The Tool Desk
Outbyte PC Repair FREEClear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Outbyte Driver Updater FREEFix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Short answer: Apple was found in civil contempt on April 30, 2025, after Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers concluded that it willfully violated an injunction governing App Store payment links and commissions. She referred the matter to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for possible criminal-contempt proceedings. That referral was not a criminal charge. As of August 18, 2026, the available record confirms the civil-contempt ruling and later appellate proceedings, but does not establish that Apple, Tim Cook or Apple finance executive Alex Roman was criminally charged.
The Ninth Circuit’s December 11, 2025 decision also changed the picture: it upheld much of the contempt ruling but rejected the complete prohibition on Apple commissions as an appropriate civil-contempt sanction in its existing form. The case therefore remains a story about enforcement of a court order, not a finding that Apple was convicted of a crime.
| # | Preview | Product | Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
Apple iPhone 14, 128GB, Blue - Unlocked (Renewed) | $299.95 | Buy on Amazon |
| 2 |
|
Apple iPhone 14, 128GB, Midnight - Unlocked (Renewed) | $300.00 | Buy on Amazon |
| 3 |
|
Apple iPhone 13, 128GB, Midnight - Unlocked (Renewed) | $262.00 | Buy on Amazon |
| 4 |
|
Apple iPhone 16e, 128GB, Black - Unlocked (Renewed) | $389.00 | Buy on Amazon |
| 5 |
|
Apple iPhone 15, 128GB, Black - Unlocked (Renewed) | $405.00 | Buy on Amazon |
What people mean by the “Apple tax”
“Apple tax” is a colloquial label used by developers, critics and commentators for Apple’s commission on certain digital goods and services sold through the App Store or Apple’s in-app purchasing system. It is not a statutory tax.
The often-repeated 30% figure is not universal. Rates vary by developer program, category, subscription status and transaction. The legal dispute described here was not simply about a percentage. It focused on whether Apple could restrict developers from directing customers to outside payment options and then impose charges or conditions that undermined the court’s injunction.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitches2Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errors3Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minute#1 Best Overall
- Vibrant 6.1-inch Super Retina XDR display with OLED technology. Action mode for smooth, steady, handheld videos.
Apple says its U.S. App Store ecosystem facilitated $406 billion in developer billings and sales in 2024, and that more than 90% of that amount generated no Apple commission. The figure includes physical goods, services, advertising and transactions completed outside apps, so it is not Apple’s App Store revenue or a measure of the commissions at issue. Apple’s breakdown explains those categories.
The transaction types that matter
| Scenario | Why it matters in this litigation |
|---|---|
| A digital subscription bought inside an iPhone app with Apple’s in-app payment system | Typically falls within Apple’s App Store payment rules and any applicable commission program. |
| A user follows an approved link from an app and pays on the developer’s website | Raises the anti-steering and external-link questions at the center of the injunction dispute. |
| Food delivery, a ride, hotel booking or another physical service | Usually is not an App Store digital-goods commission transaction. |
| A purchase processed by an alternative payment provider | May avoid Apple’s in-app billing, but the developer still must comply with the Apple terms and court orders applicable at the time. |
How the Epic dispute produced the injunction
Epic Games challenged Apple’s App Store rules after Epic introduced its own payment option in Fortnite in August 2020, prompting Apple to remove the game. The resulting case addressed both competition claims and Apple’s restrictions on communicating with customers about other ways to pay.
In 2021, Judge Rogers ordered Apple to permit developers to communicate with customers about alternative purchasing methods and to avoid specified restrictions on external links. The order was an injunction, meaning compliance continued after the original judgment. Apple and Epic appealed different parts of the decision; in January 2024, the Supreme Court declined to hear the parties’ appeals, leaving the injunction in effect. A timeline of the litigation is available from AppleInsider.
Rank #2
- This phone is unlocked and compatible with any carrier of choice on GSM and CDMA networks (e.g. AT&T, T-Mobile, Sprint, Verizon, US Cellular, Cricket, Metro, Tracfone, Mint Mobile, etc.).
- Please check with your carrier to verify compatibility.
- The device does not come with headphones or a SIM card. It does include a generic (Mfi certified) charging cable.
- Tested for battery health and guaranteed to have a minimum battery capacity of 80%.
The April 2025 proceeding was therefore primarily a compliance dispute over an existing order, not a new antitrust trial.
Crashes, No Sound, or Screen Glitches?
Random freezes, missing sound and display glitches usually trace back to one bad driver. Find and replace yours safely.Free scan · under a minuteWindows Errors? Fix Them Before They Spread
Repair common Windows errors and clear accumulated junk for a smoother, more stable PC - no reinstall needed.Free scan · no reinstallWhat Judge Rogers found on April 30, 2025
According to the contemporaneous account in Computerworld, Judge Rogers found that Apple had willfully violated the injunction. The findings included:
- continued interference with developers’ use of external purchasing links;
- restrictions that, in the court’s view, undermined the practical effect of the injunction; and
- a commission structure and related implementation that conflicted with what the order required.
The judge also found that Alex Roman, Apple’s vice president of finance, gave false testimony. That testimony issue helped elevate the dispute beyond an ordinary disagreement about how to implement software rules: knowingly disobeying an order and misleading a court can create separate enforcement concerns.
Rank #3
- This pre-owned product is not Apple certified, but has been professionally inspected, tested and cleaned by Amazon-qualified suppliers.
- There will be no visible cosmetic imperfections when held at an arm’s length.
- This product is eligible for a replacement or refund within 90 days of receipt if you are not satisfied.
- Product may come in generic Box.
The underlying April 30 order should be consulted for its precise language and reasoning. The publicly described consequences establish the civil-contempt finding and referral, but do not by themselves prove that a criminal case was later filed.
Civil contempt is not criminal contempt
| Feature | Civil contempt | Criminal contempt |
|---|---|---|
| Primary purpose | Coerce compliance with an order or remedy a proven injury. | Punish past disobedience of the court’s authority. |
| Who decides whether to pursue it | The civil court can adjudicate the alleged violation. | Prosecutors decide whether to bring charges; a criminal court then applies criminal procedures. |
| What the April 2025 event was | Judge Rogers found Apple in civil contempt. | The judge referred the matter for possible investigation; no charge is established by that referral. |
Thus, “Apple was held in civil contempt and referred for possible criminal-contempt charges” is accurate. “Apple was criminally charged” would require an indictment, information, docket entry or official prosecution announcement.
Who could have faced criminal exposure?
The referral could have concerned Apple as a corporation, individuals involved in implementing the order, or both. Computerworld identified Alex Roman because the judge found his testimony false. Corporate responsibility, an employee’s conduct and an individual’s personal criminal liability are separate legal questions.
Rank #4
- 6.1" Super Retina XDR OLED, HDR10, 800 nits (HBM), 1200 nits (peak), 2532x1170px at 460ppi, 4005mAh Battery
- 8GB RAM, Apple A18 6-core CPU (2 performance + 4 efficiency cores), Apple GPU 4-core, 16‑core Neural Engine
- Rear camera: 48MP, f/1.6, wide, Front Camera: 12MP, f/1.9, wide, iOS 18.3.1, upgradable to iOS 18.5
- Connectivity: Global 4G LTE, Sub-6 GHz 5G, LTE, Wi-Fi 6, Bluetooth 5.3, NFC, USB-C, Wireless Charging (7.5W). (does not have mmWave 5G or MagSafe or physical SIM card) - Dual eSIM Only
- Unlocked for freedom to choose your carrier. Compatible with both GSM & CDMA networks. The phone is unlocked to work with all GSM Carriers & CDMA Carriers Including AT&T, T-Mobile, Verizon, Straight Talk., Etc.
The article also raised whether Chief Executive Tim Cook might be implicated. That was speculation, not a finding that Cook committed a crime. Criticism of executive decision-making does not establish personal contempt or criminal liability, and no charging document identified here supports saying that Cook was charged.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.Apple’s response and its consumer-protection argument
Apple said it strongly disagreed with the ruling, would comply with the order and would appeal. It also argues that the App Store provides review, security and privacy controls, payment processing, fraud protection, refunds, subscription management and customer support. Apple’s position is that alternative payment systems can reduce its ability to provide those services. Its explanation of external purchases and developer terms appears in its 2021 statement, while its later discussion of security and support appears in this 2025 announcement.
Those are Apple’s stated policy and business arguments, not a court finding that every alternative payment system is less secure or that every commission is justified.
Best Value
- 6.1inch Super Retina XDR display. Aluminum with color-infused glass back. Ring/Silent switch
- Dynamic Island. A magical way to interact with iPhone. A16 Bionic chip with 5-core GPU
- Advanced dual-camera system. 48MP Main | Ultra Wide. Super-high-resolution photos (24MP and 48MP). Next-generation portraits with Focus and Depth Control. 4X optical zoom range
- Emergency SOS via satellite. Crash Detection. Roadside Assistance via satellite
- Up to 26 hours video playback. USB C, Supports USB 2. Face ID
What the Ninth Circuit changed in December 2025
On December 11, 2025, the Ninth Circuit issued its opinion in the appeal. The court:
- upheld the district court’s decision that Apple’s link-design restrictions could support a contempt finding;
- left most contempt-related restrictions in place;
- found some provisions overbroad; and
- held that a complete prohibition on Apple commissions was not an appropriate civil-contempt sanction in its existing form.
The judgment was affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded for modification. The full opinion is available as a Ninth Circuit PDF. This did not completely clear Apple, nor did it convert the civil proceeding into a criminal conviction.
Status check: August 18, 2026
Verified status:
- Apple was found in civil contempt on April 30, 2025.
- The matter was referred to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for consideration of possible criminal contempt.
- The Ninth Circuit later modified the commission-related sanctions while upholding much of the contempt ruling.
- The materials available for this article do not establish that federal prosecutors filed criminal contempt charges, that Roman was prosecuted, or that a criminal resolution was entered.
The Northern District of California’s case materials show that the Epic v. Apple docket remained active into 2026, but the cited docket page does not provide enough detail to establish a final criminal-contempt disposition. Readers should not treat a referral as proof that prosecutors agreed with the judge or filed a case. Court docket materials would be the appropriate place to verify any later charging document.
Why the ruling matters to developers and consumers
Developers
The case tests how much practical freedom a developer receives when a court says it may communicate with customers about outside payment options. A link that is technically allowed but burdened by design or financial restrictions may still be challenged as inconsistent with an injunction.
Consumers
Where an app sends a customer to a website, the payment relationship, refund process, subscription controls and fraud support may differ from an Apple-billed purchase. The exact result depends on the transaction, app category, jurisdiction and developer agreement in force at the time.
Platform enforcement
The contempt proceedings show that courts can punish deliberate noncompliance with an injunction, while appellate review can still narrow an overbroad remedy. That distinction is why the Ninth Circuit’s modification matters: the contempt finding largely survived, but one major sanction did not remain unchanged.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
