

So they know total app installs as well as the installs purchased from the App Store.

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#58

Post by ClumsyPilot »

massysett wrote: post #48
ado__dev wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple's hardware is unmatched unfortunately.

Perhaps Apple’s hardware is unmatched in part because they profit from it by using the very mechanisms you don’t like. The engineering resources to focus on perfect hardware aren’t cheap. There is plenty of junk hardware out there that gives you more freedom.

I am sorry this is a total fabrication - we know the sales of iPhones entirely cover all expenses associated with hardware manufacturing and R&D.

Their margins on laptops are thinner but the AppStore is not as relevant there.

The situation is the other way round - it’s the App Store that makes the iPhone useful. Windows Phone (the remake one) had good hardware, it literally was killed by lack of apps. I had one, I miss it.

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#59

Post by arrosenberg »

etchalon wrote: post #29
jrochkind1 wrote: post #4

Can anyone provide a link to context on what OP is talking about, for those who don't know it? I don't understand what Apple is actually doing from this tweet/thread. Are they are somehow managing to force even payment links from ordinary web sites in an ordinary web browser (Safari?) to go through them as payment processor? (How?) Or is this a new rule for app store apps (what is the new rule?) Or a new payment stru…

1. If you want to include a link to an website for payment of digital goods, you have to request an entitlement from Apple. 2. As part of that entitlement, you agree to pay Apple a 27% commission on any purchases made when users click those links, for up to 7 days after the link is clicked. 3. You agree to send Apple monthly sales reports. 4. You agreed to give Apple a right to audit your books at anytime. That's the…

> Developers are in arms because they don't believe Apple deserves any money for distributing their app on their App Store.

Rephrased - Developers are up in arms because the cost of distribution on iOS is artificially high. It's artificially high because the cost is not subject to market forces. It's not subject to market forces because Apple has a vertical monopoly on hardware and software distribution. Vertical integration is illegal.

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#60

Post by bongobingo1 »

threeseed wrote: post #57
NoPedantsThanks wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder how Apple thinks they're going to measure the transactions that take place. Simply clicking on the link and visiting the third-party-payment site doesn't prove anything, because the user could bail out before paying.

Because iOS apps talk to the Notarisation Service on launch. So they know total app installs as well as the installs purchased from the App Store.

But how does it know I bought 13 tokens for $20, or 100 tokens for $149 (best value!)? If the account balance is on the application server side.
Post reply on HN