Epic Games has formally complained to Brazil’s competition authority, CADE, accusing Apple of implementing the country’s recent App Store antitrust deal in a way that undermines its goals. Epic claims Apple imposed structural, technical, and access barriers that significantly limit the practical effectiveness of newly granted freedoms for developers. The company has until Monday to respond to CADE’s inquiry. ([9to5mac.com](https://9to5mac.com/2026/08/21/epic-accuses-apple-of-sidestepping-app-store-antitrust-deal-in-brazil/))
Background: What the Brazil deal changed
Earlier this year, Apple settled a longstanding investigation by Brazil’s competition regulator—triggered by a complaint from MercadoLibre—over its tight App Store policies. Under the settlement with CADE, Apple was required to let developers distribute iOS apps through alternative app marketplaces rather than exclusively via the App Store. Developers can also now offer payment options that don’t rely on Apple’s in-app purchase (IAP) system. ([9to5mac.com](https://9to5mac.com/2026/08/21/epic-accuses-apple-of-sidestepping-app-store-antitrust-deal-in-brazil/))
A new commission regime was included in the deal: a “Core Technology Commission” of 5% will apply to digital goods and services sold via apps distributed outside the App Store. This fee reflects Apple’s attempt to retain some revenue even when apps bypass its storefront. ([9to5mac.com](https://9to5mac.com/2026/08/21/epic-accuses-apple-of-sidestepping-app-store-antitrust-deal-in-brazil/))
Epic’s challenge: Why Apple’s implementation is under fire
Epic argues that Apple is not treating Brazil’s deal as broadly as CADE intended, especially regarding operating systems. Specifically, Epic claims Apple’s obligations cover not just iPhone’ s iOS but should include iPadOS as well—a point Apple allegedly ignored. ([9to5mac.com](https://9to5mac.com/2026/08/21/epic-accuses-apple-of-sidestepping-app-store-antitrust-deal-in-brazil/))
Additionally, Epic cites “scare sheets”—materials discouraging users from downloading apps from alternative marketplaces—as another tactic Apple is using. The startup also notes that the process for installing apps outside the App Store involves nine distinct steps under Apple’s current setup in Brazil, compared to only six steps in Europe after legal pressure forced the company to simplify its system. ([9to5mac.com](https://9to5mac.com/2026/08/21/epic-accuses-apple-of-sidestepping-app-store-antitrust-deal-in-brazil/))
Another sticking point is Apple’s reporting mandates. Epic claims Apple’s rules require excessive disclosure amounting to a monitoring of rival business models—far more than what would be needed just to determine fees, according to their CADE complaint. ([9to5mac.com](https://9to5mac.com/2026/08/21/epic-accuses-apple-of-sidestepping-app-store-antitrust-deal-in-brazil/))
CADE has given Apple until Monday to respond to Epic’s petition. Thus far, Apple has stayed quiet publicly on the matter. ([9to5mac.com](https://9to5mac.com/2026/08/21/epic-accuses-apple-of-sidestepping-app-store-antitrust-deal-in-brazil/))
Significance & what to watch: Brazil’s antitrust intervention mirrored moves in Europe aiming to reduce Apple’s monopoly over app distribution and payments. The outcome of Epic’s challenge could set a strong precedent for defining how binding antitrust orders really are when it comes to policy implementation—not just negotiation. How Apple responds to CADE and adjusts its processes will be closely watched by developers and regulators alike, both in Brazil and beyond.
