2025年11月，印度反壟斷監管機構對蘋果公司開出高達380億美元的罰款，創下該國針對單一企業的最高處罰紀錄。這項罰款源於印度競爭委員會（Competition Commission of India, CCI）認定蘋果在印度市場存在壟斷行為，涉嫌濫用市場支配地位，對消費者和競爭對手造成不利影響。具體而言，監管機構指出蘋果在iPhone和相關應用生態系統中採取限制性政策，包括限制協力廠商維修服務、對開發者收取高額應用內分成以及在應用商店設定不公平條款，從而限制市場公平競爭，並損害印度消費者的權益。

針對這一裁定，蘋果公司表示強烈反對，並已決定在印度法院提起上訴。公司方面強調，其商業模式和應用分發政策符合全球慣例，同時也遵守印度的法律法規。蘋果指出，罰款金額基於全球營業額的計算方式過於苛刻，並可能對公司在印度的正常運營造成重大影響。

這一事件在印度和全球市場引發廣泛關注。分析人士指出，此次高額罰款體現了印度政府在數字經濟和科技巨頭監管上的強硬態度，也顯示出印度在保護本土消費者利益、維護市場公平競爭方面的決心。同時，此案可能為其他跨國科技公司在印度市場運營敲響警鐘，提醒它們必須更加注重合規與市場公平原則。

隨著案件進入上訴程式，蘋果在印度的業務運營和市場策略可能面臨調整，同時也將引發印度科技市場對跨國企業監管的新一輪討論。這起事件不僅關乎巨額罰款，更牽動全球科技企業在印度市場的未來佈局與法律風險評估。

In November 2025, India’s antitrust regulator imposed a record fine of up to $38 billion on Apple, marking the highest penalty ever levied against a single company in the country. The fine stems from a ruling by the Competition Commission of India (CCI), which found that Apple engaged in monopolistic practices in the Indian market, abusing its dominant position to the detriment of consumers and competitors. Specifically, the regulator cited restrictive policies within the iPhone ecosystem, including limitations on third-party repair services, high commissions on in-app purchases for developers, and unfair terms in the App Store, all of which were deemed to hinder fair market competition and harm Indian consumers’ interests.

In response to the ruling, Apple strongly opposed the decision and has decided to appeal in Indian courts. The company argued that its business model and app distribution policies are consistent with global practices and comply with Indian laws and regulations. Apple also criticized the methodology of calculating the fine based on its global revenue as excessively harsh, warning that it could significantly impact its operations in India.

The case has drawn widespread attention both in India and internationally. Analysts noted that the unprecedented fine demonstrates India’s firm stance on regulating digital economy giants and underscores the government’s commitment to protecting local consumers and ensuring fair competition. Moreover, the case could serve as a warning to other multinational tech companies operating in India, emphasizing the importance of compliance and adherence to fair market practices.

As the appeal proceeds, Apple may need to adjust its business operations and market strategies in India, while the case continues to spark discussions on the regulation of foreign tech enterprises in the Indian market. Beyond the massive financial penalty, this case also highlights the legal risks and strategic considerations for global technology companies in one of the world’s fastest-growing markets.