If I understand correctly though, since it's a hard cutoff it creates this gap between 1m and ~1.2m where you're actually worse off by making more money pre-tax.
999k --[-15%]--> 849k
1000k --[-30%]--> 700k
1213k --[-30%]--> 849k
If I understand correctly though, since it's a hard cutoff it creates this gap between 1m and ~1.2m where you're actually worse off by making more money pre-tax.
999k --[-15%]--> 849k
1000k --[-30%]--> 700k
1213k --[-30%]--> 849k
EDIT: It looks like I am wrong, ignore me.
I wonder why they're not doing that and creating all kinds of weird edge cases that will encourage hacky workarounds.
I guess they didn't want to lose out on the first million from those who are above the first bracket.
Year 1: 999k --[-15%]--> 849k (This year doesn't trip the "limit"
Year 2: 1000k --[-15%]-->850k (Limit is tripped, next year is 30%)
Year 3: 999k --[-30%]-->699k (Fell below the limit, next year is 15% again)
Basically if you are close to the limit at the end of the year, you should immediately stop all advertising/marketing spend to ensure you don't go over the peak :)
I'm not really sure why they did it this way as it really screws over people that are just at the 1m/yr mark, vs a progressive system that would "just work."
If you get kicked out, you're stuck paying 30% for at least a year.
Or, they could've just picked $1 million because it's a nice round number and looks good in a press release.
You'd pay let's say 15% over the first 30k, and then 30% over the remainder.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_tax (See the Computation section for how the higher rates only apply to the higher portions of a person's income, with their lower portions taxed less.)
The relevant sentence seems to be "If a participating developer surpasses the $1 million threshold, the standard commission rate will apply for the remainder of the year." (emphasis mine)
Apple takes the comission as you go, so it sounds like they take 15% of each sale until you hit $1M, and then 30% for every sale after that.
The next year they'd take 30% right from the start though, so a good year followed by a bad one would be unfortunate.
0-9000€ [0%] -> 0€
9000-20.000€ [10%] -> 1100€
20.000-40.000€ [15%] -> 3000€
Total = 4400€
So if you're in the 15% bracket you pay 4400€ which is actually 12.5% in total, and not 5250€ (15%) as some people seem to believe.
Yet they have 2 full year to see how it goes and work around all the edge case. I bet nobody except professional haters will complain if they soften the rules in 18 months.
My guess is that creating apps for the App store is actually far less profitable than Apple wants us to believe. That is, unless you are a large publisher.
I'd really like to see the distribution here, I wouldn't be surprised if there is a huge income gap.
"In a gold rush, you don't get rich by digging for gold - you get rich by selling shovels"
That would be dangerous, because imagine being under 1million all year, and in December you make 1 dollar too much - suddenly you would have to pay Apple a lot of money you may have already spent. You never pay Apple though, they just keep their cut.