Brazil wants its piece of the App Store anti-competition fines Apple faces worldwide

AppleInsider

Brazil has tried fining Apple over the App Store before and backed down, but its technology council is now urging it since other nations are.

The App Store continues to be under first in Brazil

In late 2022, early 2023, Brazil's Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Economica (CADE) regulator opened an investigation following complaints from firms including MercadoLibre, a Latin American ecommerce platform. Now that regulator's technology advisors have concluded that Apple is guilty of the accusations.

The General Superintendence of the Administrative Council of Economic Defense (SG/CADE) said in announcement (in translation), that "Apple's conduct constitutes an infringement of the economic order." The specific accusation concerns restrictive practices over third-party marketing, the same anti-steering issue that Apple has been fined over by the EU.

It's also the same issue that undid all of the worth of Apple winning its trial against Epic Games. The one charge Apple failed on in that trial was anti-steering, preventing developers from telling users of alternative offers.

It was a small loss in a large victory that Apple had correctly won, but then Apple slow-walked its anti-steering compliance to the extent that it visibly angered Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers. Calling Apple's actions "gross insubordination," she mandated specific steps Apple must immediately do to remedy the situation.

Brazil has not been so specific or precise in its orders to Apple, but the aim is the same. Brazil wants Apple to abandon its anti-steering practices and allow app developers to communicate offers to users.

This new recommendation follows a series of moves by Brazil to fine Apple over issue. In November 2024, the country gave Apple 20 days to lift anti-steering and in-app payment restrictions, but this was overturned in December 2024 after Apple said the ruling "drastically threatens" user privacy.

Then in February 2025, Apple representatives attended CADE's public hearing into the issue.

It's not clear at what stage SG/CADE became involved, or why it has issued a recommendation now. Notably, SG/CADE can and has recommended fining Apple, but it has not specified an amount.

According to Reuters, Apple has responded in a statement repeating that that CADE's proposed measures for preventing anti-steering and other issues, would pose privacy and security risks for users. Apple says it will continue to discuss the issues with CADE.

The decision rests with CADE, which reportedly means taking the issue to court.

Separately, a contradictory report in May 2025, said that Apple supplier Foxconn is expanding its facilities in Brazil.



Read on AppleInsider

rob53

These countries are a bunch of cockroaches. They can’t make anything themselves so they simply try forcing Apple to open everything up so they get stuff for free. Apple needs to double the cost of Apple products on every country that tries to sue them. The second thing will be to limit capabilities and/or to not sell to those countries. I’m not sure how much the USA imports from Brazil but if it’s not that much then simply cut them off. 

nubus

rob53 said:

These countries are a bunch of cockroaches. They can’t make anything themselves so they simply try forcing Apple to open everything up so they get stuff for free. Apple needs to double the cost of Apple products on every country that tries to sue them. The second thing will be to limit capabilities and/or to not sell to those countries. 

Other nations are not cockroaches. That is one toxic view on other nations. And you would punish Brazil by selling inferior versions of US products? The Chinese would love that. Or you would stop buying coffee and regional jets neither of which are produced in the US? The alternative to Embraer is Airbus A220. Would that be any better?

China is funding a $80b rail project in Brazil and Peru. A modern Panama Canal. In 5 years the shipping time from Brazil to Shanghai will match that to Los Angeles. While the Chinese are actively taking control over your backyard the US isn't investing in a competing north-south rail link to help US companies. Instead you're giving away tax cuts making it even harder to finance a response. Being shortsighted is not how to win against the Chinese. Keep America relevant!

rob53

nubus said:

rob53 said:

These countries are a bunch of cockroaches. They can’t make anything themselves so they simply try forcing Apple to open everything up so they get stuff for free. Apple needs to double the cost of Apple products on every country that tries to sue them. The second thing will be to limit capabilities and/or to not sell to those countries. 

Other nations are not cockroaches. That is one toxic view on other nations. And you would punish Brazil by selling inferior versions of US products? The Chinese would love that. Or you would stop buying coffee and regional jets neither of which are produced in the US? The alternative to Embraer is Airbus A220. Would that be any better?

China is funding a $80b rail project in Brazil and Peru. A modern Panama Canal. In 5 years the shipping time from Brazil to Shanghai will match that to Los Angeles. While the Chinese are actively taking control over your backyard the US isn't investing in a competing north-south rail link to help US companies. Instead you're giving away tax cuts making it even harder to finance a response. Being shortsighted is not how to win against the Chinese. Keep America relevant!

The title of this article says it all and I stand by my original comments. Countries who can't make cellular phones use the typical EU tactic of suing Apple. As for our current corrupt government giving away huge tax breaks to billionaires, I agree with your comment but realize that the only Americans who believe rich people should get tax breaks are rich people, not the other 90% of Americans. As for a rail project in Brazil and Peru being similar to the Panama Canal, that's a stretch. This is a huge distance to move containers between one coast to the other, requiring unloading on one side and re-loading on the other. I'd rather see a second canal across Central America, a much shorter route.