Hello, In my iOS app, I have a customer center where the user can see some details about its current subscription. I display things like the billing period, the price, the introductory offer state, the renewal date if it's not cancelled or the expiration date if it's cancelled, etc. From this screen, the user can open the subscription management sheet. I want to detect if the user cancels the subscription from this sheet or from the App Store (when the app is running) so I can refresh the information displayed on my customer center. I checked the asynchronous sequences provided by StoreKit 2 like Transaction.updates or Product.SubscriptionInfo.Status.updates and tested with a Sandbox account on my physical device with the app debugged using Xcode. But I noticed these sequences don't emit when I cancel the subscription in Sandbox. Is this the expected behavior? Is there a way to observe in real time if a user cancels the subscription? I can still manually check when the sheet is dismissed but it's not ideal because I want to know even if the user cancel from outside of the app with the app running. Thank you, Axel

Our application is currently under review, and we are still facing issues because we receive a 401 Unauthorized response from the App Store Connect API when using the production environment. Our app integrates with Chargebee for subscription management, and in production, Chargebee is unable to authenticate with the App Store Server API. This results in a 401 Unauthorized error, preventing the user’s subscription from being synced correctly into our system. Interestingly, the same configuration works in the sandbox environment, but fails in production. We’ve tried authenticating using JWTs generated from multiple keys (including App Store Connect API / Team Keys with both Admin and App Manager access, and also In-App Purchase keys), all with the same result — sandbox access works, production does not. Here is our example code for testing with JWT token: const jwt = require('jsonwebtoken'); const fs = require('fs'); const https = require('https'); const config = { keyId: '<key_id>', issuerId: 'issuer_id', bundleId: 'bundle_id', privateKey: fs.readFileSync('path_to_key') }; const { keyId, issuerId, bundleId, privateKey } = config; const now = Math.floor(Date.now() / 1000); const jwtToken = jwt.sign( { iss: issuerId, iat: now, exp: now + 60 * 10, // 10 minutes is fine for test aud: 'appstoreconnect-v1', bid: bundleId }, privateKey, { algorithm: 'ES256', header: { alg: 'ES256', kid: keyId, typ: 'JWT' } } ); console.log('Generated JWT:\n', jwtToken); // prod const originalTransactionId = '<prod_transaction_id>'; const hostname = 'api.storekit.itunes.apple.com'; // sandbox // const originalTransactionId = '<sandbox_transaction_id>'; // const hostname = 'api.storekit-sandbox.itunes.apple.com' const options = { hostname, port: 443, path: `/inApps/v1/history/${originalTransactionId}`, method: 'GET', headers: { Authorization: `Bearer ${jwtToken}`, 'Content-Type': 'application/json', }, }; const callAppStoreConnectApi = async () => { const req = https.request(options, (res) => { console.log(`\nStatus Code: ${res.statusCode}`); let data = ''; res.on('data', (chunk) => { data += chunk; }); res.on('end', () => { console.log('Response Body:\n', data || '[Empty]'); }); }); req.on('error', (e) => { console.error('Request Error:', e); }); req.end(); }; callAppStoreConnectApi(); With this code, we were able to authenticate successfully in the sandbox environment, but not in production. I read in this discussion: https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/711801 that the issue was resolved once the app was published to the App Store, but I haven’t found any official documentation confirming this. Does anyone know what the issue could be?

I'm implementing PurchaseIntent.intents for App Store in-app purchase promotions, following Apple's WWDC guidance. The API only works on cold launch (killed→launch), but fails on background→foreground transitions, making App Store promotions unusable. Sample code as followed from WWDC23 video "What's new in StoreKit 2 and StoreKit Testing in Xcode". In the StoreKitManager observable class, I have this function which is initialized in a listening task: func listenForPurchaseIntent() -> Task<Void, Error> { return Task { [weak self] in for await purchase in PurchaseIntent.intents { guard let self else { continue } let product = purchase.product await self.purchaseProduct(product) } } } where purchaseProduct() will perform the call to: try await product.purchase() ISSUE: When the app is in background (after previously launched), and the purchase intent is initiated from Xcode Transaction Manager or using the "itms-services://?action=purchaseIntent" method, the system foregrounds my app but the purchase intent is never delivered to the waiting listener. The intent remains queued until the next cold launch (quit app and relaunch app). This could mean that if a user has installed the app, and has run the app, then tapped the promotional IAP from the App Store, the purchase intent will not show up until the next cold launch. If the app is in quit state, then the system will foreground the app, and purchase intent is delivered correctly. STEPS TO REPRODUCE Launch app (listener starts in StoreKitManager.init()) Background app Add purchase intent via Xcode Transaction Manager Foreground app Result: No purchase sheet appears, no intent delivered Workaround attempts: Using this either in a view or the main app: func checkForPurchaseIntents() async { for await purchaseIntent in PurchaseIntent.intents { await storeKit.purchaseProduct(purchaseIntent.product) } } Applied to .onChange(of: scenePhase) - Doesn't work, nothing happens. Using UIApplication.willEnterForegroundNotification - Only works on the first time the app goes from background to foreground when purchase intent is sent. Doesn't work on second time or third time. • Attempting to creating fresh listening task on each foreground - Does not work. The question is: How are we supposed to implement the PurchaseIntent API? I have checked Apple sample projects like BackyardBirds, and sample projects from WWDC on StoreKit 2 but they never implemented Purchase Intent.

the email say this notification type will be available to you in production beginning May 27, 2025, and you can test it in sandbox now. but i didn't receice this notification yet

One of our apps has 85% stuck in Billing Retry -- We are so confused. All the users are from the US, and have a one-week free trial. We had 1,000 subscriptions expire from this issue. So any help would be so appreciated.

My apps stuck on review stage. Reason of it is Guideline 2.3.2 - Performance - Accurate Metadata We noticed that your promotional image to be displayed on the App Store does not sufficiently represent the associated promoted in-app purchase. Specifically, we found the following issue with your promotional image: – Your promotional image is the same as your app’s icon. The problem is i can't change this image. My subscription is still in 'in review' stage and I don't have option like delete image or change image. I replied to the review explaining that I cannot change it as long as the subscription is under review, but I haven’t received any meaningful reply, except that I need to change promotion image to be eligible for further review(which i cant do because i haven't option to change this image). Has anyone had such a problem before?

Hi everyone, I’m seeing a strange behavior with StoreKit 2 and I’d like to know if anyone else experienced this. My subscription group “ROTA Premium” (Monthly + Annual) is currently Waiting for Review in App Store Connect. What works In Xcode’s StoreKit sandbox, everything loads correctly: Products appear Trial starts Purchases work What doesn’t work In TestFlight and App Review, StoreKit 2 returns zero products, so my paywall shows: “No subscription options found.” There are: No geo restrictions No backend No VPN/IP filtering Paid Apps Agreement is accepted App Review said the device was online, but couldn’t give technical help. My question Has anyone seen StoreKit 2 fail to load subscription products when the subscription group is still in Waiting for Review? Do subscription groups need to be reviewed together with the app version for StoreKit 2 to return them in TestFlight/App Review? Any advice would be appreciated! Thanks.

Hi, Currently, instead of using a real device and test account for in-app purchase testing, we are using Products.storekit with the Simulator. Our app offers a subscription plan with a 3-day free trial. We would like to simulate the following test scenarios: User cancels the subscription within the 3-day free trial period. User cancels the subscription after the 3-day free trial period. However, in Xcode, under Debug > StoreKit > Manage Transactions..., we couldn’t find an option to simulate a subscription cancellation. There is an option to refund the purchase, but we believe this is not the same as a cancellation. Do you have any idea how we can simulate these two cases using Products.storekit and the Simulator? Thanks in advance!

We’ve recently encountered an increased rate of purchase errors StoreKit.InvalidRequestError error 1 (https://developer.apple.com/documentation/storekit/invalidrequesterror) specifically on iOS 18.4. We suspect this might be related to the new Advanced Commerce API introduced by Apple, although we haven’t made any changes related to this API in our app. Have you experienced similar issues since the release of iOS 18.4 or when integrating the Advanced Commerce API? Any insights or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

Hi, I'm reaching out to report a recurring issue with in-app purchases on iOS that seems to be related to Apple’s transaction handling — not to third-party libraries. In my Flutter application, I use both StoreKit2 and StoreKit1 (for comparison) via different packages, including the official in_app_purchase package. However, in both cases, I’m experiencing unexpected reuse of transactionId and appTransactionId values, even when initiating fresh purchases with unique appAccountToken values. Problem Summary: Purchase Stream Returns Old Purchases When calling buyNonConsumable() with a new product, the purchase stream still returns data for a previously purchased product, despite clearing all Sandbox transactions and using a new applicationUserName for each attempt. Transaction IDs Reused Across Distinct Purchases Even when generating a new UUID for appAccountToken on each purchase, the returned appTransactionId and transactionId are reused — this breaks our server-side logic, which expects these fields to uniquely identify purchases and users. Example Logs: // First purchase { "appAccountToken": "2d5a0880-f68e-44a7-a414-f51204e63904", "appTransactionId": "704464472748013865", "transactionId": "2000000928154716" } // Second purchase (different user context) { "appAccountToken": "2d5a0880-f68e-44a7-a414-f51204e63904", "appTransactionId": "704464472748013865", "transactionId": "2000000928429780" } Even when using a different productId, the appTransactionId stays the same. When using StoreKit1, the productId updates properly, but the transactionId still matches the previous one. This behavior also affects App Store Server Notifications (V2): we have observed notifications tied to appAccountTokens from completely different user accounts (based on internal logs), sometimes delayed by days or weeks. I’ve prepared a reproducible example using the official Flutter in_app_purchase sample with minimal changes — you can find it here: Github gist The code is almost identical to the package example. I only added UUID generation for applicationUserName in _getToken(). In the actual app (not in this example), I retrieve the token from an API. Additional Observations from the Community: We’ve also found similar issues reported in other frameworks and languages. For instance, a developer using react-native-iap observed that App Store Server Notifications in TestFlight were tied to previously deleted users, even after signing up with a new user account and generating a new appAccountToken. Details here: User A deleted → User B signs up → receives upgrade event with User A’s token Notification uses appAccountToken from old account, not the new one This strengthens the suspicion that the issue may be related to how Apple associates transactions with Apple IDs in test environments. Questions: Is it expected for transactionId or appTransactionId to persist across purchases within the same Apple ID, even for different user contexts (e.g., separate logins in the same app)? Is there any official recommendation for avoiding this kind of data reuse in Sandbox or TestFlight environments? Should I expect appAccountToken in server notifications to always match the latest value provided during the purchase? Thank you in advance for your assistance. I would appreciate any clarification or advice regarding this issue, as it impacts production logic that relies on these identifiers being unique and consistent.

Hi everyone, I’m facing an issue where StoreKit is returning 0 products from the App Store, even though my auto-renewable subscriptions are approved in App Store Connect. When calling queryProductDetails using Flutter’s in_app_purchase package (which uses StoreKit under the hood), StoreKit reports success but returns an empty list. The logs show the following error: IAPError(code: storekit_no_response, source: app_store, message: "StoreKit: Failed to get response from platform.") InAppPurchase.isAvailable() returns true, but no product details are received. Already verified: • Subscriptions are approved in App Store Connect • Product identifiers in the app match those in App Store Connect exactly • In-App Purchase capability is enabled in Xcode • Paid Applications Agreement, banking, and tax details are active and complete • Using the latest version of the Flutter in_app_purchase package StoreKit should normally return the list of available products in the production environment, but it consistently returns an empty array along with the “storekit_no_response” error. Has anyone else encountered this issue or found any potential causes for StoreKit failing to return products in the production environment? Any insights would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

Hi everyone, I’m implementing subscriptions using StoreKit v2, and I’ve noticed a behavior change starting with iOS 26.1. I’d like to ask if anyone else has experienced the same issue. ■ Issue Immediately after purchasing a new subscription, the value of auto_renew_status (or autoRenewStatus) returned in the receipt is 0 (auto-renew OFF). This issue occurs on iOS 26.1. On iOS 26.0 and earlier, the same parameter returned 1 (auto-renew ON) right after purchase. Sometimes, after executing a “restore” operation, the value changes to 1 later. Since we’ve been using this parameter to determine whether a user’s subscription is active or not, the current behavior is causing some difficulties on our end. ■ Questions Has anyone else observed this issue (where autoRenewStatus is 0 immediately after purchase on iOS 26.1 or later)? How are you handling or working around this behavior in your implementation? If autoRenewStatus is unreliable, we’re considering determining the subscription state based on receipt fields instead. Would this approach be reasonable? "status" is 1 (indicates active subscription) "expire_time" is in the future "deleted_at" is null If anyone has encountered the same behavior or knows of any Apple-recommended implementation approach, I’d really appreciate your insights. Thank you! 🙏

I have the typical StoreKit 2 manager class, where I check currentEntitlements for subscription. I have filed a feedback (FB22349195), I hope someone can take a look at it. func updateCustomerProductStatus() async { var activeSubscription: String? = nil // BUG: In some cases the currentEntitlements does not emit a transaction until the device is reboot for await result in Transaction.currentEntitlements { print("Found transaction: \(result)") // This print does not appear until a restart! do { let transaction = try checkVerified(result) // Skip revoked transactions if transaction.revocationDate != nil { print("Skipping revoked transaction for \(transaction.productID)") continue } // Skip expired subscriptions if let expirationDate = transaction.expirationDate, expirationDate < Date() { print("Skipping expired subscription for \(transaction.productID)") continue } // Check product type switch transaction.productType { case .autoRenewable: activeSubscription = transaction.productID default: break } } catch { print("Unable to verify transaction: \(error)") } } // Update state once after processing all entitlements self.activeSubscription = activeSubscription print("updateCustomerProductStatus() activeSubscription: \(activeSubscription ?? "nil")") } There is some unexpected behavior where the currentEntitlements does not emit a result until the iPhone device is reboot. This bug appeared in iOS 26.4 (and in the betas).

iOS 26.4系统上，我们发现三个问题： 1.调用了finishTransaction接口，但是在App重新启动后，[SKPaymentQueue defaultQueue].transactions仍然会有这笔订单。 2.支付完成后，[[NSBundle mainBundle] appStoreReceiptURL]]，拿到的票据解析出来里面的商品是空的，需要延迟2秒钟左右在调用[[NSBundle mainBundle] appStoreReceiptURL]]才能获取有效票据。 3.支付完成后，如果用户没有点击最后弹出的确认弹框，等待5秒钟，系统会自己回调 - (void)paymentQueue:(SKPaymentQueue *)queue updatedTransactions:(NSArray<SKPaymentTransaction *> *)transactions; 代理方法。正常应该是用户点击了最后弹出的确认弹框，在回调- (void)paymentQueue:(SKPaymentQueue *)queue updatedTransactions:(NSArray<SKPaymentTransaction *> *)transactions;方法。 我们在苹果开发者论坛上面找到其他开发者反馈的类似问题，链接如下： https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/817700 https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/792437?answerId=849557022#849557022 https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/817834 https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/817706 https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/818586 我们有大量用户升级到了26.4系统，这对于我们造成了巨大的困扰，我们需要你们的帮助，感谢！

Hi everyone, I'm building an iOS app using Capacitor 6 with Swift Package Manager (SPM). I have a custom native plugin (AppleIAPPlugin) for StoreKit 2 In-App Purchases that lives in the App target (not as an SPM package). Despite compiling successfully, the JavaScript bridge throws: "AppleIAP" plugin is not implemented on ios Setup AppleIAPPlugin.swift: swift import Foundation import Capacitor import StoreKit @objc(AppleIAPPlugin) public class AppleIAPPlugin: CAPPlugin, CAPBridgedPlugin { public let identifier = "AppleIAPPlugin" public let jsName = "AppleIAP" public let pluginMethods: [CAPPluginMethod] = [ CAPPluginMethod(name: "getProducts", returnType: CAPPluginReturnPromise), CAPPluginMethod(name: "purchase", returnType: CAPPluginReturnPromise), CAPPluginMethod(name: "restorePurchases", returnType: CAPPluginReturnPromise), CAPPluginMethod(name: "getCurrentEntitlements", returnType: CAPPluginReturnPromise), CAPPluginMethod(name: "openManageSubscriptions", returnType: CAPPluginReturnPromise), ] @objc func getProducts(_ call: CAPPluginCall) { /* StoreKit 2 implementation */ } @objc func purchase(_ call: CAPPluginCall) { /* ... */ } // etc. } AppleIAPPlugin.m: objc #import <Foundation/Foundation.h> #import <Capacitor/Capacitor.h> CAP_PLUGIN(AppleIAPPlugin, "AppleIAP", CAP_PLUGIN_METHOD(getProducts, CAPPluginReturnPromise); CAP_PLUGIN_METHOD(purchase, CAPPluginReturnPromise); CAP_PLUGIN_METHOD(restorePurchases, CAPPluginReturnPromise); CAP_PLUGIN_METHOD(getCurrentEntitlements, CAPPluginReturnPromise); CAP_PLUGIN_METHOD(openManageSubscriptions, CAPPluginReturnPromise); ) MyBridgeViewController.swift (custom bridge to register the plugin): swift import UIKit import Capacitor class MyBridgeViewController: CAPBridgeViewController { override open func capacitorDidLoad() { bridge?.registerPluginType(AppleIAPPlugin.self) } } Main.storyboard points to MyBridgeViewController (module: App) instead of CAPBridgeViewController. TypeScript side: typescript import { registerPlugin } from "@capacitor/core"; export const AppleIAP = registerPlugin("AppleIAP"); What I've verified Both .swift and .m files are in the Xcode project's Compile Sources build phase nm on the compiled binary confirms OBJC_CLASS_$_AppleIAPPlugin symbol exists The build succeeds with zero errors Other SPM-based Capacitor plugins (Share, Media, NativeAudio) work fine — they have pluginMethods and jsName symbols in the binary; my custom plugin does NOT A bridging header (App-Bridging-Header.h) is configured with #import <Capacitor/Capacitor.h> What I've tried (all failed) .m file with CAP_PLUGIN macro only (no CAPBridgedPlugin in Swift) Added CAPBridgedPlugin protocol conformance to Swift class Created MyBridgeViewController subclass with registerPluginType() in capacitorDidLoad() Removed/added override public func load() method Added #import <Foundation/Foundation.h> to .m file Various bridging header configurations Multiple clean builds and derived data wipes Environment Xcode 16 Capacitor 6 (via SPM, binary xcframework) iOS 17+ deployment target Physical device testing (not simulator) Question How should a custom plugin in the App target be registered with Capacitor 6 when using SPM? The SPM-based plugins from node_modules get auto-discovered, but my custom plugin in the App target does not. Is there a step I'm missing to make registerPluginType() work, or should I structure my custom plugin as a local SPM package instead? Any guidance would be greatly appreciated.

Hello, I’m trying to understand which Apple subscription offer best fits a coupon-like flow in our app. Our ideal case is a 1-month Pro benefit that users can trigger inside the app: without entering a code manually possibly more than once over time then continue into a normal paid auto-renewable subscription Ideally, this would work for new, existing, and lapsed users, and if possible, even for users who are already actively subscribed (though that part is not required). From the docs, I understand that: Offer Codes require redemption Promotional Offers are for existing or previously subscribed users Introductory Offers are for new eligible users Win-Back Offers are for lapsed subscribers So my questions are: Is there any Apple-supported way to do this without manual code entry? Can the same user receive this kind of 1-month benefit multiple times over time? Which offer type is the closest fit? Is this use case partly incompatible with Apple’s subscription system? Thanks.

I’m working on a Flutter application that implements subscriptions using in-app purchases (IAP). I currently have two apps under the same developer account: One for staging One for production In App A (staging), I successfully created a monthly subscription with the product ID: rc_1299_monthly However, when I try to create a subscription with the same product ID (rc_1299_monthly) in App B (production), I encounter the following error: "The Product ID you entered is already being used by another subscription." My understanding was that product IDs are scoped per app, but this error suggests there may be account-level constraints. Has anyone encountered this before? Is it required to use unique product IDs across all apps under the same account, or is there a recommended approach for handling staging vs production setups? Any clarification or best practices would be appreciated.

Hi all, I am adding the following StoreKit 2 code to my app, and I don't see anything in Apple's documentation that explains the unverified case. When is that case exercised? Is it when someone has tampered with the app receipt? Or is it for more mundane things like poor network connectivity? // Apple's docstring on `shared` states: // If your app fails to get an AppTransaction by accessing the shared property, see refresh(). // Source: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/storekit/apptransaction/shared var appTransaction: VerificationResult<AppTransaction>? do { appTransaction = try await AppTransaction.shared } catch { appTransaction = try? await AppTransaction.refresh() } guard let appTransaction = appTransaction else { AppLogger.error("Couldn't get the app store transaction") return false } switch appTransaction { case .unverified(appTransaction, verificationError): // For what reasons should I expect this branch to be entered in production? return await inspectAppTransaction(appTransaction, verifiedByApple: false) case .verified(let appTransaction): return await inspectAppTransaction(appTransaction, verifiedByApple: true) } Thank you, Lou

Hello, We are facing an issue with In-App Purchases (subscriptions) in two iOS apps built with React Native + react-native-iap. Issue Some users receive the error: E_CONNECTION_CLOSED during the purchase flow. However: The payment is successfully deducted via the App Store. The subscription appears in the user's Apple ID subscription list. But on our side: The app does not receive the StoreKit transaction callback No receipt or transaction ID is delivered Our backend cannot validate the purchase. Restore Purchases When affected users try Restore Purchases, StoreKit returns: No purchases found even though the subscription is visible in their Apple ID. Most affected users are from India, and many payments are made via UPI through App Store billing. Has anyone experienced a case where: the user is charged the subscription exists in Apple ID but StoreKit never returns the transaction or receipt? Any suggestions on how to recover these transactions would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

Hello, I am investigating a case where two different transaction IDs appear to refer to the same purchase, and I would like clarification on whether this behavior is expected. Additional context StoreKit version: StoreKit 1 (SKPaymentTransaction) Environment: Production Product type: Auto-renewable subscription Transaction sources The values are obtained from the following APIs: transaction_id from SKPaymentTransaction https://developer.apple.com/documentation/storekit/skpaymentqueue receipt_data from the App Store receipt https://developer.apple.com/documentation/foundation/bundle/appstorereceipturl Observed behavior After an In-App Purchase completes, the app receives: a transaction_id from SKPaymentTransaction the corresponding receipt_data for the purchase When inspecting the receipt, the transaction_id inside latest_receipt_info differs from the transaction_id received directly from the purchase transaction. For clarity: A = transaction_id received from the purchase flow (SKPaymentTransaction) A' = transaction_id found in receipt_data.latest_receipt_info The two values are different, but they differ only by 1. Additional observation The original_transaction_id for A and A' is identical, which suggests that both transaction IDs belong to the same subscription purchase chain. Pattern observation on the ID difference We have observed that the difference between A and A' is consistently exactly 1 (i.e., A' = A + 1) across multiple transactions, not just a single case. This appears to be a reproducible pattern rather than a coincidence. This observation raises an additional question (Question 6 below). API verification When calling: GET /inApps/v1/transactions/{transactionId} Both A and A' return what appears to be the same purchase record. The response data is effectively identical except for the transactionId field. However, when calling: GET /inApps/v2/history/{transactionId} A does not appear in the transaction history only A' appears in the history response Questions If A does not appear in transaction history, where does this transaction ID originate from? Why does Get Transaction Info (/inApps/v1/transactions/{transactionId}) return a valid response for A even though it is not present in the transaction history? Why do A and A' both resolve to what appears to be the same purchase? In this situation, which transaction ID should be treated as the canonical transaction ID for server-side validation? Is this difference related to how StoreKit 1 (SKPaymentTransaction) and the App Store Server API represent transactions? Is the consistent off-by-one difference between the transaction_id from SKPaymentTransaction and the one recorded in latest_receipt_info an intentional behavior of StoreKit 1's internal transaction ID assignment? Specifically, we are wondering whether StoreKit 1 applies some form of internal offset when delivering the transaction ID to the client, while the App Store server records a different (adjacent) ID in the receipt. If so, is this documented anywhere? Note We are currently in the process of migrating to StoreKit 2, but this behavior was observed while investigating our existing StoreKit 1 implementation. Any clarification would help us better understand the correct transaction model during the migration.