My iOS app got rejected because we charge users with Stripe's payment service, and Apple requires us to use IAPs for payments.
We deleted the Stripe reload balance module from the app. Now the only way to recharge it is for the user to go to the website and make the payment. Does this solution work or does the app still have to use IAPs?
Apple has explicitly requested any submission to go through their iAP for any payment. Your rejection is expected and normal. You have two choices, asking a user to pay through iAP or accept the payment on your website. Both works, but you can't and can't explicitly ask your user to pay you directly.
Let's take Dropbox as an example. You can upgrade Dropbox account on their website. It works. But Dropbox isn't allowed to encourage you to do the upgrade in the app itself (unless the payment goes through Apple). That is, you can't do something like a button in the app that takes you to the payment form on your website. If a user knows how and where to do it on the Dropbox website without being told to do in the app, good, Apple doesn't take that 30% commission.
Unless your service is popular, most users wouldn't be bothered to goto your website and give you their credit card number for a purchase. You should consider just giving the 30% commission to Apple, you'll get more sales.
You are required by Apple to use IAP, and can only use IAP, if you are using the purchase to unlock code in the app. You may use other payment systems only if you are selling real world goods and services or, in certain circumstances, files that are being downloaded from your servers. If you use other payment systems they must be used outside of the app. This is explained in the app review guidelines, section 11.
Note that requiring the use of IAP for sales of code distributed by Apple may not be an issue under anti-trust laws. But in any event, if the "market" is smartphones then Apple is not a monopoly player since their market share is limited.
Related
my name is Antony Basta and I am the developer of an app called SecuriKey. SecuriKey allows any old apartment building intercom to be controlled from an app. Users can create entry codes that work once, up to a certain date, or are instantly revokable. There is no need for any new or additional hardware – it works with the buildings existing intercom.
Currently, the app is using Stripe for subscriptions and it was initially approved 2 months ago for the App Store. I pushed an update a few weeks ago and Apple Rejected it because I am not using In-App Purchase (IAP). I submit an appeal, mentioning that we offer a consumable service that takes place outside of the app (guideline 3.1.3(e)), it is effectively a "Reader" app since we provide VoIP numbers to our customers (guideline 3.1.3(f)), and SecuriKey requires hardware to function – that is, it will not work without a physical intercom (guideline 3.1.4). Additionally, we do ship physical goods to our customers (NFC tags and Security Signs) monthly and require monthly service personnel to service the building using the physical goods for our own back end workflow. A lot of back and forth has occurred between the review team and at the time of this post, the app is still being reviewed by the board. I thoroughly believe we fit within all of the mentioned IAP exception guidelines – but that's a conversation for another day.
As I wait, I began to delve into using IAP for this product. I was able to jerry-rig the IAP platform to feed Stripe the necessary data through the notifications apple sends when a subscription is made, and I am able to create an account and collect a payment. But there's one huge oversight. This is a cross-platform app. Meaning, roommates or family members who use different mobile operating systems, can be logged into the same account. A user may sign up from the iPhone but his/her roommate/family member may have an android that also has access to the service under the same account. Thus, the android user will not be able to change the IAP subscription plan from the android side of the service. Furthermore, a web-portal is being developed, and using IAP will not allow us to modify the subscription via the web-portal either.
Has anyone ever dealt with something like this? How can you use IAP for a cross-platform application and allow android users to modify the subscription (Whether it be canceling, upgrading, or downgrading)?
If Apple says you have to use IAPs, you should leverage IAPs and not a payment service provider like Stripe.
I'm confused with what
I was able to jerry-rig the IAP platform to feed Stripe the necessary data through the notifications apple sends when a subscription is made,
means but does not sound like the right thing to do.
Thus, the android user will not be able to change the IAP subscription plan from the android side of the service. Furthermore, a web-portal is being developed, and using IAP will not allow us to modify the subscription via the web-portal either
Your user will have to use Apple's Platform (i.e. an Apple device that they are signed into) to cancel the IAP subscription.
How can you use IAP for a cross-platform application and allow android users to modify the subscription (Whether it be canceling, upgrading, or downgrading)
You can't. Take a look at the IAP experience for subscription services like HBO Max. Accounts are all ultimately provisioned through the same system, but the funding source may differ. When you attempt to manage your subscription, the website or android app could inform you that the subscription is billed via Apple, and send you to a page like this: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202039.
If the user has no Apple devices, they can contact Apple Support:
If you don't have an Apple device or Windows PC
You can cancel Apple Music on the web.
You can cancel Apple TV+ on the web.
If you want to cancel a different subscription from Apple, contact Apple Support.
I am developing an iOS application where all payment related things are on existing website, our app don't have any payment related thing in it. A user adds payment details on website and select appropriate plan and can use it on both website and iOS app.
So please tell me that if i have nothing on app for using In-App purchase then it will be get approved on app store or get rejected just because app is not giving them their 30% share?
I need some expert advise...
I just read through that exact section of the developer guidelines, and it confirms that that is prohibited. A recent example of such apps being rejected: apps using Dropbox were being rejected (the Dropbox API had a button that could navigate users to their website to upgrade their account instead of having it take place in-app, where Apple would have gotten a percentage).
A quote from that article:
In case you’re wondering what the reasoning these apps are getting for rejection, here’s what Apple is responding with:
11.13
We found that your app provides access to external mechanisms for purchases or subscriptions to be used in the app, which is not in compliance with the App Store Review Guidelines.
Specifically, your app enables to user to create accounts with Dropbox and Google.
Well that sucks. Apparently at some point when using an app that utilizes the Dropbox SDK, you can create an account for the service if you don’t already have one. At that point, there’s a link to a desktop version of Dropbox that lets you upgrade your account. That’s exactly what Apple isn’t a fan of.
My suggestion would be to make them available for purchase via an in-app purchase, charge 30% more for it (so you make the same amount as if the user made the purchase on the web or on Android), but make the user's job post last for 30% more time. This isn't quite fair for you because, if you make $100 off John for an 30-day listing, you would still only make $100 off me for a 39-day listing (assuming I bought the listing via the iOS app). That said, there is no incentive for me to pay for the listing via the iOS app because I am paying $130 (30% more than John) for it and the additional days.
Best of luck.
http://thenextweb.com/apple/2012/05/02/apps-using-dropbox-are-being-rejected-because-apple-is-playing-hardball/
The link on App Store Review Guidelines mentions:
3.1.3(b) Multiplatform Services: Apps that operate across multiple platforms may allow users to access content, subscriptions, or features they have acquired
elsewhere, including consumable items in multi-platform games, provided those
items are also available as in-app purchases within the app. You must not directly or indirectly target iOS users to use a purchasing method other than in-app purchase, and your general communications about other purchasing methods must not discourage use of in-app purchase.
I am not sure how Netflix does this. New users cannot signup on iOS App, but can sign up on website, purchase subscriptions and use in iOS App.
I have developed an app like money wallet (e.g. paytm), where user can request money to each other and transfer money to each others account. with every transaction of user, Admin will get some fixed percent commission.
As app is for one small town only,right now user will have to manually contact admin to load money in his wallet or to withdraw it.
I want to submit my app on iTunes store. I know to use any digital content, services, unlock features we need to use In App Purchase. And for any physical good we need to go with any other third party payment gateway.
So I am confused that will apple approve my app or not. Please help.
Thanks,
First, you never know if Apple will approve or not. The only way to know for sure is to submit and see what happens.
Your description of features sounds like you are probably taking the correct approach.
Its important to use In app purchase for unlocking content/features:
Apps that unlock or enable additional features or functionality
with mechanisms other than the App Store will be rejected
And equally for real world purchases to use something else:
Apps using IAP to purchase physical goods or goods and services used
outside of the App will be rejected
The complete guidelines can be found here https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#purchasing-currencies
And again, its Apples own words:
This is a living document, and new Apps presenting new questions may
result in new rules at any time. Perhaps your App will trigger this.
I tried to submit using paytm integration sdk, and after that my app got rejected
following is reply from App Store
Guideline 3.1.1 - Business - Payments - In-App Purchase
We noticed that your app or its metadata enables the purchase of content, services, or functionality in the app by means other than the in-app purchase API, which is not appropriate for the App Store.
Next Steps
While the payment system that you have included may conduct the transaction outside of the app, if the purchasable content, functionality, or services are intended to be used in the app, they must be purchased using in-app purchase, within the app - unless it is of the type referenced in guideline 3.1.3 of the App Store Review Guidelines.
Please see attached screenshots for details.
Since your App Store Connect status is Rejected, a new binary will be required.
I'm about to develop an app (for iOS and Android) that allows users to create a collection of digital content from their phone (e.g. some videos and pictures), and send that content to other users who can consume that collection on the same iOS/Android app. I'd like to bill users for sending a collection, because this process involves uploading and processing the collection to the cloud (which I pay for) and the recipient's app downloading it again (causing traffic costs). Note that I don't want to charge any money from the recipient!
The way I see it, producing such an iOS app is not possible (because Apple will reject it, see App store guidelines and In App Purchase Guidelines) for the following reasons:
Setting a fixed price for the app ("paid app") is not reasonable, because I want to charge the user each time he sends a collection, so IAP (In-App-Purchases) would be more reasonable
The IAP-logic/flow would be that a user can create the collection in the app for free and then, when he clicks the "send collection" button, he is asked to approve a purchase, in return he gets the link that he can send to his friend. The logic would essentially be the same in the Android app, using Google's "In App Billing"
Such an app could be rejected by Apple because of rule "11.3. Apps using IAP to purchase physical goods or goods and services used outside of the App will be rejected" - because the user essentially paid for hosting the collection, and that collection can be used outside of the app (by an Android app user for example)
OTOH it's also impossible to use external means of payment. For example, I was thinking about forcing users to first create an account on my website, where they can pay for a voucher (with Paypal, say) that enables users to send collections. They'd first need to log into their account in the iOS app and then they might see a warning that they have not yet purchased (or no longer have) any credits for sending a collection. The IAP guidelines forbid me to directly link to my website with a note saying that users can pay for additional credits by other means. When Apple engineers sees that message during review (assuming they aren't putting very bright people in charge) the app might be rejected, too. Even if it were not, this work flow is very uncomfortable for the user, I'd prefer IAP as this also makes accounting (taxes and earnings for my company) a lot easier.
I'd like to get your opinions on this. Please note that I might be "too hard" on myself. As a matter of fact, I do know apps that have been approved to the store that do exactly that, see e.g. here and here. Maybe they have been approved because paragraph 11.3 actually just forbids the ability to purchase the functionality of uploading (converting a collection to a link) and then use this functionality somewhere else - effectively that would mean "to buy credits for an external service" mechanism. My app wouldn't do this. You'd have to do the purchase and the upload/convert-to-link functionality would only work on that device where you did the purchase.
Any thoughts?
I have similar experience with an app i worked on. It was a GPS device showing tracking data in the app. The device uses cellular data to send tracking information and we need to collect a fee to pay the SIM provider which is an external service. We did this using Stripe payment but Apple rejected the app and asked to implement In-App purchase. Because we were blocking the user and asking to pay in the app that looks like we are asking payment for app digital content.
Based on my experience, to answer your question :
Yes you have to use In-App purchase and it can be Consumable type. When user try to send a collection, show a consumable purchase type. Keep track of the purchase in the server using purchase receipt, collection id etc.
Even though the amount collected is used for hosting and web traffic, you can term this as a service fee for managing/sending the collection. Behind the seen, you use this fee to pay your hosting provider or anyone else, that's up to you. Apple won't reject the app for this reason. Because you are charging a fee for digital service you are provided in the app. In apple guidelines, external physical service means, for example taxi charge in Uber, shopping goods price in amazon etc.
This is very common mistake developer often doing while choosing the payment options for any Payment related feature into application. Specifically in iOS there are new rules defined by the Apple for choosing the payment model for your application.
Here are some important points :
If your application having some points system or coins system for which you needs user to pay for than you must use the inApp purchase. And inApp purchase must be of type Consumable. So it will be purchasable multiple times
If your application offering any pro features or facility inside the application you must use inApp purchase. Type will be non consumable. (Note : For Non Consumable inApp purchase you must give Restore Purchase option into your application other wise your application will get rejected.)
If your application is providing any feature or any internal content access for limited time than you must use the subscription based inApp Purchase.
If your application is selling any physical goods than you must use any third party payment options. You can't use inApp purchase for it.
If your application is selling external services or any donation related feature then you can't use inApp purchase for it. This will be a complicated case & in this case according to the apple guidelines you should use the Payment gate way with Webview redirection. So the user will do the payment from the Webview redirected component.
Hope this helps to everyone.
I am developing an app for a client, where he wishes the app to be able to have users to sign up and try out the app for 14 days, after which they have to make a purchase to continue using the app.
My client does not want to absorb Apple's 30% cut for using Apple's in-app purchase mechanism. Initially I suggested implementing a 3rd party payment gateway, but it seems that Apple does not allow app that unlocks app functionalities via a 3rd party payment gateway.
My question is this: if we submit the app that allows users to sign up and login, but only use the app for 14 days without any form of payment mechanisms in the app to allow the user to continue using the app, will the app be rejected? As I was thinking to just have the payment gateway on a website, and during user sign-up, send the user an email informing them that they can go to the website to make a payment.
I know that Apple rejects trial/demo apps, but this is technically a full fledged app where users that purchased via the website will be able to login and perform full functionality. I will also provide Apple with a test account that is fully functional.
Thanks!
Short answer: Apple will reject you if you allow signups and block functionality after a trial period without allowing IAP. Period.
I have first hand knowledge of this, shameless plug in 3..2..1.., Simple In/Out offers a 45 day free trial, after which users are blocked from using the app. In the early days, we escaped Apple's ban hammer by being small and using a blessed trial account that never expired. Apple would review using test account, never see rejection or blocked alerts and prompts to sign up on our website. That did change one day after requesting an expedited review. We got a lot more scrutiny and they rejected us for essentially steering users to our website for subscribing.
The IAP for trials and subscriptions other than magazines is pretty terrible. It is essentially designed for magazines, and that's it. So beware going in. What we eventually did was allow users to subscribe in the app using IAP. Our server manages who is subscribed and who isn't. It also manages which subscription they have (IAP or our own). There is a lot of weird receipt checks you need to do to manage the subscription from Apple. The user is also stuck if they want to change to a bigger/lower subscription plan. Which kinda works for us because the only way to do it is email us, in which we can convert from IAP (-30%) to our own (-2.5% for card processing).
The moral of this story is that if you plan on allowing users to create accounts inside your app, then you will most likely be obligated to offer subscriptions via IAP. If you want to avoid IAP, then you will also need to strip any references to your website from your app and description. They will bust you on meta if you try and steer them around the IAP process. Once we added IAP, we were allowed to point everyone to our website for "more information" in which we are able to convert more users to our own subscription rather than IAP. Right now, our number of our own subscribers vs. Apple is about 75:1. So we don't lose much over the signups we get from Apple.
I believe this should be perfectly fine as long as the 14 day "trial" is a fully functional version of the app.
Your model seems similar to Spotify. Pay for subscription on their website, but use the service in the app.
These resources may help:
https://news.layervault.com/stories/9695-how-do-apps-like-lyft-uber-airbnb-skirt-apples-30-cut-on-each-transaction
http://www.quora.com/How-does-Apple-define-digital-content-when-taking-its-30-cut