I'm developing for compliance with Texas law in the United States. Currently, I'm encountering an issue where I want to test the feature point "when the app undergoes significant changes, a supervised user initiates a request." However, during actual testing, the app pops up an error message: "Can't Ask, An Unknown error occurred." Additionally, I see the following error message in the Xcode Console: "Error Domain=AskToCore.ATMessageComposeValidationError Code=4 'The user is in a region that does not support this type of ask.' UserInfo={NSLocalizedFailureReason=The user must be in a supported region to use this feature., NSLocalizedRecoverySuggestion=Please ensure the user is in an eligible region., NSLocalizedDescription=The user is in a region that does not support this type of ask.}" I am indeed not in the Texas region. I want to conduct full-process testing before the feature is released to the App Store. What should I do? Apart from Sandbox testing (which, in fact, doesn't show any pop-ups either), how can I test under real-world conditions?

Hello, we get in touch as we need some guidance from Apple regarding age verification for minors in our app. Our app supports iOS 17 and above. The Declared Age Range API is available only starting on iOS 26, but we must comply with legal requirements (e.g., Texas SB 2420) and ensure that minor users cannot access certain sections of the app, regardless of the version of the operating system. Our question: What is the correct and Apple-approved approach for handling age verification and restricting access for minor users on iOS versions prior to 26, given that the Declared Age Range API is not available on those systems? We want to ensure that our implementation aligns with the regulations, the App Store Review Guidelines and platform expectations.

#1) The docs for the significantAppChangeApprovalRequired option (https://developer.apple.com/documentation/declaredagerange/agerangeservice/parentalcontrols/significantappchangeapprovalrequired) are a bit unclear of the meaning. If this is set to true, does that mean (a) its an indication from Apple that the user is in a jurisdiction that requires approvals for significant app changes or (b) the App store has detected a significant app change and the app needs to use PermissionKit to re-obtain approval. #2) In section Sec.A121.053 of SB2420, it states "The developer of a software application shall provide notice to each app store through which the developer makes the software application available before making any significant change..." and there are several subsections that define what constitutes a signficant app change that include items like "change of personal data stored", etc. How can developers notify the app store that a significant change has occurred and how can the app then query the app store to detect these changes?

I develop and maintain an app for craft breweries. It is very clearly 18+ due to frequent references of alcohol. Integrating DeclaredAgeRange is pretty straightforward, I should ask for the age signal, and check / require the user to be 18+ to align with my app terms of service. Under the limit, user declined, and unavailable, YOU SHALL NOT PASS. The moment that I introduce the concept of having an 'admin' or 'brewery mode' of that same public app, things break down. Why? Because I would be enabling this brewery or admin mode to run when the app is installed via MDM, and configured via MDM. The downside of this strategy is that Business Essentials for as long as it has listed, has not supported app-based configuration. Neither the legacy configuration, nor the new ManagedApp framework configuration. FB19980558 - Business Essentials: Add Support for Managed App Configuration (via UserDefaults) and newer Managed App Framework (August 2025) FB13398533 - Business Essentials: Add ability to send managed application configuration to an application installed via Apple Small Business Essentials app (November 2023) FB9967549 - Business Essentials: Add ability to send MDM Configuration payload to MDM managed applications (March 2022) There is a real integration issue when trying to use a public app on MDM devices. Making a fully custom app distribution is an option, then don't do Age Assurance in it, but, that doesn't seem to fit with the new regional requirements because even a Custom App is still distributed using App Store technologies and I don't want to argue semantics and play it safe, and a custom app also introduces additional friction for B2B customers that can't just find it on the App Store to buy licenses for the app. In the context of the app being installed via MDM, the user's age range might not be available, after all the device could be 'supervised' and considered company owned--the user might not even be able to sign in. I could be a warehouse iPad shared amongst workers and not really have a singular 'identity'. I'd like Apple to provide a mechanism to enable developers to make apps that do age assurance for standard downloads via DeclaredAgeRange API as it exists today, and, add support for these MDM based installs. I will assume that the App Configuration solution is out of the picture due to the lack of adoption by MDM vendors, including Business Essentials. So the next best thing would be a configuration profile, either a new restriction, or new enablement, that tells the DeclaredAgeRange system missing details. I can't just assume that if I can detect installed via MDM that it is enough and to allow the user to pass when the age signal comes up as notAvailable. I need to go further because of Apple School Manager. With respect to DeclaredAgeRange and MDM I see these scenarios: Installed via Apple School Manager MDM for K-12 - Minor (student) Installed via Apple School Manager MDM for K-12 - Adult (instructor, older student) Installed via Apple School Manager MDM for College - Minor / Adult (student) Installed via Apple School Manager MDM for College - Adult (student | instructor) Then the business side Installed via Apple Business Manager MDM - Adult (employee) Installed via Apple Business Manager MDM - Minor (younger worker, 16+?) In my particular instance, 18+ app with a hard 'you need to be 18' requirement, I'd only want to allow a pass through and more or less 'AgeRangeDeclaration.verifiedByMDM' or something to that nature. I think that Age Assurance should be built into the platform to support ABM and ASM use cases. Assuming that a personal Apple Account can be used by DeclaredAgeRange API when installed via MDM (user-enrolled or supervised), the argument can easily be made to 'just have the user sign in with a personal account'. But for several reasons this won't be feasible at all times. Either due to device restrictions, or a supervised device is shared amongst employees (brewery warehouse / inventory). FB21340165 - DeclaredAgeRange: Add mechanism to determine that no signal is available due to mdm-based install

Hello, I’m currently reviewing and implementing age assurance and parental approval flows using AgeRangeService and PermissionKit (AskCenter) in the context of Texas regulatory compliance requirements. While the high-level APIs are clear, there are several technical aspects where the intended usage patterns are not fully explicit in the documentation. Clarification on these points would help ensure our implementation aligns with system expectations and regulatory obligations. ⸻ Querying the current approval state for SignificantAppUpdateTopic AskCenter.ask(...) returns Void, and AskCenter.responses(for:) provides an AsyncSequence of approval events. Is there an official or recommended way to determine whether a SignificantAppUpdateTopic has already been approved when the app launches, or is listening for future responses events the only supported mechanism? ⸻ Behavior of AskCenter.responses(for:) regarding past approvals When subscribing to AskCenter.responses(for:): • Does the stream replay previously recorded approval or decline decisions? • Or does it only emit events that occur after subscription? This affects whether the listener must be registered early in the app lifecycle. ⸻ Recommended lifecycle timing for registering a responses(for:) listener What is the intended or recommended time to register a responses(for:) listener? • At application launch • Immediately before calling ask(...) • When entering a specific gated feature Clarification on the expected lifecycle usage would be helpful. ⸻ Repeated calls to ask(...) after approval If AskCenter.ask(...) is called again for the same SignificantAppUpdateTopic after parental approval has already been granted: • Is the request ignored? • Is a new approval request sent to the parent? • Or is the call handled idempotently by the system? ⸻ Delivery of approval results when the child app is not running If a parent approves or declines a SignificantAppUpdateTopic while the child app is not running: • Will the approval decision be delivered as a responses(for:) event on the next app launch? • Or is the app expected to persist approval state locally? ⸻ Persistence of approval state Is the approval decision for SignificantAppUpdateTopic persisted by the system at the OS level, or is the app responsible for storing approval state? Additionally, does the approval persist across: • app restarts? • app deletion and reinstallation? ⸻ Meaning of activeParentalControls.significantAppChangeApprovalRequired How is activeParentalControls.significantAppChangeApprovalRequired determined? • Is this value explicitly configured by a parent (for example via Screen Time)? • Or is it automatically determined by the system based on region, age, or regulatory requirements? ⸻ Relationship between significantAppChangeApprovalRequired and AgeRangeService When activeParentalControls contains significantAppChangeApprovalRequired, is it still expected that apps call AgeRangeService.requestAgeRange(...)? Or can the presence of this flag be treated as sufficient indication that the user is a minor for gating purposes? ⸻ Recommended interpretation of AgeRangeDeclaration Is the intended usage of AgeRangeDeclaration to handle each case individually, or is it acceptable and recommended to interpret the values as different trust levels (for example, self-declared vs. government ID or payment verified)? ⸻ Clarification on these points would help ensure that implementations of age assurance and parental approval flows are consistent with system behavior while meeting regulatory compliance requirements. Thank you for your guidance.

Hello, I’m currently reviewing and implementing age assurance and parental approval flows using AgeRangeService and PermissionKit (AskCenter) in the context of Texas regulatory compliance requirements. While the high-level APIs are clear, there are several technical aspects where the intended usage patterns are not fully explicit in the documentation. Clarification on these points would help ensure our implementation aligns with system expectations and regulatory obligations. ⸻ Querying the current approval state for SignificantAppUpdateTopic AskCenter.ask(...) returns Void, and AskCenter.responses(for:) provides an AsyncSequence of approval events. Is there an official or recommended way to determine whether a SignificantAppUpdateTopic has already been approved when the app launches, or is listening for future responses events the only supported mechanism? ⸻ Behavior of AskCenter.responses(for:) regarding past approvals When subscribing to AskCenter.responses(for:): • Does the stream replay previously recorded approval or decline decisions? • Or does it only emit events that occur after subscription? This affects whether the listener must be registered early in the app lifecycle. ⸻ Recommended lifecycle timing for registering a responses(for:) listener What is the intended or recommended time to register a responses(for:) listener? • At application launch • Immediately before calling ask(...) • When entering a specific gated feature Clarification on the expected lifecycle usage would be helpful. ⸻ Repeated calls to ask(...) after approval If AskCenter.ask(...) is called again for the same SignificantAppUpdateTopic after parental approval has already been granted: • Is the request ignored? • Is a new approval request sent to the parent? • Or is the call handled idempotently by the system? ⸻ Delivery of approval results when the child app is not running If a parent approves or declines a SignificantAppUpdateTopic while the child app is not running: • Will the approval decision be delivered as a responses(for:) event on the next app launch? • Or is the app expected to persist approval state locally? ⸻ Persistence of approval state Is the approval decision for SignificantAppUpdateTopic persisted by the system at the OS level, or is the app responsible for storing approval state? Additionally, does the approval persist across: • app restarts? • app deletion and reinstallation? ⸻ Meaning of activeParentalControls.significantAppChangeApprovalRequired How is activeParentalControls.significantAppChangeApprovalRequired determined? • Is this value explicitly configured by a parent (for example via Screen Time)? • Or is it automatically determined by the system based on region, age, or regulatory requirements? ⸻ Relationship between significantAppChangeApprovalRequired and AgeRangeService When activeParentalControls contains significantAppChangeApprovalRequired, is it still expected that apps call AgeRangeService.requestAgeRange(...)? Or can the presence of this flag be treated as sufficient indication that the user is a minor for gating purposes? ⸻ Recommended interpretation of AgeRangeDeclaration Is the intended usage of AgeRangeDeclaration to handle each case individually, or is it acceptable and recommended to interpret the values as different trust levels (for example, self-declared vs. government ID or payment verified)? Clarification on these points would help ensure that implementations of age assurance and parental approval flows are consistent with system behavior while meeting regulatory compliance requirements. Thank you for your guidance.

Share Age Range Permission is set to 'Ask First'. Application requested for AgeRange via requestAgeRange API. System presented a consent window where user has to make a choice. User did not acted. Application was pushed to background. Our Application supports PushToTalk Framework and we have successfully joined the channel already. User tapped on the blue-pill , SystemUI will get presented. User tapped on the SystemUI, A New Full Screen SystemUI will get presented. User chosen 'Leave' option and our application left the active channel. 10 User brought the application to foreground and the previous "Share Age Range" system window disappeared. 11. After Step 10, We need to terminate and launch our application in order to get the "Share Age Range" system window. Is "Share Age Range" system window getting disappear is expected here or a BUG

After reading the news below, we are currently working on updating our app in preparation for the enforcement of Texas SB 2420. https://developer.apple.com/news/?id=2ezb6jhj Based on the information in the announcement, we understand that parents will be able to revoke their consent for apps. However, we are unsure how an app is supposed to obtain or verify the parent’s consent status in the first place. We reviewed the Declared Age Range API and PermissionKit’s Significant Change API, but could not find any functionality related to this. If anyone with expertise on this topic has insight, we would greatly appreciate your guidance. Thank you in advance.

As per the US state law including SB2420 in Texas. We are suppose to meet their compliance. We have following queries Could you please confirm whether the provided Declared Age Range API framework is available for sandbox testing How does the API respond for a region other than Texas

[MTAgeRangeService requestEligibility:^(BOOL eligible) { if (eligible) { //您应用程序的用户所在的地区，需要执行特定年龄相关义务 [MTAgeRangeService requestAgeRangeWithAgeGates:18 in:[ViewU getCurrentVC] completion:^(enum ARResponseType responseType, ARAgeRange * _Nullable ageRange, NSError * _Nullable error) { [weakself.ageRangeLoadingView dissmiss]; self->_ageRangeLoadingView = nil; if (responseType == ARResponseTypeSharing) { //用户同意并分享了年龄范围 if ([ageRange.lowerBound intValue] >= 18) { //满18岁可以注册 }else{ //不到18岁不能注册，提示一下 } }else{ //用户拒绝或者其他未知错误，需要提示 }else{ } } }] ; }else{ }];

I’m trying to fully understand the purpose of the ageGates parameter in the AgeRangeService.requestAgeRange API. The official documentation includes the following statement: “The system may return geo-specific age ranges that override your provided age gates based on the person’s location and applicable regulations. When geo-specific ranges are required, the returned age range reflects regulatory requirements rather than the bounds of your age gates.” Based on this, it seems that even if my app provides specific age thresholds through the ageGates parameter, the system may override those boundaries depending on regional laws or regulations, and return a completely different lowerBound / upperBound than what my age gates would suggest. My current understanding is: ageGates indicates the thresholds my app uses to define its internal feature tiers, but the actual age range returned by the OS is determined by legal or regional requirements (e.g., COPPA, GDPR-K, AADC, SB2420), meaning the returned age range may not align with the age ranges implied by my ageGates values. I’d like to confirm whether this interpretation is correct. Additionally, if different regions may produce different lowerBound / upperBound values due to regulatory requirements, then it seems that: developers shouldn’t rely on fixed age buckets, and instead must implement feature gating logic dynamically based on whatever age range the OS returns. So my questions are: Is my understanding correct that ageGates is simply a hint that describes my app’s tier thresholds, and the OS may override those boundaries to comply with local regulations? If lowerBound / upperBound can vary across regions, what is the recommended way for developers to design their feature-gating logic? Should we avoid hardcoded age buckets and instead build flexible logic that adapts to whatever range the OS returns? I’d appreciate clarification so I can design our age-based policies appropriately and in a regulation-compliant way.

We are in the process of preparing our app to support the new Texas law (SB2420) that takes effect 1/1/2026. After reviewing Apple's recent announcements​/docs concerning this subject, one thing isn't clear to me: how to associate an app install with a​n App Store Server RESCIND_CONSENT notification​ that could be delivered to our server. Our app is totally free so there isn't an originalTransactionId​ or other similar transaction IDs that would be generated as part of an in-app purchase (and then subsequently sent as part of the payload in the notification to our server during an in-app purchase scenario). So my question is: How do I associate an app (free app) install with an App Store Server RESCIND_CONSENT notification​ that is sent to our server​?

Hi Team, We are planning to implement the age verification logic in our iOS app and our app rating in AppstoreCoonnect is 16+. Our app is like eComm Application. Our customer can login into our application and order the products. Now we want to introduce the Age verification logic when user tries to purchase products from App. Could you suggest which API we should use to adhere the Age verification in our Application?

Hello, I need clarification regarding the new Declared Age Range requirement. App Name: Hanna Lab Our app is a utility/scientific BLE app that connects to instruments, reads measurement values, and displays logs in a table or a Graph. We do not collect age data or provide any age-restricted content. I would like to confirm: Is AgeRangeService mandatory for an app that does not use age-based features? Do we need to add the Declared Age Range capability in Xcode → Signing & Capabilities for such a utility app? Thanks for any guidance.

Hi Team, We have an app in appstore. Customer can login into our app and order items from Application. Our App's Age rating is 16+(As per new Age Rating policy). We want to introduce Age verification logic when user tries to order from our Application. Could you let us know which API we should to implement the age verification?

I've been writing about the DeclaredAgeRange a bit on LinkedIn and now it is time to take to the developer forums. In my efforts to prepare my apps for new local requirements, I've run across some rough edges. The DeclaredAgeRange API is missing on several platforms, and extension types. First and foremost, watchOS. An Apple Watch is a clear single user platform and for standalone apps, the DeclaredAgeRange being absent is felt by developers. FB20954931 - DeclaredAgeRange: Framework not available on watchOS making compliance a challenge for watchOS standalone apps In the same vein of thinking, while users on Apple Vision Pro are far fewer numbers than Apple Watch, it is also a miss. The tricky part would be testing on the simulator. So far I haven't gotten the simulator and sandbox testing to work and give real values across any platform. I don't think an Apple Store will let me try my app out via TestFlight on their devices and they're still too expensive to reasonably buy for most developers. Too bad Feedbacks are not a currency that developers can trade in for gear. FB20955020 - DeclaredAgeRange: Framework not available on visionOS making compliance a challenge for visionOS apps I'll recognize that the user model is different on tvOS, and that as a user while I have family group setup, I don't have any children on the account. I have to imagine that child accounts on an Apple TV exist and would be able to account for the sharing of age ranges to apps. Yes, the user could just switch profiles, but, app developers could still integrate the age range into their apps. Maybe it needs more robust system level support but here is the feedback just the same. FB20955029 - DeclaredAgeRange: Framework not available on tvOS making compliance a challenge on tvOS apps And finally, let's not forget about App Clips. While the App Clips might not be 'downloaded' from App Store itself, it is powered by App Store technologies to an extent. I'd rather not bifurcate my code more than it already is for the shared code between my apps and app clips. Rounding out platform support to App Clips, since it is iOS, would close the loop. FB20954846 - DeclaredAgeRange / App Clips: Add support for DeclaredAgeRange framework for App Clip targets - capability exist, Xcode cannot generate entitlement for it Oh wait, actually, not quite. To fully close the loop, make the DeclaredAgeRange work fully on macCatalyst. The documentation says it is compatible, but from my experiments trying to get it to even compile when targeting macCatalyst apps simply doesn't build. FB21117325 - DeclaredAgeRange: API documentation states available on mac catalyst - but fails to compile in Xcode 26.2

Hello I'm testing an 'age range sharing' feature using the AgeRangeService API in an app we service. I approved 'Age Sharing' during testing. (For your information, my account is an adult account.) For repeat testing, I would like to delete the our app from 'Apps that requested user age information' or cancel the sharing status. However, there doesn't seem to be such a feature. Is there a way I can't find, or is this a feature that Apple doesn't offer?

From https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/803945?answerId=862153022#862153022, the testing of Age Range API was not available through xcode simulator back in Oct 2025. Is this available now? In particular: Is requestAgeRange testing available through simulator? Is requestAgeRange testing with sandbox account available through simulator? Is isEligibleForAgeFeatures available through simulator? Is isEligibleForAgeFeatures testing with sandbox account available through simulator? If the answer is "yes" to any of the above, which version of the xcode and ios version should I use? So far I didn't get any of the above working on the simulator, and I can't find any documentation on the answers above. Thank you!

According to Apple's documentation at https://developer.apple.com/documentation/storekit/testing-age-assurance-in-sandbox?language=objc, the testing steps and expected responses are outlined as follows: ​Test app consent revocation​ To test the notification when a parent or guardian revokes access to your app on behalf of their child, follow these steps: Start with a Sandbox account. From the Age Assurance settings, tap ​Revoke App Consent. Enter your app’s Bundle ID (for example, com.example.bundle). Tap ​Revoke Consent​ to simulate the revocation. Confirm that the system displays ​​“Notification Triggered”​​ with the message ​​“A notification will be sent to the developer server soon.”​ I followed the steps exactly as described above, but during the fifth step, instead of seeing the prompt ​​"A notification will be sent to the developer server soon,"​​ a pop-up dialog with only a confirmation button appeared. After clicking it, there was no further response, and our server did not receive any notification (neither from the Sandbox nor the Production environment).

The published "Next steps for apps distributed in Texas" says "A parent or guardian in Texas can withdraw consent for any app, which will block launching of the app on the child or teen’s device." My question is: will this also block notifications sent to that app from showing up on that device? Or will notifications still be delivered to the notification center, even though the app can't be launched? (Specifically, notifications sent from a server via Firebase topic/token). If notifications are not blocked automatically, what is the expected flow for this scenario? My app sends notifications from a server like this. I could implement client-side code to say "if consent is revoked, unsubscribe from notifications", but if the OS blocks launching of the app, this client-side code would never run. Similarly, I could subscribe to the server notifications for when consent is revoked, but my app is free & accountless, so I'm not aware of any information in the server notification that I could use to identify the specific user whose notifications should be stopped. (For example my users won't have an appAccountToken because they never made a purchase). Guidance would be much appreciated. I'm trying to comply with the law but I don't know how.