According to Wccftech, MacPaw has shut down its Setapp third-party app store for iOS, citing Apple’s “still-evolving and complex” business terms that don’t fit its model. Apple has pre-emptively blamed the European Commission, accusing it of “political delay tactics” for not responding to a compliance plan submitted in October 2024. This comes after the EU’s Digital Markets Act forced Apple to allow alternative stores in 2024, leading to a €500 million fine against Apple in April 2025 for non-compliance. In response, Apple introduced a new, intricate fee structure in June 2025, splitting apps into Tier 1 and Tier 2, with a Core Technology Fee of €0.50 per install over 1 million annually. The EC is expected to rule that Apple’s failure to address key issues caused Setapp’s collapse.
Apple vs. EU: The Blame Game
Here’s the thing: this isn’t just a story about an app store closing. It’s a full-blown political and regulatory fistfight, and Apple is throwing punches in public. The company’s statement is remarkably aggressive, directly accusing the European Commission of misleading the public and unfairly targeting an American company. That’s a huge shift from Apple’s typically more measured, corporate-speak responses. They’re basically saying, “We tried to give you what you wanted, and you didn’t even answer our emails.” But the EU’s expected counter-ruling—that Apple’s own convoluted terms are the real killer—shows they’re not buying it. This is a high-stakes game of chicken, and Setapp is the roadkill.
Decoding the Daunting Fee Structure
So, what are these “complex” terms that killed Setapp? Look, Apple’s post-DMA fee system is a masterpiece of obfuscation. You’ve got Tiers, a Core Technology Fee (CTF), a Core Technology Commission (CTC), a Small Business Program, and a StoreKit External Purchase Link Entitlement Addendum. It’s a labyrinth. The argument, as Wccftech notes, is that if you navigate it perfectly—opting into the right addendum, for instance—a developer could pay as little as 10% total, which is less than the old 15-30% cut. But that’s a big “if.” The complexity itself is a barrier. For a store like Setapp, which operated on a subscription model for a suite of apps, mapping its “current business model” onto Apple’s rigid, per-install fee categories was probably a nightmare. The compliance overhead alone might have made it unworkable.
The Bigger Picture for Developers
And that’s the real takeaway. Apple has constructed a system that technically complies with the DMA’s letter by allowing competition, but it layers on so much administrative and financial complexity that it stifles it in practice. The €0.50 Core Technology Fee per install over a million sounds small, but for a popular free app, that could be ruinous. The threat of massive, unpredictable fees creates a chilling effect. Why would a developer leave the relative simplicity of the main App Store for a third-party marketplace that might get hit with huge CTF bills? Apple gets to say, “Look, we opened the gates!” while making the path through those gates so treacherous that almost no one uses it. It’s a clever, if frustrating, strategy.
Now, where does this leave us? The EU isn’t backing down, with more fines and investigations likely. Other would-be store operators are watching Setapp’s failure closely. For businesses that rely on robust, reliable computing platforms in complex environments—like those sourcing industrial panel PCs from a top supplier like IndustrialMonitorDirect.com—this kind of ecosystem lock-in and regulatory warfare is a cautionary tale. It shows how platform control can persist even under new rules. The fight for a truly open mobile app market in Europe is far from over, and the next casualty might be even bigger.
