A Republican bill with 4 Democratic cosponsors · See all 6 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The App Store Freedom Act aims to stop unfair or deceptive practices in the app marketplace. It requires companies that control both an operating system and a large app store to allow users to choose third-party app stores and delete pre-installed ones. The bill prohibits these companies from forcing developers to use specific payment systems or punishing them for offering better deals elsewhere. It also stops covered companies from using a developer's private business data to compete against them. Enforcement is handled by the Federal Trade Commission and state officials, with potential fines up to $1,000,000 per violation.
Yes· 3 of 18
- Scored +8
Would business owners be better off under this?
Highly beneficial for app developers and digital service providers by removing platform-imposed restrictions.
- Scored +8
Does this put more rules on large technology companies?
Directly regulates the behavior of large companies that control both an OS and a dominant app store.
- Scored +7
Does this make it easier to run a small business?
Provides small app developers fairer access to OS features and removes restrictive payment requirements.
The opposite
- Scored -6
Would billionaires be better off under this?
Negatively impacts owners of the largest tech platforms by restricting their ability to control ecosystems.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Increased User Choice: Users can choose third-party app stores as defaults, install apps from sources other than the company-owned store, and delete pre-installed apps (Section 2(a)(1)).
-
Fairer App Development: Developers get free and equal access to the operating system's hardware and software features, along with the documentation needed to use them (Section 2(a)(2)).
-
Payment Flexibility: Developers are no longer required to use the covered company's in-app payment system as a condition for being on the operating system or store (Section 2(b)(1)(A)(i)).
-
Better Pricing Opportunities: Companies cannot punish developers for offering more favorable pricing or terms of sale on other platforms (Section 2(b)(1)(B)).
-
Improved Communication: Developers can communicate directly with users about business offers and pricing without facing restrictions or fees from the covered company (Section 2(b)(2)(A)).
-
Protection of Business Data: Covered companies are banned from using a developer's nonpublic business information to compete against that developer's app (Section 2(b)(3)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Loss of Warranty and Support: Covered companies are not required to provide customer service or warranty repairs for damage caused by third-party apps or stores installed outside their own system (Section 5(2)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this make it easier to run a small business? — Provides small app developers fairer access to OS features and removes restrictive payment requirements. Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — Gives users more choice over their software and prevents deceptive practices by dominant platform owners. Is this likely to grow the economy? — Promotes a more competitive digital marketplace by breaking down walled gardens. Is this likely to create jobs? — Lowering barriers to entry for app developers may stimulate growth and job creation in the software industry. Is this likely to slow the rise in prices? — Increased competition in app stores and payment systems could lead to lower prices for consumers.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would business owners be better off under this? — Highly beneficial for app developers and digital service providers by removing platform-imposed restrictions. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — General consumers of technology will benefit from increased competition and choice. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Young adults are heavy users of mobile apps and will benefit from more choice and potential price reductions. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Increased competition in the app market can lead to lower prices for digital services. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Benefits from lower app prices and more software choices. Would students be better off under this? — Students are primary users of educational and productivity apps that may become more affordable. Would billionaires be better off under this? — Negatively impacts owners of the largest tech platforms by restricting their ability to control ecosystems.
- Education And Technology
- Does this put more rules on large technology companies? — Directly regulates the behavior of large companies that control both an OS and a dominant app store. Does this give people more control over their personal data? — Prohibits platform owners from using a developer's nonpublic business information to compete against them. Does this make patent and copyright rules fairer? — Requires fair access to OS interfaces while preserving legitimate IP protections.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — Grants the FTC significant enforcement power and establishes federal standards for app marketplaces. Does this protect the individual right to speak freely? — Reduces the ability of platform owners to restrict communication between developers and users. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — Explicitly allows state attorneys general to bring civil actions for violations.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this protect what people are allowed to say in public life? — Allows developers to communicate more freely with users about their offerings.
- 1/20/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 10/28/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 10/24/2025
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 9/10/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/29/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 5/6/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
James ComerRepublican · Kentucky
Pramila JayapalDemocrat · Washington
Nicholas LangworthyRepublican · New York
Kevin MullinDemocrat · California
Darren SotoDemocrat · Florida
Lori TrahanDemocrat · Massachusetts