This is why software should not be subjected to an "app store" type distribution system, where a monopolist retains absolute control of what software can run on your devices, and can capriciously deny distribution to developers for whatever reason it likes.

Play billing "must not be used in cases where payments include … tax exempt donations"

Note: 501(c)(6) is a tax-exempt status; donations are not tax-deductible for the donor. Google's communications explicitly state "tax-exempt".

Isn't it pretty obvious that the problem is the donations aren't tax-exempt, despite the organization being tax-exempt? Your note suggests you already understand this.

Logically, the payment processor (who deals with sales taxes rather than income taxes) should worry about the taxability of the transaction rather than the tax status of the recipient, right?

Specifically, your app allows users to contribute donations to an organization that is not tax-exempt.

So whoever is writing their email is mixing these two up, but you're reading the policy itself and it is fairly clear-cut what it means for you, right?

Donations are not tax-deductible

Because we are a 501(c)(6), OSC is not a registered 501(c)(3) charity; donations to hosted member projects are not tax-deductible. This is consistent with IRS guidelines — open source donations aren't automatically classified as charitable simply because they are FOSS.

If your project has a clear charitable purpose, a 501(c)(3) fiscal sponsor may be a good fit.

- https://docs.oscollective.org/welcome-and-introduction-to-os...

The UE should make it mandatory to permit PWA install popups on all platforms.

Such problems wouldn't arise, because this app could be installable as a cached Web app. A native mobile application could be installed only for specific functionalities.

clarification on whether an IRS 501(c)(6) determination satisfies "tax exempt donations".

These donations aren't tax exempt. 501(c)(3) are tax exempt. If users are paying via Google pay these payments must be tax exempt to the *user*.

And if such AI does something wrong (which it does) no matter what they WILL REMOVE your app. Because they don't care about you. Sometimes the only way out is to publish the app again with another package identifier, because once they flagged it even if you remove all reference to the offending feature there is no way that they will accept it (it unfortunately happened, fortunately before releasing the app to the public so we could switch without affecting users).

In some sense I prefer Apple (and I say it as an Android user), you surely pay an annual fee to publish to the store, but if you have some issues you can open a ticket where a fucking real human will look into it and answer you, and explain what to to.

Also - all those monopoly-stores need to be broken up. It can not be that these mega-corporations continue to be protected by a selfish US government wanting to install monopolies globally.

It works great on Mac, and iPhone. I imagine as more people try this sort of user experience, they might wonder like I am "Why use a Google experience device at all?" Most of what I use these days is simple and the extra value-add AI features, attention driven designs that justify new OS and new hardware, and even app stores barely feel necessary. OK some people say "but banking software" but very rarely do I have to use my banking software in a way I couldn't get to in the web browser?

I believe we're very close to having a 80:20 experience designed out in both hardware and software for laptops, phones and smart watches. I can't see these monopolies holding out much longer.

https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answ...

but make sure to "pay the relevant Play service fee, starting October 1, 2026."

Very cool, Google.

are we forgetting google already announced they will shut it all down in a few months?

I'm amazed to see the exact playbook be used here. Instead of people opposing Apple's horrible App Store, it seems that every other store is studying their strategies.

I think by the time of Apple's next court case on the App Store, the judge will pay them something back as they'll arrive at the conclusion of Apple doing nothing out of the ordinary.

I am sorry, if I am wrong. Happy to be wrong too.

Epic Games v. Google: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epic_Games_v._Google

GitHub Sponsors is another way to raise for an open source organization.

Google's AI can't even line up the facts of it's own TOS as laid out in the ticket. If it's covert AI running in the background, it should at least throw out a bone as a github issue or something to let people submit on it.

In a time where marketplace options are supposed to be opening up, an app for learning ends up in the crosshairs.

As I understand it, there are ways to work around accepting payments or donations outside of the app stores.

It adds one more thing to have to do and explain to users. And even with that piece taken care of, we would need to be constantly vigilant about changes in Apple or Google policies that might eject our app from the storefront.

We are forced to remove donation links immediately from our Play Store build in 2.24.X, and are doing so under protest

So you are still complying.