Apple fights India’s antitrust regulator over a possible $38 billion fine

Apple has filed a case in the Delhi High Court challenging the Competition Commission of India’s (CCI) method for calculating antitrust penalties. The company argues that using global turnover as a benchmark is “unconstitutional, grossly disproportionate, and unjust.”

If the CCI’s new antitrust framework remains in place, Apple could face fines as high as $38 billion—a figure that would dwarf the company’s total revenue in India. Reuters first reported the filing.

The CCI is investigating complaints from a coalition of Indian startups and Match Group, the owner of Tinder, which accuse Apple of “abusive conduct” by forcing developers to pay high commissions on in‑app purchases. Apple has denied the allegations.

In a December 2021 order, the commission indicated a “prima facie view” that Apple’s mandatory use of its In‑App Purchase (IAP) system limits developers’ ability to choose alternative payment processors, potentially violating competition norms.

Apple’s market traction in India is undeniable. IDC data shows the company shipped a record 5 million iPhones in the third quarter of 2025, the highest quarterly volume ever recorded for the brand in the country.

Analysts project total iPhone sales of roughly 15 million units in India for 2025. If those forecasts materialize, Apple could break into the top‑five smartphone vendors, a milestone highlighted by IDC’s associate vice president for India, Navkendar Singh, during a recent interview.

Beyond sales, Apple’s strategic shift in its supply chain is reshaping the Indian tech ecosystem. In 2024, Apple’s exports from India reached $12.8 billion, a 42 % year‑over‑year increase, reflecting the company’s broader effort to diversify manufacturing away from China.

Business and Technology Implications

Regulatory Risk Management – The litigation underscores the growing regulatory scrutiny tech giants face in emerging markets. A potential $38 billion penalty would force Apple to reconsider its pricing model for developers, possibly prompting a revision of the 15 %–30 % commission structure that has been a cornerstone of its services revenue.

Revenue Diversification – India now accounts for a growing slice of Apple’s services and hardware revenue. The country’s expanding middle class and increasing smartphone penetration present a long‑term growth engine that could offset any short‑term financial hit from regulatory penalties.

Supply‑Chain Resilience – By expanding production capacity in India, Apple not only taps into lower labor costs but also mitigates geopolitical risks associated with reliance on China. The surge in Indian export figures signals a successful transfer of high‑value assembly and component sourcing.

Developer Ecosystem – Any shift away from the mandatory IAP model could open the Indian market to alternative payment providers, fostering competition and potentially lowering costs for consumers. However, it may also fragment the user experience, a trade‑off Apple will need to balance.

Overall, Apple’s legal challenge in Delhi is a litmus test for how multinational tech firms will navigate antitrust frameworks that tie penalties to global turnover. The outcome will have ramifications not only for Apple’s bottom line but also for the broader architecture of app‑based commerce in India.