Apple Weighs New Ways to Grow Revenue From Its $30 Billion App Store

Apple Plans to Squeeze More Revenue From the App Store, Report Says

Apple is systematically examining ways to increase margins and extract additional recurring revenue from the App Store, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman reporting in his Power On newsletter on September 6, 2026. The push is being driven by newly appointed CEO John Ternus and Services SVP Eddy Cue, marking a significant strategic shift in how Apple plans to operate one of its most important profit centers.

The internal effort has already created tension at the executive level: Phil Schiller, Apple's 39-year veteran who has overseen the App Store since its 2008 inception, stepped down from his day-to-day operational role rather than be associated with the planned changes.

The Context: Revenue Pressures and Regulatory Headwinds

Apple's decision to pursue additional App Store revenue comes at a moment of pressure on the services business. While the App Store generates an estimated $30 billion annually and helped drive $30.74 billion in Services revenue last quarter, growth is slowing.

Analytics firm Appfigures reported that Apple's U.S. commission revenue has fallen 18 percent since the start of 2026. The decline reflects the impact of regulatory changes and legal rulings, particularly the Epic Games lawsuit, which has forced Apple to allow alternative payment methods and app distribution channels in certain markets.

Beyond the U.S., Apple faces similar headwinds. App Store revenue has declined in Brazil and Japan following new regulations that restrict Apple's ability to control how apps are distributed and how payments are processed. These regulatory challenges directly threaten the commission revenue that has historically been Apple's core App Store income.

In its latest SEC filing, Apple explicitly warned that "if third-party developers use alternative methods of distribution and payment for their apps and digital content, including direct-to-consumer distribution models, the company may earn a lower commission on such sales" or "may not earn a commission at all."

This creates a paradox: as regulators force Apple to allow alternative payment methods and distribution channels, Apple's ability to extract commission revenue from transactions shrinks. The company's response—under Ternus and Cue's leadership—appears to be exploring new revenue models to offset this erosion.

The Strategic Shift

The effort to "raise margins and squeeze additional recurring revenue" represents a departure from how the App Store has traditionally operated. For nearly two decades, Apple's model has been straightforward: take a 30% commission on digital purchases and subscriptions, plus 15% on certain subscription renewals after year one.

What Ternus and Cue are now pursuing remains undefined. Possible approaches could include:

Higher commission rates on certain transactions — Though regulatory pressure makes across-the-board increases unlikely, Apple might selectively increase rates on specific categories or transaction types.

Mandatory advertising or promotion fees — Developers could face costs to promote their apps through Apple's discovery mechanisms, beyond the current Search Ads program.

Tiered pricing for app developer accounts — Apple might introduce premium developer program tiers that cost more but offer enhanced features or preferential placement.

New recurring revenue streams — Apple could introduce subscription requirements for developers, hosting fees, or other operational costs.

Expanded advertising network — The App Store's search advertising business is already expanding; Apple could mandate or incentivize app developers to participate in advertising programs.

The lack of specificity in Gurman's reporting reflects genuine uncertainty about what Apple is considering. But the direction is clear: generate more money from the App Store without relying on traditional commission rates that regulators are attacking.

Phil Schiller's Departure: A Symbolic Moment

Phil Schiller's decision to step back from overseeing the App Store is significant beyond its headlines value. Schiller was the architect of the App Store—he personally pitched the idea to Steve Jobs and has been associated with the platform's growth since 2008.

Schiller's departure appears to be a matter of principle. According to Gurman, Schiller "seems to believe that such moves will only irk developers and governments." Rather than oversee a strategic shift toward more aggressive revenue extraction, Schiller stepped aside while remaining an Apple Fellow.

This distinction matters. Schiller didn't resign from Apple entirely—he moved to other unspecified projects. This allows him to remain an Apple executive and maintain his status while distancing himself from App Store decisions he apparently disagrees with philosophically.

The move is a quiet rebuke of Ternus and Cue's direction. Schiller's implicit message to the industry and regulators: these revenue-squeezing plans are not something I'm willing to have my name attached to.

The Regulatory and Developer Reaction

Developers are unlikely to welcome new revenue extraction. The App Store community is already fractious, with developers frustrated by:

• Apple's 30% commission (or 15% after year one), viewed as high
• Lack of transparency in app ranking and discovery algorithms
• Preferential treatment for Apple's own apps and services
• Restrictions on communicating with users outside the app

Adding new mandatory costs or advertising requirements would deepen these tensions. Regulatory bodies in Europe, Brazil, Japan, and the U.S. have already shown willingness to force Apple to reduce its App Store control. More aggressive revenue extraction could trigger additional regulatory action.

The EU's Digital Markets Act, for instance, already requires interoperability and alternative payment methods. Additional fee structures or mandatory costs could violate the spirit of these regulations, even if technically compliant.

What This Means for Apple's Services Business

The App Store is not just a revenue generator—it's the foundation of Apple's Services business. Higher developer costs could:

• Reduce incentive for small and independent developers to build for iOS
• Push some developers toward Android or web-based alternatives
• Trigger antitrust challenges from regulators who view Apple's actions as anti-competitive

Apple's Services revenue grew only 12% last quarter, down from historical growth rates. The company needs growth in this segment to offset slowing iPhone revenue. But pursuing it through aggressive developer fees risks alienating the developer ecosystem that creates the apps making iOS attractive.

The Timing and Ternus Leadership

John Ternus' appointment as CEO in 2025 signaled a more aggressive approach to profitability and operational efficiency across all Apple businesses. Services, as the highest-margin business segment, naturally became a target for optimization.

Ternus' background is in operations and hardware engineering, not services. Unlike previous Apple executives who grew up within Services, Ternus is viewing the App Store through a pure business lens: how do we maximize returns from this asset?

This outside perspective may be exactly what Ternus intended to bring to the role. But it also creates risk: optimizing for short-term revenue can damage long-term ecosystem health if pursued carelessly.

What Comes Next

Apple has not announced specific App Store changes. The company typically moves deliberately on major policy shifts, often testing changes in limited markets before broader rollout.

Likely scenarios include:

Measured increases to existing fees — Apple might raise Search Ads costs or introduce tiered pricing for certain developer programs, framing these as "premium features" rather than mandatory costs.

Regulatory negotiation — Apple might propose certain revenue structures to regulators as compromise positions, arguing they're less restrictive than forced interoperability.

Selective enforcement of new policies — Apple could introduce new policies that apply primarily to large or international developers, while exempting small developers to avoid PR backlash.

Investment in developer relations — Apple might bundle fee increases with new developer tools, APIs, or services to offset the perception of pure revenue extraction.

The core question remains: can Apple raise more revenue from the App Store while maintaining developer satisfaction and regulatory compliance? History suggests the answer is difficult. But under Ternus and Cue's leadership, Apple appears determined to find out.

For developers, this moment will likely define their relationship with Apple for years to come. For regulators, it represents another test of whether their oversight is actually constraining Apple's behavior or merely encouraging more creative revenue extraction. For Apple, it's a bet that the company's size and ecosystem power provide enough leverage to make it work.