According to Reuters, Apple has agreed to allow third-party app stores and alternative payment methods on iOS in Brazil to settle a three-year antitrust case with the country’s regulator, CADE. The probe started after a 2022 complaint from Latin American e-commerce giant MercadoLibre. The agreement, which will last for three years, orders Apple to execute the changes within 105 days and allows for links to external websites for transactions. If Apple fully breaks the deal, it faces a potential fine of up to 150 million reais, or about $27 million. The company stated it will comply but warned the changes will introduce privacy and security risks that its safeguards “will not eliminate.”
The Global Pressure Cooker
So here’s the thing: Brazil isn’t acting in a vacuum. This is just the latest domino to fall in a global campaign against Apple’s so-called “walled garden.” We’ve seen the Digital Markets Act force similar changes in Europe, and Epic Games famously took them to court in the U.S. But Brazil’s case is interesting because it was driven by a regional powerhouse, MercadoLibre, not a global gaming company. It shows the pressure is coming from all sides—different industries, different continents. Apple’s strategy seems to be settling case-by-case, likely hoping to manage the fragmentation. But how many different rulebooks can one company handle?
The Security Argument Shifts
Now, Apple’s statement is classic Apple. They say they’ll comply, but immediately pivot to warning about “privacy and security risks.” It’s their go-to defense, and it’s not without merit. But after years of making this argument in courts and regulators’ offices worldwide, it’s clearly losing its potency as a blanket justification for total control. The implication from regulators is becoming clear: yes, security is paramount, but it shouldn’t be used as an excuse to stifle all competition and maintain a 30% tax on digital commerce. Apple’s line about safeguards not eliminating “every risk” is almost an admission that their own App Store isn’t perfectly secure either. Nothing is.
What This Actually Changes
Let’s talk business model. This agreement, like the EU’s rules, directly attacks two of Apple’s core revenue streams: the cut from App Store sales and the cut from in-app purchases. Allowing other stores and payment links is a huge deal. For developers in Brazil, it means they can potentially keep more money and maybe pass savings to users. For a company like MercadoLibre, it means they can distribute their apps without Apple’s gatekeeping. But MercadoLibre says the deal only “partially addresses” the need for balanced rules. Why? Probably because these mandated changes are often complex for developers to implement, and Apple still holds all the technical keys to the iOS kingdom. The real test is whether anyone builds a vibrant alternative ecosystem in Brazil, or if Apple’s first-party store remains the default out of sheer convenience and habit.
The Bigger Picture on Regulation
Basically, we’re watching the slow, piecemeal unwinding of a mobile ecosystem that’s been locked down for over a decade. This Brazilian settlement is another data point in the global trend of increased regulatory oversight on big tech. It’s about data privacy and control, sure, but mostly it’s about money and market power. The three-year term is also key—it’s not a permanent change, but a trial period. It gives CADE leverage and Apple a potential off-ramp if the world changes. For tech watchers, the question is no longer *if* Apple’s model will change, but *how messy and fragmented* that change will be as each country or region negotiates its own terms. The era of one global App Store policy is clearly over.
