Apple and Google could soon be required to modify the way some of their mobile services operate in the UK, according to preliminary findings from the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA).
The regulator is currently examining the dominant role both tech firms play in the mobile ecosystem—spanning their app stores, web browsers, and operating systems.
The CMA noted that Apple’s iOS and Google’s Android platforms power nearly every mobile device in the UK, giving the two companies what it calls an “effective duopoly.”
If the proposals go forward, both firms could be classified as having “strategic market status” (SMS) under UK law, a designation that gives the CMA greater powers to enforce changes. This law, introduced in 2023, allows the authority to intervene if a company is deemed to have excessive influence in a specific market.
Apple has voiced concerns that the suggested changes could negatively affect user experience and safety, while Google described the move as “disappointing and unwarranted.”
The companies now have a one-month window to respond before the CMA delivers a final ruling in October. Should the designation be upheld, Apple and Google may be legally obligated to adjust how their mobile services work in the UK to promote fairer competition and expand consumer choice.
One focus of the investigation is how the firms prioritize their own apps on their platforms, potentially giving them an unfair advantage over rival developers.
CMA CEO Sarah Cardell said the potential rules could help maintain the UK’s leading position in app development while ensuring consumers continue to receive top-tier digital services.
What Are Apple and Google Saying?
Apple has argued that the proposed regulations could compromise the security and privacy features its users rely on, limit innovation, and potentially give international competitors free access to its proprietary technology.
A company spokesperson stated, “We’re concerned the UK’s proposed rules would weaken the security protections we’ve built, hinder innovation, and unfairly benefit foreign rivals at our expense. We will continue working with the CMA to make sure they fully understand the consequences.”
Google echoed similar concerns. Oliver Bethell, the company’s Senior Director of Competition, emphasized the need for any new rules to be based on evidence and to avoid hampering growth.
“Android, Chrome, and the Play Store support user choice, innovation, and security,” Bethell said. “We remain committed to working collaboratively with the CMA throughout this process.”
Google also noted that Android and its browser engine, Blink, are open-source—making their core technologies freely available to developers, which the company believes encourages competition and lowers product costs.
Broader Regulatory Pressure
The move is part of a wider global push to scrutinize Big Tech. Both Apple and Google are under increasing regulatory pressure in the UK, EU, and the US.
Apple recently contested a €500 million fine imposed by the European Commission, which accused the company of blocking app developers from informing users about alternative purchasing options outside the App Store.
In the US, Apple is also facing legal challenges over how it handles in-app payment systems within its platform.
Separately, the CMA recently concluded that Google holds strategic market status in online search and digital advertising, with Google accounting for over 90% of UK search traffic.
While the CMA stressed it is not directly accusing Google of anti-competitive behavior, it plans to release a roadmap of potential reforms aimed at opening up the sector before issuing a final decision later this year.
Consumer Advocacy Reaction
The consumer advocacy group Which? welcomed the CMA’s intervention. Rocio Concha, its policy and advocacy director, said: “Although these companies have driven technological progress, their overwhelming market dominance is now causing tangible harm to both consumers and smaller businesses that rely on their platforms.”
ALSO READ : How Trump’s Tactics Have Changed Global Trade Negotiations
