App rejected: the subscription screen does not say enough
Guideline 3.1.2(c) asks you to describe plainly what the money buys before anybody is asked to pay, and to meet the terms in Schedule 2 of the Develop
What the rejection means
Guideline 3.1.2(c) asks you to describe plainly what the money buys before anybody is asked to pay, and to meet the terms in Schedule 2 of the Developer Program License Agreement, which is where the list of what a paywall has to show actually lives. Reviewers read the screen, not the policy.
The usual causes
- The price is shown without the period it covers, so a yearly plan reads as a monthly one.
- Nothing says the subscription renews by itself until it is cancelled.
- A free trial that becomes a paid subscription does not say when, or at what price.
- The paywall carries no working link to the terms and the privacy policy.
- The subscription lasts less than the seven days 3.1.2(a) sets as the minimum.
What to change
Put the length, the price per period, the renewal and the way out on the paywall itself, in text the reviewer can read without scrolling, and link the terms and the privacy policy from the same screen. The links have to work on the device, not only on the store listing.
Before you resubmit
- Open every URL you entered in a private window.
- Read the reviewer's message again and answer the specific point, not the general topic.
- Reply in Resolution Center saying what you changed and where to see it.
Keeping it true after launch
A legal page stops being true the moment the product moves past it, usually by adding a payment provider, an analytics SDK or a sign-in. No store re-checks your pages against your build, so the drift is yours to notice.
- Re-read it whenever you add a dependency that sees user data.
- Re-check what loads on the page after any change: the cookie notice and the policy have to agree.
- Keep the URL stable. Changing where a policy lives breaks every listing that points at it.
Common questions
How long does a resubmission take?
Usually the same as a first review. Answering the exact point raised, with a link, is what shortens it.
Can I argue a rejection?
You can, and sometimes you should. It works when the reviewer has misread something and you can show it in one sentence with a link. It rarely works as a general objection.

