EU Reportedly Planning to Charge Apple for Violating Digital Markets Act

[mikelets456]

The EU does not have a government...😏

True---but the oversite commission is even worse than any government---similar to the the UN. They take money, grant themselves more power and go after success. Like I said---we will pay for it---Apple designed their platform specifically. This is what made them a success----yes it's locked down, but it works. Who is the government or commission to come in and tell them how to run their business? So they create laws that they KNOW will disrupt their business model then threaten them with fines.

 

[chmania]

True---but their oversite commission is even worse---like the UN. They take money, grant themselves more power and go after success. Like I said---we will pay for it---

You might have to, but not those who reside in the EU. There would be additional fines if something like that were to occur again. The majority in the EU use Windows, a few use Linux, but not many opt for Macs.

 

[mikelets456]

You might have to, but not those who reside in the EU. There would be additional fines if something like that were to occur again. The majority in the EU use Windows, a few use Linux, but not many opt for Macs.

There's an interesting site showing "Apple vs "Android" users---other than America and Canada-----Most of the world uses Android or "other than Apple". UK is 56% IOS but the rest of Europe is in the 26%-36% range. At some point they simply might offer a different option or get out of the EU.

iPhone Market Share by Country 2025

Discover population, economy, health, and more with the most comprehensive global statistics at your fingertips.

worldpopulationreview.com

 

[chmania]

UK is 56% IOS but the rest of Europe is in the 26%-36% range. At some point they simply might offer a different option or get out of the EU.

The EU, along with the rest of Europe, encompasses a market larger than that of the US and Canada combined. It would be quite foolish to turn one's back on such a significant opportunity. Moreover, American companies, which often provide minimal guarantees for their products within the US, are required to offer a standard statutory two-year warranty to consumers in the EU. This clearly illustrates that the EU prioritises the protection of its citizens far more effectively.

 

[AppliedMicro]

And guess who will end up paying for that fine

What fine?
There is no fine.
Apple has so far (albeit begrudgingly and not always in good faith) chosen to comply.

We will---prices will go up to offset the cost

Prices in competitive markets can't just go up and costs can't just be passed on indefinitely - they'll reduce consumer demand and will make the company earn less.

it's all corruption. They see a company making money and now government wants a piece of it

Nonsense. The Digital Markets Act does not make the European Union money. It doesn't provide for any form of taxation.

It's there to achieve an effect on certain markets. Companies are supposed to obey the law - in which case they don't have to pay to the government (unless it is a law providing for taxes - which it isn't).

most laws are fabricated to simply gain power and control.

...and money.

So are Apple's App Store / developer terms.

 

[AppliedMicro]

At some point they simply might offer a different option or get out of the EU.

What different "option"?

Few people are asking for expensive Apple-branded smartphones that run Android (when better price/value propositions are offered by the competition).
Even fewer are interested in another operating system that can't run third-party apps.

 

[mikelets456]

What different "option"?

Few people are asking for expensive Apple-branded smartphones that run Android (when better price/value propositions are offered by the competition).
Even fewer are interested in another operating system that can't run third-party apps.

Options as "fewer features" or ridding of "features" that are banned by the EU....in the end it's a business model with a "cost vs benefit" analysis.. Correct me if I'm wrong, numerous Beta items are available here in the USA but not in the EU.

 

[AppliedMicro]

ridding of "features" that are banned by the EU

What feature ist "banned by the EU"?
They don't ban features.

If anyone is "banning" features from EU consumers, it is Apple.

Correct me if I'm wrong, numerous Beta items are available here in the USA but not in the EU.

They're have been or are merely a beta anyway. And it's mainly "AI" features. Something that Apple is merely rushing to jump on the AI bandwagon than leading the industry*. Which means there's competition.

Let's see about the "finished" product - the availability or unavailability of features will be appreciated by consumers.

* Edit: And depending on third parties.

👉 ...and that is where the law (again) comes in: It provides third party developers / services the rights to integrate with Apple's products.

 

[I7guy]

[…]



👉 ...and that is where the law (again) comes in: It provides third party developers / services the rights to integrate with Apple's products.

said another way, it forces apple to give away its up for free to anyone who wants it. However if a feature isnt included, can’t be given away.

 

[AppliedMicro]

it forces apple to give away its up for free to anyone who wants it

No, you’re wrong.

Providing interoperability for third parties and their apps/services doesn’t mean giving away to anyone for free. Apple don’t have to give away their code. And they’re free to monetise iOS in many ways (through selling hardware devices, licensing it to third parties, charging consumers for certain functionality, etc.). They clearly do not have to give away their IP “for free to anyone who wants it”.

 

[I7guy]

No, you’re wrong.

Providing interoperability for third parties and their apps/services doesn’t mean giving away to anyone for free. Apple don’t have to give away their code. And they’re free to monetise iOS in many ways (through selling hardware devices, licensing it to third parties, charging consumers for certain functionality, etc.). They clearly do not have to give away their IP “for free to anyone who wants it”.

No this is spin. “Forcing interoperability” is exactly what I said it was.

 

[AppliedMicro]

They have to allow interoperability and access for free in limited circumstances (as defined by law),
Which is good for innovation, competition and society.

That’s not “giving IP away for free” in the generalising way you‘re trying to spin it.

 

[mikelets456]

The EU, along with the rest of Europe, encompasses a market larger than that of the US and Canada combined. It would be quite foolish to turn one's back on such a significant opportunity. Moreover, American companies, which often provide minimal guarantees for their products within the US, are required to offer a standard statutory two-year warranty to consumers in the EU. This clearly illustrates that the EU prioritises the protection of its citizens far more effectively.

How? It will simply be reflected in higher prices....Do you think corporations simply give extra for nothing out of the kindness of their hearts? You are paying for it...period.

Iphone 16 Pro Italy = starting at 1,239 Euros ($1,346)
Iphone 16 pro USA = starting at $999

Congrats on paying more and bragging about it...

 

[AppliedMicro]

Iphone 16 Pro Italy = starting at 1,239 Euros ($1,346) ($1103)
Iphone 16 pro USA = starting at $999

If I had 10 dollars for every time I’ve read someone failing to account for VAT/sales taxes (included in the Italian price, not included in the U.S. price), I’d had…

…enough money to buy an iPhone. 🙂

Apele products are usually about 10% more expensive in non-US markets. Net of local taxes/duties. Have been for ages. EU or non-EU (including countries with weaker consumer protection laws).

 

[webkit]

How? It will simply be reflected in higher prices....Do you think corporations simply give extra for nothing out of the kindness of their hearts? You are paying for it...period.

Iphone 16 Pro Italy = starting at 1,239 Euros ($1,346)
Iphone 16 pro USA = starting at $999

You're comparing prices in Italy with purchases taxes (VAT) against prices in the U.S. without purchases taxes (sales tax).

The pre-VAT price in Italy is €1,009 or around $1,096 USD.
The pre-sales tax price in the U.S. is $999.

 

[chmania]

How? It will simply be reflected in higher prices....Do you think corporations simply give extra for nothing out of the kindness of their hearts? You are paying for it...period.

Iphone 16 Pro Italy = starting at 1,239 Euros ($1,346)
Iphone 16 pro USA = starting at $999

Congrats on paying more and bragging about it...

So what are you going to do when it conks out the day after the "1-year warranty" in the US?
Anyway, I’m using an iPhone today, but my next one will most likely be a Poco Pro, as it has many more features.

 

[mikelets456]

You're comparing prices in Italy with purchases taxes (VAT) against prices in the U.S. without purchases taxes (sales tax).

The pre-VAT price in Italy is €1,009 or around $1,096 USD.
The pre-sales tax price in the U.S. is $999.

Once again---You're bragging about the EU (OECD) protecting you but you're still paying more in the end $100 plus VAT---I could get the phone for $300 less and pay $3.99 per month ($79) for 2 extra years or $7.99 month ($149 2 years) of Apple care +...VAT is added to everything and $300 is a lot of money ($60 here in PA)

"The Commission of the European Union (EU) takes part in the work of the OECD, in accordance with the Supplementary Protocol to the Convention on the ..."

 

[mikelets456]

So what are you going to do when it conks out the day after the "1-year warranty" in the US?

Explained above---I'm still way ahead and don't need to have a nanny state "government" interfering and charging me 15%- 25% (In this case 25%) on top and I'm still ahead with Apple care from theft, breakage, repairs, etc.

 

[mikelets456]

Interesting thread on Redditt along what I was saying---BTW, looks as if you have to PROVE after 6 months that the defect was from the factory----good luck there:
Well there are factors.

• It is imported and there are costs that go along with that. Apple is a global company and phones are built in China but Apple is a company that is headquartered in the U.S.
• Tax is included.
• Many times in Europe they have a longer warranty depending where you live. Yup, in Germany you get 2 years and in the US we get one. Expect that to be a big reason.
  
  
  ______________________________________________________________

To clarify the 2 year warranty, thing - it's an EU wide law, that some countries may add on to. BUT it's not quite the same as the full warranty you get because:

The legal guarantee is valid for a period of two years [...] covers any defects presumed to have existed at the time of delivery and which become apparent within a period of two years.

https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/shopping/guarantees-returns/faq/index_en.htm

So basically after 6 months YOU have to prove that the defect existed:

After six months, you can still hold the seller responsible for any defects during the full two-year guarantee period. However, if the seller contests this, you must be able to prove that the defect existed at the time of delivery.

 

[chmania]

Explained above---I'm still way ahead and don't need to have a nanny state "government" interfering and charging me 15%- 25% (In this case 25%) on top and I'm still ahead with Apple care from theft, breakage, repairs, etc.

The EU is not a government...and, people over here are not owned by companies...

 

[webkit]

Once again---You're bragging about the EU (OECD) protecting you but you're still paying more in the end $100 plus VAT---I could get the phone for $300 less and pay $3.99 per month ($79) for 2 extra years or $7.99 month ($149 2 years) of Apple care +...VAT is added to everything and $300 is a lot of money ($60 here in PA)

"The Commission of the European Union (EU) takes part in the work of the OECD, in accordance with the Supplementary Protocol to the Convention on the ..."

Once again?? I'm not bragging about anything, nor do I live in the EU.

I was simply pointing out that the price you quoted for Italy includes purchases taxes (VAT) while the price in the U.S. did not include sales tax. The comparison was misleading because it included sales tax for one but not the other, and didn't factor in the warranty difference between the countries.

As far as VAT is concerned, that's a country by country thing not an EU thing. For example, the UK isn't part of the EU yet it also has VAT. You shouldn't tie the VAT to the EU.

 

[chmania]

Interesting thread on Redditt along what I was saying...

The VAT rates in different EU countries. They range from 17% to 27% depending on the country.

 

[surferfb]

The EU is not a government...and, people over here are not owned by companies...

There isn't a country on earth where people are owned by companies.

And while you're correct that it's technically not a government, it is a political entity that passes laws that apply to the citizens of its member states, and can rule that certain laws of said member states are unenforceable, so it shares many of the characteristics of a government. So for ease of conversation, calling it a government is perfectly valid.

 

[chmania]

There isn't a country on earth where people are owned by companies.

Where there are no statutory guarantees for goods purchased by individuals, companies effectively hold power over the consumers.

So for ease of conversation, calling it a government is perfectly valid.

For you perhaps, but for us, the EU is not a government. We have our own.

 

[AppliedMicro]

And while you're correct that it's technically not a government, it is a political entity that passes laws that apply to the citizens of its member states, and can rule that certain laws of said member states are unenforceable, so it shares many of the characteristics of a government. So for ease of conversation, calling it a government is perfectly valid.

I think it's fair to call it a (federal) quasi-government.

There isn't a country on earth where people are owned by companies.

And that's why companies

• with considerable monopoly power
• that control access to essential computing and communications platforms
• for tens of millions of consumers (more than most countries in the world)

not be unregulated in restricting, regulating and charging for access to their customer base.
"Minority operator" (within a duopoly) or not.