Congress moves to break Big Tech's app store monopoly—here's what changes

What it does

This bill prohibits large app store operators (those with over 50 million US monthly users who also control the underlying operating system) from forcing developers to use their payment systems, charging different prices on different platforms, punishing developers who use competitors, blocking developer communication with users, using competitor data to compete unfairly, or artificially ranking their own apps above others in search results. It requires these companies to let users install alternative app stores, choose different defaults, and give all developers equal access to operating system features. Developers and state attorneys general can sue for damages, and the FTC can enforce the rules.

Why we flagged it

The bill's core function is antitrust regulation of dominant app store operators, requiring them to cease exclusionary practices and allow interoperability. It is fundamentally a competition and consumer-protection measure, not a tax, subsidy, or commemorative act.

What the text implies

• Enforcement relies on private litigation by developers and state AGs, which may create a flood of lawsuits and legal uncertainty for platforms during the 180-day implementation window.
• The 'preponderance of the evidence' standard for privacy/security exceptions is lower than typical antitrust safe harbors, potentially allowing platforms to block apps on weak grounds if they can show any privacy rationale.
• Foreign state-owned app developers are explicitly barred from suing, which may create asymmetric enforcement and leave some developers without remedy.
• The bill does not address data portability or interoperability between competing app stores, only access to OS features—users may still face fragmentation and switching costs.
• Certification requirement (Section 5) places burden on executives to attest non-pretextual use of exceptions, creating personal liability exposure and potential criminal perjury risk.

Who it affects

Ordinary consumers and app developers gain meaningful protections: lower app prices (by enabling price competition), more choice in how they install software, and protection from anti-competitive practices by dominant platforms. The bill reduces lock-in and creates pathways for smaller competitors, which historically benefits consumers through innovation and lower costs.

Who stands to gain

• independent app developers
• alternative app store operators
• smaller mobile OS competitors
• payment processor companies (non-integrated)

Named in the bill

Apple, Google, Microsoft, Federal Trade Commission, Department of Justice Antitrust Division, State Attorneys General, app developers, app store operators

Where it stands

5 cosponsors: 3 Democrats, 2 Republicans.

• Jun 24, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in Senate”
• Jun 24, 2025 — Referred to Senate Committee on the Judiciary · Congress.gov: “Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary”

Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.

Money around this bill

21 lobbying clients named this bill on 33 disclosure filings across 3 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $15,420,000 in lobbying spend. A filing names 5 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.

More lobbying clients named this bill than 97% of bills with at least one filing.

Marsha Blackburn, the sponsor, reported $133,620 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.

• Google Client Services LLC — $6,920,000 on 2 filings
• Apple Inc — $2,740,000 on 1 filing
• Microsoft Corporation — $2,690,000 on 1 filing
• Epic Games, Inc. — $900,000 on 2 filings
• Spotify USA Inc. — $520,000 on 1 filing

Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.