对话“苹果税”举报人：美国都免佣了，为何还收中国30%？

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the ongoing challenges posed by Apple's "App Store tax," which imposes a commission of up to 30% on virtual goods transactions in China, leading to significant disparities in consumer benefits compared to Android users [5][26]. Group 1: Apple's Market Practices - Apple's policy of requiring users to download apps exclusively from the App Store and use its designated payment system is referred to as the "Apple tax," which has resulted in consumers paying more for the same services compared to Android users [5][26]. - In 2024, a court ruling in China recognized Apple's dominant market position but rejected claims of abuse of that position, leading to ongoing appeals [5][14]. - The article highlights a collective administrative complaint filed by 55 consumers against Apple, marking a significant step in consumer rights advocacy in China [5][9]. Group 2: Global Context and Legal Actions - There is a growing global movement against Apple's commission practices, with various countries, including the US and EU, implementing legal changes that challenge Apple's payment policies [5][10]. - The article emphasizes the importance of both civil lawsuits and administrative actions in addressing Apple's market behavior, suggesting that a dual approach may yield better results [11][21]. - The article notes that Apple's practices in China differ significantly from those in other regions, raising questions about fairness and consumer rights [7][12]. Group 3: Consumer Impact and Future Outlook - If successful, the administrative complaint could lead to reduced costs for consumers, allowing for more competitive pricing in digital goods and services [26][28]. - The article suggests that a reduction in the "Apple tax" could stimulate growth in China's digital consumption market, which totaled 1.65 trillion yuan in 2022 [26]. - The potential for regulatory changes in China is viewed positively, with expectations that Apple may have to adjust its practices in response to increased scrutiny and consumer advocacy [28][30].