Read the press release here.

Germany’s antitrust regulator required Apple to revise its consent prompts for tracking user data across apps, after determining that the company made it easier for users to consent to its own advertising than to that of competitors.

Watchdog ends four-year case with binding commitments: On August 17, the Bundeskartellamt closed its investigation into Apple’s App Tracking Transparency Framework (ATTF) after accepting binding commitments from Apple. Although Apple maintains that its rules complied with competition law, it agreed to the changes rather than contest the findings. The case, opened in June 2022, is now formally concluded.

What was Apple doing differently? The ATTF requires third-party app developers to obtain an additional layer of consent, beyond standard data-protection consent, before using cross-app data for personalised ads. This consent must be collected through a prompt designed and controlled by Apple. However, Apple’s own apps are exempt from these requirements and use a separate consent prompt to request permission for ads within its ecosystem.

Regulators determined that the two consent prompts were not equivalent. The wording, layout and options in Apple’s prompt encouraged users to grant consent, while the prompt required for third-party apps discouraged consent. Additionally, developers sometimes had to request consent multiple times, even after users had already provided data-protection-compliant consent.

Why this falls under antitrust law, not just privacy rules: Andreas Mundt, the agency’s president, said Apple is entitled to protect user privacy beyond what the law requires. However, he framed the issue as one of fairness under Germany’s special rules for dominant digital platforms: internal data rules cannot favour a company’s own products over those of rivals. He said the goal was not to maximise consent to tracking, but to ensure that both a “yes” and a “no” reflect an equally free and informed choice.

The case is based on Section 19a of Germany’s competition act, which grants the Bundeskartellamt additional oversight of companies deemed “of paramount significance for competition across markets.” Apple received this designation in April 2023, and it was upheld by Germany’s Federal Court of Justice in March 2025. Since Apple operates both the App Store, which third-party apps rely on for distribution, and its own advertising business, regulators stated that it has increased obligations to avoid self-preferencing.

The fix: Under these commitments, Apple will remove “possibly discouraging” symbols and language from the prompt required of third-party developers. This will ensure that the design is neutral in content, wording and layout, consistent with Apple’s own products. Developers will have more opportunity to explain to users the importance of personalised ads to their business models. They will also have greater flexibility to combine or sequence Apple’s required consent prompt with their own data-protection consent requests, reducing duplicate steps for users.

Apple has four months from formal notice to implement the changes, beginning with tests involving app publishers. These commitments will remain in place for seven years under the supervision of an independent monitoring trustee.

Part of a wider European push: Germany’s case proceeded alongside similar ATTF investigations by other EU competition authorities, coordinated through the European Competition Network. The European Commission’s first formal antitrust action against Apple’s App Store was initiated on June 16, 2020. The case focused on Apple’s mandatory in-app purchase system, its 30% commission and rules that prevented developers such as Spotify from informing users about lower-cost payment options outside the App Store. Then-Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager described Apple’s control over app distribution as a “gatekeeper” role that required oversight to prevent unfair disadvantages to competitors, particularly in markets where Apple also operates, such as music streaming.

The 2020 case led to the EU’s first antitrust fine against Apple for music-streaming anti-steering rules and contributed to non-compliance proceedings under the Digital Markets Act. In April 2025, Apple was fined €500 million for continuing to restrict how developers communicate offers to users.

France and Italy fined Apple €150 million and €98.6 million, respectively, last year for the framework. Unlike these actions, Germany aims to address future compliance rather than penalise past conduct. The agency stated that its decision could influence how Apple redesigns the ATTF in other EU countries.

The Bundeskartellamt clarified that its inquiry focused solely on competition law, not data-protection enforcement. It consulted Germany’s federal data protection commissioner and Bavaria’s state data protection office to avoid overlap with privacy regulations.

Also read: