Hey everyone, I'm currently preparing an older iOS app for App Store release that includes a non-consumable In‑App Purchase using StoreKit 2. Everything works perfectly in the StoreKitTest environment inside Xcode – the product loads, the purchase flow runs, the transaction verifies. However, when I run the same app through TestFlight, I always get the error: ❌ Product not available - mapped to Here’s what I’ve already checked: ✅ The product ID is correct and matches what’s in App Store Connect (case-sensitive). ✅ The IAP is created in App Store Connect and includes: Title Product ID Price Tier Screenshot for review ✅ The App Store "Paid Applications" agreement is active. ✅ The app is using the correct bundle ID. ✅ I'm using Product.products(for: [productID]) from StoreKit 2. ✅ I’ve implemented fallback and retry logic (e.g. reload after delay). ✅ All IAP logic is wrapped in @MainActor and async-safe. As the App got Rejected on Review, the IAP is also now in the Rejected Status. Now the IAP shows status: 🟠 "Developer Action Required" And App Review rejected the IAP with the message: "Your first In‑App Purchase must be submitted together with a new app version." But if I add the App to the Test again and therefore the IAP, then the app will get Rejected again for App Completeness, IAP does not work... What am I doing wrong here? :) Thanks a lot in advance Cheers, Niklas

I have implemented in-app-purchase in one of my iOS application. I generated the consumable products and these are approved by Apple Showing with Green check. I used StoreKit-2 and locally testing with store sync configuration file. The products I have created on developer accounts automatically synced by Store Configuration file and showing no the screen and I can purchase the product with Xcode environment in development. When uploaded app to test flight, I am not getting products with sandbox email id. Cases I have tries: -Remove my original Apple ID from device and just testing with Apple Sandbox email id -> Not getting products. -Remove configuration file while uploading to test flight -> not fetching products. -Checked the archive build and its in Release mode. Note: I am as a (Admin) team member, not account holder. Issue: Not fetching products on Test flight with Sandbox & in live app. Is there something I have to track here: Agreements for Free Apps Agreement with EFFECTIVE DATE showing 3 Jul 2025 - 20 Sep 2025 & STATUS is Active Agreements for Paid Apps Agreement with EFFECTIVE DATE showing nothing & STATUS is New

For testing purposes, I log out of media and purchases to use sandbox ID's to test in app purchases. Once I log out of media and purchases in device settings, in app purchases is still using my real apple ID, I'm not being prompted anymore to log into a sandbox ID for purchases.

We got access into Advanced Commerce API and trying out the server APIs. I was trying out the Migrate a Subscription to Advanced Commerce API but the API was just simply returning not found to me with a generic error code 4040000 (this is undocumented in the API doc). Here is the request body { "descriptors": { "description": "User migrated from old plan to Essential", "displayName": "Essential Plan" }, "items": [ { "sku": "com.company.essential", "description": "A new subscription description after migration", "displayName": "Essential" } ], "requestInfo": { "requestReferenceId": "11aa3174-9aeb-41a6-996d-fc655a793c06" }, "storefront": "HKG", "targetProductId": "com.company.subscription.base", "taxCode": "C003-00-1" } Headers Authorization: Bearer <REQUEST_TOKEN> And the response { "errorCode": 4040000, "errorMessage": "Not found." } Am I doing something wrong or there will be additional configuration needed?

Hi there 👋🏻 We are facing an issue that started on 24 June 2025 where some users that have an active subscription with an offer are not being able to use/restore their subscription since Transaction.currentEntitlements is empty. We have tried to call the server with this endpoint https://developer.apple.com/documentation/appstoreserverapi/get-transaction-history and it's returning the correct transactions correctly. Any idea what is happening?

I would like to clarify that my app is a Reader APP and a hybrid application built with Vue.js and Capacitor. To comply with Apple’s guidelines, I am not using any third-party SDKs for account management or payments. Instead, I am attempting to use the official StoreKit External Link Account API as required. To achieve this, I created a custom native Capacitor plugin in Swift, which calls the StoreKit 2 classes (SKStoreExternalLinkAccountRequest and SKStoreExternalLinkAccountViewController) to present the required modal before redirecting users to manage their accounts externally. However, I am encountering a technical issue: When building the app in Xcode 16 (with iOS Deployment Target set to 16+), the Swift compiler cannot find the StoreKit 2 classes (SKStoreExternalLinkAccountRequest and SKStoreExternalLinkAccountViewController). I have attached a screenshot showing the error in Xcode. Could you please clarify if there are any additional requirements or steps needed to access these StoreKit 2 APIs in a hybrid (Capacitor/Vue) app? Is there any limitation for hybrid apps, or is there a specific configuration needed in Xcode or the project to make these APIs available? I am committed to fully complying with Apple’s guidelines and want to ensure the best and safest experience for my users. Any guidance or documentation you can provide would be greatly appreciated. my plugin: my app in xcode - build failed I would really appreciate it if someone could help me.

One of our customers subscribed to a monthly plan on August 16 but the server-to-server notification seems to have been sent on August 18. What could be the reasons for such a delay between the purchase and the server-to-server notification which are usually sent right after the purchase? The receipt sent along with the notification seems to confirm that the receipt has only been created 2 days after the purchase. Here is an extract: { "environment": "Production", "receipt": { "receipt_type": "Production", "bundle_id": "fr.gaumontvideo.gaumontclassique", "application_version": "613", "receipt_creation_date": "2025-08-18 13:00:16 Etc/GMT", "receipt_creation_date_ms": "1755522016000", "receipt_creation_date_pst": "2025-08-18 06:00:16 America/Los_Angeles", "request_date": "2025-08-25 13:08:27 Etc/GMT", "request_date_ms": "1756127307346", "request_date_pst": "2025-08-25 06:08:27 America/Los_Angeles", "original_purchase_date": "2022-05-11 06:14:37 Etc/GMT", "original_purchase_date_ms": "1652249677000", "original_purchase_date_pst": "2022-05-10 23:14:37 America/Los_Angeles", "original_application_version": "265", "in_app": [ { "quantity": "1", "product_id": "fr.gaumontvideo.gaumontclassique.subscription.monthly.apple", "transaction_id": "270002386706194", "original_transaction_id": "270002386706194", "purchase_date": "2025-08-16 08:02:06 Etc/GMT", "purchase_date_ms": "1755331326000", "purchase_date_pst": "2025-08-16 01:02:06 America/Los_Angeles", "original_purchase_date": "2025-08-16 08:02:08 Etc/GMT", "original_purchase_date_ms": "1755331328000", "original_purchase_date_pst": "2025-08-16 01:02:08 America/Los_Angeles", "expires_date": "2025-09-16 08:02:06 Etc/GMT", "expires_date_ms": "1758009726000", "expires_date_pst": "2025-09-16 01:02:06 America/Los_Angeles" } }

Hi! I’m new in programming apps for Apple Store and I’m creating my first app. I already send my for review but I get an answer of problems with the subs flow. If there’s anyone who can help me fix this problem and implement my subscriptions in my app and test it out I would be thankful, I want the flow work like in the image!

I’m trying to determine the most appropriate modern method for detecting whether a user originally downloaded a paid app (prior to transitioning the app to freemium/IAP-based access). Historically, this was done by checking for a valid App Store receipt and using SKReceiptRefreshRequest to ensure a fresh one was available. However, SKReceiptRefreshRequest and many related aspects of StoreKit receipt handling are now deprecated in iOS 17+. The current Apple documentation on receipt validation still refers to SKReceiptRefreshRequest, which makes things unclear. With so many deprecations and the push toward StoreKit 2, what’s the recommended path to: Check for a valid App Store receipt Confirm that the app was originally purchased (as a paid app, not via IAP) Persist this info to exempt the user from paywalling the app in the future I don’t need to validate purchases of IAPs — just to detect a legacy paid app download. Any guidance on best practice for this use case, preferably using non-deprecated APIs (StoreKit 2 or otherwise), would be appreciated.

Hello! I am trying to get my app set up to support external payments. The snag I am hitting at the moment is it seems that relevant pages are not accessible? There is this old EU doc https://developer.apple.com/support/apps-using-alternative-payment-providers-in-the-eu/ But the more updated US doc titled "Distributing apps in the U.S. that provide an external purchase link - Support" is not available where it should be https://developer.apple.com/support/storekit-external-entitlement-us/ In addition the link for requesting the entitlement seems to be broken https://developer.apple.com/contact/request/storekit-external-entitlement-us/ Any idea how one can access these? Perhaps this is just a temporary error?

Hello, I recently saw this error from StoreKit in the Console - 'Invalid value for purchase intake' - while debugging a SKPayment subscription issue (where a valid receipt should be verified and restored, but isn't for one user). I haven't been able to find any documentation about this message and wondered if it was related at all. There were two other logs from StoreKit right before saying: 'Found 3 products in receipt with ID' 'Processing ad attribution purchase intake' Does anyone know what 'invalid value for purchase intake' is referencing? We don't have the AdAttributionKit implemented. It sounds like it might be related to that instead? Thank you

I'm encountering an issue with the App Store Server API where the appAccountToken is not preserved when users migrate their Apple ID email addresses. I've submitted Feedback Assistant ticket FB18709241 but wanted to check if anyone else has experienced this and get community input on best practices. The Issue When a user migrates their Apple ID from one email to another (e.g., from olduser@example.com to newuser@icloud.com), the App Store creates a new subscription transaction with a different originalTransactionId, but the appAccountToken is not carried forward from the original transaction. What I'm Seeing note: these values are fake When querying /inApps/v1/subscriptions/{originalTransactionId} with the either post-migration transaction ID or the pre-migration transaction ID, the API returns both transactions: Pre-migration transaction (status: 2 - inactive): originalTransactionId: "12345678910111" Contains: "appAccountToken": "abc123-def456-ghi789" Post-migration transaction (status: 1 - active): originalTransactionId: "67891011121314" Missing: appAccountToken entirely The Problem The appAccountToken is our only way to link App Store subscriptions to user accounts. Without it on the new transaction: Users lose access to premium features despite having valid subscriptions Server-side renewal notifications can't be matched to user accounts Manual support intervention is required for each affected user Questions for the Community Has anyone else encountered this issue with Apple ID migrations? What's the recommended approach for handling this scenario? Is there an alternative mechanism to maintain the subscription-to-user linkage across migrations? Questions for Apple Engineers Is this the expected behavior, or should the appAccountToken be preserved? Are there any planned improvements to handle this migration scenario? What's the best practice for developers to handle this case? Interestingly, both the old and new transaction IDs return the same JSON response from the App Store Server API, suggesting Apple maintains internal linkage between these transactions, but the appAccountToken isn't carried forward to the active transaction. Any insights or similar experiences would be greatly appreciated! Thank you!! Feedback Assistant: FB18709241

We are using consumable in-app purchases. Starting from May 27th, we began receiving refund callbacks with the notificationType set to ONE_TIME_CHARGE immediately after users successfully completed a payment. { "notificationType": "ONE_TIME_CHARGE", "signedPayload": "..." } During this period, we did not make any changes to our App release or server-side purchase handling logic. Could this issue result in actual refunds being processed? What steps should we take to resolve this issue? We also noticed in your changelog that a new notification type ONE_TIME_CHARGE has been introduced. Can we safely ignore callbacks with the ONE_TIME_CHARGE notification type without affecting refund processing or user experience?

Dear Apple Technical Support Team, We have encountered a potential issue related to transaction handling while using StoreKit v2, and would greatly appreciate your assistance in confirming the behavior or providing any relevant guidance. Issue Description: When calling Transaction.unfinished and listening to Transaction.updates on the client side, we noticed that some transactions—despite having already been processed and successfully completed with finish()—are being returned again upon the next app launch, which results in duplicate receipt uploads. Current Handling Flow: 1. Upon app launch: • Iterate over Transaction.unfinished to retrieve unfinished transactions; • Simultaneously listen for transaction changes via Transaction.updates (e.g., renewals, refunds); 2. For each verified transaction, we immediately call await transaction.finish(); 3. We then construct a transaction model, store it locally, and report it to our backend for receipt verification; 4. After the server successfully verifies the receipt, the client deletes the corresponding local record; 5. On every app launch, the client checks for any locally stored receipts that haven’t been uploaded, and re-uploads them if necessary. Key Code Snippets: private static func verifyReceipt(receiptResult: VerificationResult) -> Transaction? { switch receiptResult { case .unverified(_, _): return nil case .verified(let signedType): return signedType } } public static func handleUnfinishedTransactions(payConfig: YCStoreKitPayConfig, complete: ((YCStoreKitReceiptModel?) -> Void)?) { Task.detached { for await unfinishedResult in Transaction.unfinished { let transaction = YCStoreKitV2Manager.verifyReceipt(receiptResult: unfinishedResult) if let transaction { await transaction.finish() if transaction.revocationDate == nil { let receipt = YCStoreKitV2Manager.createStoreKitReceiptModel( transation: transaction, jwsString: unfinishedResult.jwsRepresentation, payConfig: payConfig, isRenew: false ) complete?(receipt) } } } } } private func observeTransactionUpdates() -> Task<Void, Never> { return Task { for await updateResult in Transaction.updates { let transaction = YCStoreKitV2Manager.verifyReceipt(receiptResult: updateResult) if let transaction { await transaction.finish() if transaction.revocationDate == nil { let receipt = YCStoreKitV2Manager.createStoreKitReceiptModel( transation: transaction, jwsString: updateResult.jwsRepresentation, payConfig: self.payConfig, isRenew: false ) self.callProgressChanged(.receiptPrepared, receiptModel: receipt, errorType: .none, error: nil) } } } } } Our Questions: 1. Is it possible for Transaction.unfinished or Transaction.updates to return transactions that have already been finished? Specifically, if a transaction was successfully finished in a previous app launch, could it still be returned again during the next launch? 2. Are there any flaws in our current handling process? Our current sequence is: finish() → construct model → local save → report to server → delete after verification. Could this order lead to timing issues where StoreKit considers a transaction unfinished? 3. If we need your assistance in investigating specific user transaction records or logs, what key information should we provide? We greatly appreciate your support and look forward to your response to help us further optimize our transaction processing logic.

I am unable to sign in to a Sandbox Apple Account, where this issue occurs only via Simulator. Under Settings > Developer, I tap "Sign In" under Sandbox Apple Account. I enter my account credentials, and after bringing me back to the Developer page, the Sign In button briefly appears as disabled, before being re-enabled, without signing in to the account. (The account credentials are also recognized as correct, as I will receive an alert popup if incorrect.) See screenshots below: After signing in, Sign In button appears disabled... ... then is re-enabled without actually signing in to the account. I have now tried setting up multiple sandbox accounts via App Store Connect with various permutations (no confirmation of Apple Account email, confirming Apple Account email, logging in to iCloud and accepting terms of service), running different device simulators, running simulators on different Mac computers... none of which yield a different result. By contrast, I can sign in to the Sandbox Apple Account without issue on a physical device. The problem occurs only via Simulator.

I’m seeing an issue with subscriptions in TestFlight builds on iOS 26. Running from Xcode works as expected, and the App Store build looks fine. But when I install the same build via TestFlight, transaction.subscriptionStatus is nil. The identical binary behaves correctly on an iOS 18 device. Is this expected behavior on iOS 26 TestFlight, or am I missing something? Thanks!

I have non-consumable and consumable in-app purchases in my app. The tutorial I was following stated Transaction.currentEntitlements includes unfinished consumables, which is incorrect according to the documentation. Is the correct way to handle unfinished consumables (and non-consumables) to implement Transaction.updates and call finish() if it’s verified? The documentation says that listener will receive unfinished transactions once upon app launch, so with that, do I understand correctly you do not need to implement Transaction.unfinished unless you want to look for unfinished transactions manually later on? Otherwise what is the correct and most recommended way to handle unfinished consumables? Is there a way to test that scenario in Xcode?

I’m implementing subscriptions and running tests, and I noticed a behavior I’d like to confirm. Plans in the app Basic — Monthly Basic — Annual Premium — Monthly Premium — Annual Test environment Sandbox (where ~1 day ≈ under 1 minute of real time) steps Start Basic (Monthly) using an introductory offer (free trial). Create a crossgrade to Basic (Annual) (scheduled/queued). After receiving a RENEWAL App Store Server Notification indicating the plan will move from trial to paid Basic (Annual), but before the trial actually expires, upgrade the user to Premium (Monthly). Observed behavior (Sandbox) & questions Even though there is still up to ~1 day of trial remaining (≈ under 1 minute in Sandbox), upgrading to Premium (Monthly) immediately ends the trial and activates the paid Premium plan right away. Will this same behavior occur in Production? If yes, is this the expected/acceptable behavior when upgrading during an active trial after a pending crossgrade? Note: If we upgrade to Premium before the RENEWAL notification arrives, the remaining trial time is carried over in our tests. In this flow, we see a RENEWAL notification for Basic (Annual) (moving from trial → paid), but then the user immediately upgrades to Premium (Monthly) and the trial ends at that moment. In Production, would the charge for Basic (Annual) be refunded automatically since the user effectively switches to Premium immediately (and Basic Annual does not remain active)? In Sandbox there’s no real charge, but I want to ensure we won’t see a situation in Production where Basic (Annual) is billed and not refunded, even though the subscription effectively moved to Premium right away. Thanks in advance!

Hello, I am encountering an issue where I receive an App Store Server Notification V2 upon the purchase of a consumable item. I have configured the App Store Server Notification V2 endpoint to handle notifications related to subscription products. However, I did not expect to receive notifications for consumable purchases. The notification includes the following signedPayload decoded into the ResponseBodyV2DecodedPayload object with the following values: notificationUUID: 3cd6410b-0c89-4247-aba5-20710e79895e notificationType: null subtype: null The transaction information decoded from the ResponseBodyV2DecodedPayload object is as follows: transactionId: 2000000633622618 webOrderLineItemId: null productId: heart_2 To debug, I called the Get Notification History API of the App Store Server API, and the mentioned notification for the consumable product purchase is not included in the history. Only notifications related to subscription product purchases are retrieved. According to the notification type documentation, there is no explanation for cases where both notificationType and subtype are null, nor is there any mention of receiving notifications for consumable purchases. Therefore, I am uncertain how to interpret and handle this notification. Could you please provide an explanation or guidance on this issue? Thank you. References: https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/737592 https://developer.apple.com/documentation/appstoreservernotifications/notificationtype

My app has in app purchase for subscriptions, available in many countries. When using Sandbox App Store accounts on TestFlight with a locale different from my own in the iOS 26 RC, I'm getting incorrect currency coming back from Product.products(for: identifiers), and so my app displays the wrong price for the locale. However, the actual Apple Pay buy sheet shows the proper currency symbol and currency amount. This did not happen on prior versions of iOS. Is anyone else experiencing this?