Germany didn’t fine Apple over tracking consent. It made the prompts symmetric.

What happened

On 17 August 2026, Germany’s Federal Cartel Office (Bundeskartellamt) closed its proceeding against Apple over the App Tracking Transparency Framework (ATTF) by declaring Apple’s commitments legally binding. There is no fine and no formal finding of infringement. The case ends through a commitment decision.

This is a competition case, not a data protection ruling. The authority proceeded under Section 19a of the Act against Restraints of Competition (GWB), Germany’s special abuse regime for companies of paramount significance for competition across markets, and Article 102 TFEU. The Bundeskartellamt designated Apple under Section 19a in April 2023, and the Federal Court of Justice upheld that designation on 18 March 2025. The underlying complaint, though, is one every consent operator will recognise: two consent prompts that were not built alike.

The complaint

Since April 2021, ATTF has required third-party iOS apps to ask users for permission before tracking them across other companies’ apps and websites. Apple’s own data use for advertising was presented through a different consent request. The Bundeskartellamt opened its proceeding in June 2022 and set out a preliminary legal assessment in February 2025, finding that the predefined third-party prompt had “the potential to discourage consent” while Apple’s own offerings were treated more favourably. Apple offered commitments, which were market-tested in December 2025 before being made binding.

What Apple has to change

Apple must align the consent requests for its own offerings much more closely with those shown for third-party apps, remove potentially discouraging symbols and wording from the predefined third-party requests, and keep the design neutral in content, wording and layout. App publishers also get more freedom to combine Apple’s request with the consent they need under data protection law, so users are not asked twice in disconnected ways.

Apple has four months from service of the decision to implement the changes, testing the new wording with app publishers along the way. The commitments run for seven years and are overseen by an independent monitoring trustee.

Bundeskartellamt President Andreas Mundt was explicit that the goal is not higher opt-in rates: “It is expressly not our aim to help achieve the highest possible levels of consent to personalised advertising. We want to ensure that users can make a free and informed decision.” He also drew the line competition law is enforcing. Apple may set privacy rules stricter than the legal minimum, but those rules “must, under Germany’s special abuse provision for large digital companies, not treat its own offerings better than those of its competitors.”

Why it matters beyond one platform

The theory of harm, a gatekeeper’s own consent flow designed to win more “yes” answers than the flow it imposes on everyone else, is a structural version of the asymmetry complaints regulators have made about cookie banners for years: accept in one click, reject buried in settings. Germany applied that logic through competition law and obtained a remedy about the comparative design of two prompts, not the legality of either one alone.

It is not the only European response to ATT. France’s Autorité de la concurrence fined Apple €150 million in March 2025, and Italy’s AGCM fined it more than €98.6 million in December 2025, both for abuse of dominance in how ATT was implemented. Germany is the first of the three to resolve the issue through design commitments rather than a penalty.

The question this case puts to anyone shipping consent UI, cookie banners included, is simple. If a regulator laid your “accept” and your “reject” side by side and compared their visual weight, wording and click-path, would they look equally free, or would one look built to win?

Sources

• Bundeskartellamt, 17 August 2026: Apple changes its rules for personalised advertising in apps bundeskartellamt.de
• Bundeskartellamt, 14 June 2022: Bundeskartellamt reviews Apple’s tracking rules for third-party apps bundeskartellamt.de
• Bundeskartellamt, 13 February 2025: Concerns about the current form of Apple’s ATTF bundeskartellamt.de
• Global Competition Review: German court confirms Apple Section 19a designation globalcompetitionreview.com
• Autorité de la concurrence: Targeted advertising: €150,000,000 fine imposed on Apple autoritedelaconcurrence.fr
• 9to5Mac, 22 December 2025: Apple fined in Italy over App Tracking Transparency 9to5mac.com