Apple has told Patreon to move the remaining creators on its platform who sell memberships through the iOS app onto Apple’s in-app purchase system for subscription billing, setting a firm transition deadline and warning of potential App Store consequences for noncompliance. Patreon says the change affects roughly 4% of creators still on legacy billing and argues the repeated policy pivots are destabilizing for creator businesses.
What Apple Is Enforcing for In-App Subscriptions and Billing
At the heart of the dispute is Apple’s long-standing rule that digital goods and services offered inside iOS apps must use Apple’s payment rails. The company frames this as a consumer protection and consistency measure—pointing to its subscription management, refunds, parental controls, and privacy features—while collecting a commission that typically ranges from 15% to 30% depending on factors like a developer’s participation in the Small Business Program and the duration of a subscriber’s tenure.
Apple has, under pressure from litigation and regulators, allowed limited scenarios where apps can link users to the web for account or payment management. Following the Epic v. Apple rulings, certain categories and markets gained narrowly defined link-out options—often with disclosure requirements and, in some cases, Apple seeking to apply a commission even for off-platform conversions initiated in-app. But for mainstream subscription billing inside the iOS experience, Apple continues to push developers toward in-app purchase.
Patreon had previously slowed its migration as Apple relaxed some guidelines, but the platform now says Apple has reimposed a hard cutoff. In practical terms, creators who want to take new signups or manage paid memberships directly inside the iOS app will need to use Apple’s subscription infrastructure.
Why Patreon Pushes Back on Apple’s In-App Billing Rules
Patreon contends that Apple has changed course multiple times in a relatively short span, creating “whiplash” for creators planning their pricing, perks, and community operations. The company says it proposed alternative tooling to enable a smoother, creator-led transition and claims those proposals were rejected. While Patreon will comply, it maintains that creators need stable rules to build sustainable businesses.
That tension isn’t just philosophical. Membership programs depend on continuity. Each forced switch of billing rail—especially one that requires users to re-authorize payments—risks churn, benefit disruption, and support overhead. For smaller teams without dedicated operations staff, even modest policy shifts can compound into lost revenue and time.
Who Is Affected and How the Money Flows Through iOS
Only a minority of creators—around 4% still on legacy billing—face migration. Those who do not sell or modify subscriptions inside the iOS app can continue to rely on web billing. For creators who do transact in-app, Apple’s commission changes the unit economics. On a $10 monthly tier sold via in-app purchase in its first year, Apple can take up to $3; after certain thresholds, that take can drop to $1.50. On the open web, payment processors usually charge a few % plus a small fixed fee per transaction.
The gap often leads platforms and creators to price higher inside iOS to maintain margins. However, steering users from the iOS app to cheaper web options remains tightly constrained, with only narrow link-out paths allowed and varying rules by market. That leaves creators weighing whether to absorb fees, adjust their in-app pricing, or direct audience acquisition to the web and then encourage app usage for consumption rather than purchase.
Patreon’s Migration Tools to Ease the In-App Billing Shift
To cushion the transition, Patreon is rolling out a suite of support features. A benefit eligibility tool helps creators confirm who has paid and who is queued to pay, reducing fulfillment errors. Tier repricing tools make it easier to recalibrate in-app tiers without breaking benefit structures. Gifting and discount capabilities offer flexibility for patrons who need assistance or incentives during the switch.
Patreon also plans to introduce an annual-only membership option designed to simplify billing commitments and reduce churn risk after the migration. The company says it will publish detailed guidance and may temporarily restrict in-app subscription options for creators who choose to delay, consistent with Apple’s rules, until they adopt the mandated billing model.
The Bigger Picture For Platforms And Regulators
Apple’s stance mirrors years of friction with subscription-heavy services like Spotify and major streaming platforms, many of which either block in-app purchase entirely or price higher on iOS to offset fees. The renewed pressure on Patreon underscores Apple’s intent to keep recurring revenue sold inside iOS on its rails.
Regulatory scrutiny of those rails continues. In Europe, the Digital Markets Act is reshaping distribution and payments on mobile platforms. In the U.S., the Epic litigation and advocacy from groups such as the Coalition for App Fairness keep App Store policies in the spotlight. The Patreon case adds a fresh, creator-economy example to a debate that is often framed around large media apps but increasingly touches smaller businesses and independent artists.
For creators, the next steps are operational rather than ideological: audit their audience mix, decide how to handle pricing inside iOS, and communicate clearly so patrons know what to expect. For Apple and Patreon, the challenge is delivering a migration that is predictable and minimally disruptive—because in the creator economy, trust and momentum are the hardest currencies to replace.
