Ten Plus Five

Google's 24 June announcement says "the service fee starts at 10% on your first $1M (USD) in annual earnings", and "This 10% service fee also applies to all auto-renewing subscriptions." The next part matters more: "we're separating our service fee" from the billing fee, and "In the United States, United Kingdom, and the European Economic Area, the billing fee is set at 5%." The rate card in the Play Console help centre prints both on one line: "First $1M (USD) of annual earnings", "10% + 5% billing fee". Per the post, it "starts on June 30, 2026".

One $10.00 in-app purchase, US user, Google Play Billing, developer inside its first $1M of the year$10.00

Service fee, 10%−$1.00

Billing fee, 5%−$0.50

Arrives$8.50

$10.00 − $1.00 − $0.50 = $8.50, so 15% of the price goes to Google. The $10.00 is our example, not a quoted price. The rate-card rows we fetched don't say whether either percentage is charged before or after sales tax or VAT, so we apply both to the full price. Same page, other markets: "Developers enrolled in the 15% service fee tier" pay "15% for the first $1M (USD)", which is also $1.50 on $10.00, so $8.50 arrives.

Where the 10% actually applies

Paying through Google, a small developer's total stays at 15%. Auto-renewing subscriptions too: "10% + 5% billing fee" in the new table, against "15% for automatically renewing subscription products" under the older structure for other markets. Either way, a $10.00 subscription leaves $8.50.

The 10% is all Google charges only on payments that don't go through Google: the post says "billing fee does not apply" to transactions processed "via alternative billing or external web links". On $10.00 that leaves $9.00 before the developer pays its own processor. Google's pages don't give that cost, and we couldn't either.

Past the first million

Above a developer's first $1M, the rate depends on when each user installed the app. An existing install is "A transaction from a user whose first-time install or first update of the app from Google Play occurred before the" rollout date in that user's region. The standard row reads "20% + 5% billing fee" for new installs and "25% + 5% billing fee * OR; 20% for external web links" for existing ones.

$10.00 in-app purchase, developer past its first $1M, standard rowArrives

New install, Play Billing: 20% + 5%$7.50

Existing install, Play Billing: 25% + 5%$7.00

Existing install, external web link: 20%, before own processor$8.00

Other markets, past the first million: "30% for earnings in excess of $1M (USD)"$7.00

$10.00 − $2.00 − $0.50 = $7.50. $10.00 − $2.50 − $0.50 = $7.00. $10.00 − $2.00 = $8.00. $10.00 − $3.00 = $7.00. Developers in "the Play Games Level Up or Apps Experience programs" pay five points less on non-subscription Play Billing transactions past the first million, and "15% for external web links". The rate card prints no external-link rate for new installs.

On the standard row, a user who installed before the rollout and pays through Google costs a large developer 25% + 5% = 30%. That's the same 30% the other-markets structure charges past the first million, split into two lines. On that row, the only Play Billing reduction at that size is on new installs: 25% instead of 30%. The program row runs five points lower, as above. Because the definition fixes a user's status by an install or update before the rollout date, a user can't move from one column to the other. What the sources don't say is whether Google will change the existing-install rates.

What it leaves out

Geography. The blog post states the 5% for the US, UK and EEA, and says Google will "announce billing fee details for other markets soon". The rate card goes further: it prints the same rows, 5% billing fee included, in one table covering Australia and Japan as well, with a rollout of "September 30, 2026 for Australia and Japan". That date has passed. The post itself gives no billing-fee figure for any market outside its three. Everywhere else, the rate card keeps the older structure.

Enrolment. The older tier is for developers enrolled in it. The new first-million row doesn't say whether enrolment is still required.

What the billing fee covers. Per the footnote, the fee "applies when a user completes a purchase of an in-app digital service or feature using Google Play Billing". Once it is a separate line, a developer can compare it with a processor's price. That's the case for splitting it out.

The regulator. In the UK, "The CMA launched a consultation on a proposed Steering conduct requirement in relation to Google’s mobile platform." As of the CMA's case page, it has not published a decision. These rates may not last.

Confidence

10% from first $1M; 10% on subscriptions; 5% billing fee in US, UK, EEA; billing fee not applied to alternative billing or external links; June 30 start; other markets to be announced —Android Developers Blog, primary Every rate-card row: 10% + 5%, 20% + 5%, 25% + 5%, 20% and 15% external links, the 15% tier, 30% above $1M, install definition, billing-fee footnote, the one table covering Australia, the EEA, Japan, the UK and the US, the Australia and Japan rollout date —Play Console Help, service fees, primary UK steering consultation launched 30 June 2026, responses published 14 August 2026, no decision on the page —CMA case page, primary Every ledger figure — our arithmetic, from the rates above Fee base: before or after tax and VAT — not stated in the rows we fetched Whether the first-million row needs enrolment — not stated External-link rate for new installs — not published Developer's own processing cost on the non-Google routes — no credible data; varies by processor and country The US rates in force before June 30 — not established from a fetched source

Didn't survive

"The 5% is stated for the US, UK and EEA only" Cut — our own error, misstated the rate card — Only the blog post limits the 5% to those three markets. The rate card prints "+ 5% billing fee" in a single table for Australia, the EEA, Japan, the UK and the US, with Australia and Japan rolling out on 30 September 2026, a date already past when we published. "Only" was wrong. The paragraph now says what each document says.

"UK steering consultation open" Cut — our own error, not on the page — The CMA case page lists the consultation as published on 30 June 2026 and the responses to it as published on 14 August 2026. It gives no closing date and never calls the consultation open. With responses published, it has most likely closed. We now say only that it was launched and that responses were published, and the same wording replaces "open" in the CMA PDF row below.

"Nothing we fetched says when, or whether, existing installs move to that column" Softened — over-hedged — The rate card defines an existing install by an install or update before the rollout date, an event fixed in the past, so a user's status can't change. The open question is whether Google changes the existing-install rates, and the piece now says that.

"The only Play Billing reduction at that size is on new installs" Narrowed — true of one row only — It holds for the standard row. The Level Up / Apps Experience row charges 20% + 5% on existing installs, which is 25% on Play Billing. The sentence is now scoped to the standard row.

"The US moved from 15% to 10%" and "from 15% to 15%" Cut — our own framing, unsupported — The draft's first version compared the new US table with "the US before June 30". We fetched no record of the old US rate card. The piece now compares it with the structure the same page still lists for other markets. That page is current, and we can cite it.

The developer's processing cost on the alternative-billing route, priced with Stripe's US card rate Cut — page not reliably fetchable — We requested Stripe's US pricing page twice and got the Canadian page both times, priced in CA$. A page that changes with the reader's location can't be checked by our verifier or by a reader, so the $9.00 and $8.00 rows stop before processing.

"In the US, links out of the app carry no Google fee" Cut — weak, contradicted by the rate card — One trade blog said this about the US court injunction. Google's own table prints an external-link rate for existing installs. We didn't fetch the injunction, so we can't say which applies to whom.

The Epic–Google settlement's proposed caps Cut — reported, not fetched — Secondary reports say the settlement was withdrawn in July. We fetched no court record, and a withdrawn proposal isn't a rate.

The CMA's own summary of Google's new fees Cut — unreadable to the checker — It is in a compressed PDF. Our fetch returned no readable text, so we cite only the CMA's HTML case page, and only for the fact that a consultation was launched and responses to it published.

Google's statistics on how many developers pay a low rate Excluded — The help page opens with two of these. A company's figures about its own customers are advertising under this publication's rules, so they're left out rather than caveated.

A quotation of the older 15% tier, as first copied Shortened — our own error — Our reads of the page disagreed on the wording after "(USD)": one included "of" and one didn't. The draft had quoted the full line anyway, so we now quote only the words every read agreed on.

How this was checked

Drafted, then verified by an independent pass that re-derived every figure from primary sources rather than reviewing the draft's reasoning. No human read this before publication. Corrections run at the top of the next issue.