31 ms·

Finally. This is exactly how regulators should respond to the market abuse of these technology monopolies. If they wanted to head this off all they had to do

by stirlo 5y ago

Finally. This is exactly how regulators should respond to the market abuse of these technology monopolies. If they wanted to head this off all they had to do was pay a reasonable amount of tax in the country where the revenue was generated and offer a reasonable (single percentage) fee for facilitating payments. They chose not to so they reap what they sow

laurent92 5y ago
What regulators should mostly do is provide rulings in 2 weeks. Monopoly lawsuits have been threatening for 5 years and are still in limbo, our entire West is in threadlock: Slow justice, slow regulators, slow administrations, fast market grabs…
- pyrale 5y ago
  Due process doesn't fit in 2 weeks, and I don't believe the issue with monopoly law not being enforced is related to the speed of justice.
- ethbr0 5y ago
  Slow justice and slow regulation are a feature, not a bug. Premature either is more dangerous than delayed action. In hindsight, the correct time for regulation was probably 2008 for Google (DoubleClick purchase and Android shipping with "Android Market") and Apple (App Store). It should have been a clear line from hardware control -> distribution control. And if regulators hadn't seen it, then Congress should have drawn it for them in updated laws. Unfortunately, the world had a bit more going on that year.
  - beambot 5y ago
    Android was effectively launched in 2008, per Wikipedia: "It was unveiled in November 2007, with the first commercial Android device, the HTC Dream, being launched in September 2008." In this case, I'm not sure how to square new innovation (smart phones first launching in 2008) with slow regulation.
  - stonemetal12 5y ago
    No, the spec doc lists "Speedy trials" as a requirement. Slow justice is no justice.
alisonkisk 5y ago
What are you talking about? They pay sales tax based on revenue, and they provide a lot more than facilitate payments.
mrtksn 5y ago
It's going to be a hell for the users and the smaller developers. Devs will have to support multiple platforms, different API and options. Also different legal arrangements would be needed as each country has different laws and processes. Remember the agreements and forms we fill for different countries when we want to sell paid apps/features on App Store? I also can't wait to pay account fees for many app stores and modify my apps to fit specific app store rules. The %30 cut, for me covers this boring complexity. I'm sceptical that the potentially lower commissions will offset the added development and administrative costs. As for the users, people will start forgetting where they paid what. They will get frustrated, blame devs etc. It would become tiresome and many will be turned off the moment a payment is requested simply because they don't want to go through the same stuff multiple times. I despise platform fragmentations. Instead of telling companies what they must do, I think the regulators should intervene for market fairness, i.e. Apple&Google getting heavily fined when enforce different rules on different developers differently or compel them to accept an app in the App Store if they can't clearly indicate which rule is being broken. I would like to remind you all the troubles we need to go through to support just platforms: AppStore and Play Store. I am NOT looking forward to start paying fees and do development/Marketing work/Adjustments for Epic, Microsoft, Oracle, T-Mobile, Vodafone etc. just to reach the exact same users as of today. Edit: I, as a developer, don't want to deal with multiple platforms and their management and fees. Please tell me if you are mobile developer or is your opinion ideological. The Arguments so far look like coming from people who have no real experience with getting an app into the AppStore. How do you plan to sell Apps in the UK, France, Turkey, charge VAT and pay it to the respective governments for example. How do you plan to file your export paperwork in the US? How do you plan to deal with compliance? Seriously, are there any indie developers here with hands on experience? How do you handle international trade and taxation outside of platforms like AppleStore?
- keithnz 5y ago
  I saw nothing saying you can't still use them.
  - mrtksn 5y ago
    Sure, you can do dev work for Windows Phone Store. That doesn't mean that it's as rewarding as doing work for Apple AppStore. The fragmentation will not open the floodgate for all the users out there who were holding off because they didn't want to use App Store or Play Store. It's going to be the exact same userbase but there will be more gatekeepers to deal with.
lotsofpulp 5y ago
> If they wanted to head this off all they had to do was pay a reasonable amount of tax in the country where the revenue was generated Like a donation? Or are these companies evading tax laws?
- stirlo 5y ago
  I think we can all agree that transfer pricing and the Double Irish Dutch sandwich were not intended to be used in the way they have been by modern multinationals.
  - lotsofpulp 5y ago
    What is stopping the governments from changing the laws to make it illegal? I do not understand the concept of expecting an entity to pay taxes they are not liable for paying.
    - xdennis 5y ago
      These companies paying them not to.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
      - jtbayly 5y ago
        So... they are paying money to the government that they aren't required to?
        foepys 5y ago
        The problem is the EU's process which requires all countries to vote unanimous on this. Ireland is vetoing any change to keep being allowed to set their own tax rates and underbid anybody else while still keeping access to the EU market. In that regard The Netherlands aren't any better by the way.
        5y ago
germandiago 5y ago
one of the first regulations that make sense: more free market. As long as there are regulators with a lot of power there will be incentive to corruption anyway. I like free competition. Something that Google and Apple were trying to prevent. But putting all in the hands of an ever-increasing state is not the way to go either. Though I gree with the decision.
- vincnetas 5y ago
  So when you have Apple and Google (two gorillas) how do you imagine "free competition" happening without state intervention?
- oblio 5y ago
  1. Network effects. 2. Information asymmetry. 3. Barriers to entry. Purely free markets only apply to toiler paper rolls, and not even that.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > one of the first regulations that make sense: more free market State regulations dictating conditions to market participants cannot make something more “free market”. They can favor more competition by artificially limiting the advantage of the most successful competitors, but that's not “free market”, which is the absence of market distortion by state regulation, not the presence of only those market distortions that you prefer. > I like free competition. No, clearly, you like competition with the leaders artificially handicapped by the State, not free competition. Which may be a valid preference, but don't pretend its a free market with free competition.
  - MatekCopatek 5y ago
    Well, depends on your definition of free market. Wiki says: > In a free market, the laws and forces of supply and demand are free from any intervention by a government or other authority, and from all forms of economic privilege, monopolies and artificial scarcities. So while your remark about state regulations isn't wrong, the (grand)parent comment is clearly talking about the second part of this definition. Whose freedom is the "free" bit about? Is it about Apple being free to do whatever they want with their platform or is it about me being free to buy iPhone apps from anyone?
dmitryminkovsky 5y ago
I very much agree that this app stores market abuse thing needs to end, and I am also really glad to see that at least one country is responding like this. > a reasonable (single percentage) fee for facilitating payments. I want to point out, though, that the service Apple provides is not merely payment processing. They offer total customer management. Which, when integrated with their entire developer offering (TestFlight, App Store, etc) is pretty neat. I’ve integrated my app with Apple for iOS and then had to do it all over again with Braintree of web. You might say that entire exercise speaks to the inanity of the App Store monopoly, but the experience illustrated for me how much more Apple provides than just mere payment processing. You won’t find the words “chargeback” or “dispute” in Apple’s docs, because they take care of all that for you. With Apple, you don’t have to program UIs for changing subscription tiers or viewing transaction histories. And many other things. Is it worth 30%? No. 15%? I don’t think so. Should I have to maintain and juggle different integrations for every app store? Definitely not. But Apple’s offering is decent and comprehensive. It would be made much better if it wasn’t a racket that held developers hostage. Think App Store competing with Play Store on Android devices. And vice versa. Now that would be cool! I really hope similar legislation is passed in the United States and EU.
- mafuy 5y ago
  I agree that Apple's system adds a lot of value. And that's why I believe it can and should compete with other systems. There should be no problem with informing users about other payment options both in- and outside of an app. But Apple chose to forbid this. And that's not ok.
- ehsankia 5y ago
  Sure but the point is that developers should have the option of rolling out their own solution if they don't need all the features Apple provides or agree with the fee. This in turn creates competition which may reduce rates all around.
  - judge2020 5y ago
    The common argument against that is that the 30% also goes to actually developing iOS - you could envision the margin Apple makes on every iPhone as one that goes towards the R&D costs of developing the hardware, while the post-sale revenue goes towards the post-sale costs of developing iOS (and all the updates they test/push out for 5+ years after the device is released).
amelius 5y ago
> This is exactly how regulators should respond to the market abuse of these technology monopolies. A somewhat faster response would have been nice though.
muh_gradle 5y ago
Agreed. Hopefully we see a growing trend on this.

by stirlo 5y ago

laurent92 5y ago

What regulators should mostly do is provide rulings in 2 weeks. Monopoly lawsuits have been threatening for 5 years and are still in limbo, our entire West is in threadlock: Slow justice, slow regulators, slow administrations, fast market grabs…

pyrale 5y ago
Due process doesn't fit in 2 weeks, and I don't believe the issue with monopoly law not being enforced is related to the speed of justice.
ethbr0 5y ago
Slow justice and slow regulation are a feature, not a bug. Premature either is more dangerous than delayed action. In hindsight, the correct time for regulation was probably 2008 for Google (DoubleClick purchase and Android shipping with "Android Market") and Apple (App Store). It should have been a clear line from hardware control -> distribution control. And if regulators hadn't seen it, then Congress should have drawn it for them in updated laws. Unfortunately, the world had a bit more going on that year.
- beambot 5y ago
  Android was effectively launched in 2008, per Wikipedia: "It was unveiled in November 2007, with the first commercial Android device, the HTC Dream, being launched in September 2008." In this case, I'm not sure how to square new innovation (smart phones first launching in 2008) with slow regulation.
- stonemetal12 5y ago
  No, the spec doc lists "Speedy trials" as a requirement. Slow justice is no justice.

alisonkisk 5y ago

What are you talking about? They pay sales tax based on revenue, and they provide a lot more than facilitate payments.

mrtksn 5y ago

It's going to be a hell for the users and the smaller developers. Devs will have to support multiple platforms, different API and options. Also different legal arrangements would be needed as each country has different laws and processes. Remember the agreements and forms we fill for different countries when we want to sell paid apps/features on App Store? I also can't wait to pay account fees for many app stores and modify my apps to fit specific app store rules. The %30 cut, for me covers this boring complexity. I'm sceptical that the potentially lower commissions will offset the added development and administrative costs. As for the users, people will start forgetting where they paid what. They will get frustrated, blame devs etc. It would become tiresome and many will be turned off the moment a payment is requested simply because they don't want to go through the same stuff multiple times. I despise platform fragmentations. Instead of telling companies what they must do, I think the regulators should intervene for market fairness, i.e. Apple&Google getting heavily fined when enforce different rules on different developers differently or compel them to accept an app in the App Store if they can't clearly indicate which rule is being broken. I would like to remind you all the troubles we need to go through to support just platforms: AppStore and Play Store. I am NOT looking forward to start paying fees and do development/Marketing work/Adjustments for Epic, Microsoft, Oracle, T-Mobile, Vodafone etc. just to reach the exact same users as of today. Edit: I, as a developer, don't want to deal with multiple platforms and their management and fees. Please tell me if you are mobile developer or is your opinion ideological. The Arguments so far look like coming from people who have no real experience with getting an app into the AppStore. How do you plan to sell Apps in the UK, France, Turkey, charge VAT and pay it to the respective governments for example. How do you plan to file your export paperwork in the US? How do you plan to deal with compliance? Seriously, are there any indie developers here with hands on experience? How do you handle international trade and taxation outside of platforms like AppleStore?

keithnz 5y ago
I saw nothing saying you can't still use them.
- mrtksn 5y ago
  Sure, you can do dev work for Windows Phone Store. That doesn't mean that it's as rewarding as doing work for Apple AppStore. The fragmentation will not open the floodgate for all the users out there who were holding off because they didn't want to use App Store or Play Store. It's going to be the exact same userbase but there will be more gatekeepers to deal with.

lotsofpulp 5y ago

> If they wanted to head this off all they had to do was pay a reasonable amount of tax in the country where the revenue was generated Like a donation? Or are these companies evading tax laws?

stirlo 5y ago
I think we can all agree that transfer pricing and the Double Irish Dutch sandwich were not intended to be used in the way they have been by modern multinationals.
- lotsofpulp 5y ago
  What is stopping the governments from changing the laws to make it illegal? I do not understand the concept of expecting an entity to pay taxes they are not liable for paying.
  - xdennis 5y ago
    These companies paying them not to.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - jtbayly 5y ago
      So... they are paying money to the government that they aren't required to?
      - foepys 5y ago
        The problem is the EU's process which requires all countries to vote unanimous on this. Ireland is vetoing any change to keep being allowed to set their own tax rates and underbid anybody else while still keeping access to the EU market. In that regard The Netherlands aren't any better by the way.
      - 5y ago

germandiago 5y ago

one of the first regulations that make sense: more free market. As long as there are regulators with a lot of power there will be incentive to corruption anyway. I like free competition. Something that Google and Apple were trying to prevent. But putting all in the hands of an ever-increasing state is not the way to go either. Though I gree with the decision.

vincnetas 5y ago
So when you have Apple and Google (two gorillas) how do you imagine "free competition" happening without state intervention?
oblio 5y ago
1. Network effects. 2. Information asymmetry. 3. Barriers to entry. Purely free markets only apply to toiler paper rolls, and not even that.
dragonwriter 5y ago
> one of the first regulations that make sense: more free market State regulations dictating conditions to market participants cannot make something more “free market”. They can favor more competition by artificially limiting the advantage of the most successful competitors, but that's not “free market”, which is the absence of market distortion by state regulation, not the presence of only those market distortions that you prefer. > I like free competition. No, clearly, you like competition with the leaders artificially handicapped by the State, not free competition. Which may be a valid preference, but don't pretend its a free market with free competition.
- MatekCopatek 5y ago
  Well, depends on your definition of free market. Wiki says: > In a free market, the laws and forces of supply and demand are free from any intervention by a government or other authority, and from all forms of economic privilege, monopolies and artificial scarcities. So while your remark about state regulations isn't wrong, the (grand)parent comment is clearly talking about the second part of this definition. Whose freedom is the "free" bit about? Is it about Apple being free to do whatever they want with their platform or is it about me being free to buy iPhone apps from anyone?

dmitryminkovsky 5y ago

I very much agree that this app stores market abuse thing needs to end, and I am also really glad to see that at least one country is responding like this. > a reasonable (single percentage) fee for facilitating payments. I want to point out, though, that the service Apple provides is not merely payment processing. They offer total customer management. Which, when integrated with their entire developer offering (TestFlight, App Store, etc) is pretty neat. I’ve integrated my app with Apple for iOS and then had to do it all over again with Braintree of web. You might say that entire exercise speaks to the inanity of the App Store monopoly, but the experience illustrated for me how much more Apple provides than just mere payment processing. You won’t find the words “chargeback” or “dispute” in Apple’s docs, because they take care of all that for you. With Apple, you don’t have to program UIs for changing subscription tiers or viewing transaction histories. And many other things. Is it worth 30%? No. 15%? I don’t think so. Should I have to maintain and juggle different integrations for every app store? Definitely not. But Apple’s offering is decent and comprehensive. It would be made much better if it wasn’t a racket that held developers hostage. Think App Store competing with Play Store on Android devices. And vice versa. Now that would be cool! I really hope similar legislation is passed in the United States and EU.

mafuy 5y ago
I agree that Apple's system adds a lot of value. And that's why I believe it can and should compete with other systems. There should be no problem with informing users about other payment options both in- and outside of an app. But Apple chose to forbid this. And that's not ok.
ehsankia 5y ago
Sure but the point is that developers should have the option of rolling out their own solution if they don't need all the features Apple provides or agree with the fee. This in turn creates competition which may reduce rates all around.
- judge2020 5y ago
  The common argument against that is that the 30% also goes to actually developing iOS - you could envision the margin Apple makes on every iPhone as one that goes towards the R&D costs of developing the hardware, while the post-sale revenue goes towards the post-sale costs of developing iOS (and all the updates they test/push out for 5+ years after the device is released).

amelius 5y ago

> This is exactly how regulators should respond to the market abuse of these technology monopolies. A somewhat faster response would have been nice though.

muh_gradle 5y ago

Agreed. Hopefully we see a growing trend on this.