A coalition of over 600 Japanese companies is urging regulators to take further action against Apple, arguing that recent changes to the App Store’s rules have failed to create a viable alternative to the company’s existing payment system. The call for intervention comes after Apple announced modifications to its iOS policies in Japan last December, intended to comply with the country’s Mobile Software Competition Act (MSCA).
The changes, mirroring similar adjustments Apple has made globally in response to increasing regulatory scrutiny, allowed developers to link users to off-app promotions and offer alternative in-app payment methods. Though, these new options came with associated fees, including commissions of up to 15% on web-based transactions and additional charges for apps distributed outside the App Store. Apple had previously characterized Japan’s MSCA as a more balanced approach to regulation than the Digital Markets Act in Europe.
According to a report by The Japan News, seven IT-related industry groups – collectively representing the more than 600 companies – have jointly criticized the new commission structure, stating there is “no economic incentive” for developers to utilize the newly permitted payment methods. The groups are advocating for the elimination of commissions on off-App Store transactions, aiming to foster a market where a wider range of payment options are genuinely available.
This joint statement follows a previous criticism issued by the Mobile Content Forum, one of the seven industry groups, on January 29th, which also took issue with Apple and Google’s approach to the new regulations. The latest move by the coalition is intended to pressure the Japan Fair Trade Commission (JFTC) to re-examine the issue and potentially implement additional enforcement measures, though the JFTC has not yet indicated whether it will act.
The MSCA, which grew its guidelines recently according to Wolters Kluwer, aims to promote competition within Japan’s mobile software market. The current dispute centers on whether Apple’s implementation of the law truly provides developers with meaningful alternatives, or if the associated fees effectively negate any benefits.
