European Commission imposes first fines under the DMA against Apple and Meta

On 23 April 2025, the European Commission imposed fines on Apple and Meta. These are the first fines imposed on gatekeepers under the Digital Markets Act ("DMA").

• Apple was fined EUR 500 million for allegedly violating the DMA's anti-steering requirements, in particular because Apple did not sufficiently allow app developers to inform consumers about alternative purchase options outside the App Store.
• Meta was fined EUR 200 million for allegedly failing to offer users a genuine choice regarding the use of personal data under its "consent-and-pay" model.

In detail:

I. The Digital Markets Act

The DMA forms an essential component in regulating the EU’s Single Digital Market. It aims to limit the market power of large digital platforms, so-called gatekeepers, and thus ensures fair competition (in the digital sector).

Gatekeepers are companies which provide core platform services, thereby acting as important gateways between business users and consumers. The provisions of the DMA oblige gatekeepers to implement practices which are open and non-restrictive in order to facilitate access to its platform services for users.

In the event of non-compliance, companies face fines that can amount to up to 10 % of their global annual turnover or even 20 % in the event of a repeat offence.

II. First fine decision under the Digital Markets Act

These are the first fines imposed under the Digital Markets Act.

The European Commission's decision shows that it is prepared to enforce the digital market rules even in the face of resistance from gatekeepers and to utilize its instruments. Although the fines naturally remain far below the theoretical maximum limit, the amount hardly insignificant especially considering that the addressees of the fines have only been in breach of the DMA for a relatively short time. In the event of repeat offences, higher fines are also likely to be imposed.

III. History: Proceedings against Apple and Meta under the Digital Markets Act

On September 6^th, 2023, Apple (core platform services: App Store; Safari; iOS (and later also iPadOS)) and Meta (core platform services: Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, Messenger, Meta Ads and Facebook Marketplace) were designated as gatekeepers.

From the day of their designation, the gatekeepers had a time frame of six months, so until the 6th of March 2024, to comply with the requirements of the DMA. On 25th March 2024, the European Commission consequently initiated proceedings against Apple and Meta (among others) considering a possible issuance of a non-compliance order.

Regarding Apple, measures relating to the App Store were criticized, including the fact that app developers could not fully benefit from alternative distribution channels outside the App Store.

Regarding Meta, the European Commission criticized the “pay-or-consent” model implemented by Meta. On 1st June and 1st July 2024, Apple and Meta, respectively, were notified of the Commission’s preliminary assessments.

IV. Fines imposed on Apple and Meta

On 23 April 2025, the European Commission issued a non-compliance decision against Apple and Meta.

1. Apple: Violation of anti-steering regulations

Gatekeepers are obliged to provide app developers with the possibility of offering their apps on platforms other than the gatekeepers own platform, in this case the Apple AppStore, and allowing the use of alternative platforms. Developers who distribute their apps via the Apple App Store should be able to inform their customers free of charge about alternative, more favourable purchase options and allow for these purchases to be made onto their devices.

The European Commission in its decision determined that Apple violated the anti-steering provisions by restricting options for app store alternatives. As a result of this violation, app developers cannot fully benefit from the advantages of alternative distribution channels outside the App Store due to several restrictions. For example, app developers could not provide pricing information within the app; they were not allowed to communicate better offers within their apps; and they could only offer promotions via a link in their app that redirects the user to an external website ("link-outs"). Also, the (generally permissible) fees that Apple charged for concluding a contract via another sales channel via their App Store were not necessary, particularly in terms of the amount. Therefore, consumers cannot fully benefit from alternative and more favourable offers.

Consequently, the European Commission has ordered Apple to cease any restrictions immediately and to refrain from such practices in the future.

2. Meta: "consent-and-pay" model

Gatekeepers must obtain the consent of users if they intend to combine or use their personal data across different core platform services.

In March 2024, Meta therefore introduced a model for Facebook and Instagram in which users either had to consent to the combination of their personal data for personalized advertising or pay a fee for an ad-free version. The European Commission considered the model introduced by Meta for Facebook and Instagram of choosing between free use with consent to the further use of personal data and paid use to be not sufficient and therefore a violation of the DMA. In the view of the European Commission, Meta has failed to offer users genuine freedom of choice with regard to data processing within its social networks, as users were not offered an equivalent, less data processing-intensive alternative.

Therefore, also Meta was instructed – in addition to the fine – to make adjustments and present an improved model.

V. Facebook Marketplace is not a core platform service after all due to lack of reach

As part of the decision, the European Commission also determined that Meta's online brokerage service Facebook Marketplace is not a core platform service, contrary to the European Commission's original categorization. This is because Meta's marketplace had fewer than 10,000 commercial users in 2024 and therefore no longer meets the relevant DMA-threshold, which suggests that the marketplace serves as an important gateway to end users.

VI. Outlook

Apple and Meta now have 60 days to adjust their practices in line with the European Commission’s decision. Otherwise, they risk fines of up to 5% of their annual turnover.

Both Apple and Meta must revise their current framework to comply with DMA provisions. In its decision the Commission criticized Apple far more harshly, requiring the Tech-giant to remove all commercial and technical restrictions on steering. In Meta's case, less far-reaching adjustments to the current model appear possible.

Moreover, injured parties, in particular app developers but also users affected by Apple's or Meta's practices, can also assert civil law claims (before national courts), in particular claims for damages. The 11^th amendment to the ARC in Germany has further strengthened this possibility by, among other things, extending the binding effect of Commission decisions to private enforcement in connection with the DMA.

Interesting to note: On 30 April 2025, a US court also issued a (analogous) ruling against Apple on the grounds of anti-steering measures in breach of antitrust law. According to the court decision, Apple prevents developers from providing information about alternative purchase options to users. In this respect, the decision confirms the European Commission's approach. Particularly delicate: The court found that Apple had deliberately violated antitrust law and had always apparently behaved in the most anti-competitive manner possible – even initiated by Apple's top management including CEO Tim Cook:

“In stark contrast to Apple's initial in-court testimony, contemporaneous business documents reveal that Apple knew exactly what it was doing and at every turn chose the most anticompetitive option. To hide the truth Vice-President of Finance (...) outright lied under oath. Internally, [an Apple Fellow] had advocated that Apple comply with the [court decision], but Tim Cook [CEO of Apple] ignored Schiller and instead allowed [CFO of Apple] and his finance team to convince him otherwise)”

Against this backdrop, it will be interesting to see whether Apple will comply with the European Commission's DMA decision or whether the European Commission will have to take action against Apple again – which will certainly result in even higher fines.