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?

操作步骤：1:调用let eligible = try await AgeRangeService.shared.isEligibleForAgeFeatures，返回YES后，再次调用 let response = try await AgeRangeService.shared.requestAgeRange(ageGates:18, in: viewController) switch response { case .declinedSharing: DispatchQueue.main.async { completion(.declinedSharing, nil, nil) } case .sharing(let swiftRange): DispatchQueue.main.async { let model = ARAgeRange(swiftRange: swiftRange) completion(.sharing, model, nil) }

We are using AgeRangeService.requestAgeRange(ageGates:in:) with an age gate of 18 to verify adult users. The system prompt always displays the lower-bound wording (“17 or Younger”), even when the app’s requirement is to verify users who are 18 or older. We understand the UI is system-controlled; however, this wording causes confusion for users, QA, and product teams, as it appears to indicate a child-only flow even when requesting adult verification. Based on the demonstration video, it appears that they have another more coherent message. In Apple's example, it is different, and it is correct that we need to specify 18 years or older in the implementation. A little more context might be helpful, but we are creating a kind of wrapper with React Native that receives that value as a parameter, which is 18.

While preparing my app for Declared Age Range capability usage, I've noticed a weird behaviour: the same code works for iOS, but not for macOS. My project uses same target for both platforms, so the capability is enabled for both platforms. The business logic layer is also shared across between platforms. Both UI layers are writter in SwiftUI. The iCloud account used for testing on iOS and macOS devices is the same, so even the consent is shared across both devices. While requestAgeRange(ageGates:) seems to work just fine for iOS app, for macOS app it always throws Not available error (DeclaredAgeRange.AgeRangeService.Error.notAvailable) Am I missing something? Could the API be somehow unavailable for macOS? Should I use AgeRangeService.shared.requestAgeRange(ageGates:in:) for macOS instead of SwiftUI's @Environment-based approach? Also, after giving permission, is there a way to actually revoke it? In Age Range for Apps menu I can only view the list of apps that have my consent to share my age range, but not the ability to revoke it.

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.

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?

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.

[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{ }];

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

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

We are getting the above mentioned error while uploading to TestFlight. We have used a Swift Class to request for the Age Range via DeclaredAgeRange Framework. We have exposed Swift class and a helper function to be available in Objective-C layer. We have enabled the following build settings SWIFT_OBJC_INTERFACE_HEADER_NAME = "Common-Swift.h"; SWIFT_OBJC_BRIDGING_HEADER = "Common-Bridging-Header.h "; ALWAYS_EMBED_SWIFT_STANDARD_LIBRARIES = YES Also we are compiling the application using latest available Xcode release 17C52 Is there anything else we need to do to resolve the error?

AgeRangeService is the burning topic right now. Needless to say, Everything is so unclear. We got our app finally into the TestFlight for QA and the product to test. only to find out that AgeAssurance for sandbox testing does not work. There is no document confirming or denying whether and when age assurance for the App with the release configuration in test flight would work. There isn't any guidance from Apple on whether an app that sells physical goods, such as an e-commerce app, can continue doing business as usual. Also, there is no clarity that the Age assurance options are off, 13, unverified, 13 verified, and so on. How those should be used.

I have a Apple Developer accounts for development purposes only and that is also used for testing builds via TestFlight. Is the Age Ratings Responses updates due by the end of January 2026 still required even to send builds to TestFlight?

I've been trying to follow Apple's testing age assurance documentation here. After following each step and setting my user as "Texas, child 16-17, significant change declined", the AgeRangeService consistently throws the notAvailable error: do { let response = try await AgeRangeService .shared.requestAgeRange(ageGates: 18, in: self) // ... } catch AgeRangeService.Error.notAvailable { // Always throws this error }

Is there a setting in Settings for None, Ask, or Always for Declared Age? I cannot find anything in iOS 26.2 Settings app, nothing comes up in a search for "age" in Settings. I managed to setup a sandbox apple account (after creating a new email address) and I was able to go to Settings->Developer, login to the sandbox account, and try the various settings for age there, so that much is working. When I call AgeRangeService.shared.requestAgeRange(ageGates: 18, in: presenter) I get "The operation couldn’t be completed. (DeclaredAgeRange.AgeRangeService.Error error 0.)" Is there a way to test this with my regular personal apple unpaid developer account, my work apple developer account with MS SSO, or with the sandbox user? Should I be using requestAgeRange or isEligibleForAgeFeatures? We just have a regular app on the store, it doesn't have chat or anything like that, it's used by licensed truck drivers mostly CDL holders who are 99.99% 18+ in age, possibly some exceptions for 16+ farm drivers. And we would like to stay compliant. Other caveats are that only iOS 26.2 and up are supported, and a judge has blocked the Texas law. Is Apple still supporting the Declared Age Framework or has there been a change?

1)What's the relationship between ""Texas, child, 16-17, significant change declined" from my 11:03 screenshot below and "revoking"? ie what situation could someone decline but not revoke or vice versa, what is the purpose of the distinction in testing or legally or implications/implementation 2) What is a cause besides a typo to receive the "Can't trigger notification" titled message after using "Revoke"? you can see by my screenshot by comparing the left and right half there is no title. 3) Even if i find a workaround perhaps my info will help someone else or be an opportunity for improved documentation see: see my 5:54pm second screenshot

I can't see that capability, anyone knows why..? does it have to be a paid developer account?

I've tried pass different value like 13,16,18, but I don't see any difference..? could anyone tell what could happen differently if I pass a different value here?

I found currently there is no way to revoke sharing age to an app after I shared to it, no matter in testing or in app settings

Hi all, I've been attempting to implement the Texas age range restrictions for an app I work on. I've banged my head against it for the last week and have a flow that is 99% working. I have all of the cases working exceptt when a significant change is approved. The issue I'm running into, is that let responsesSequence = AskCenter.shared.responses(for: SignificantAppUpdateTopic.self) is not receiving a response the first time it's called. It's only after the second time it's called that a response is registered and then I allow a user to access my app. When I set significant app change declined, then responses(for: ) returns on the first call to it. I can't for the life of my figure out why one works and the other doesn't. Has anyone else encountered this or have suggestions for me? I'm happy to post more code here in order to come to a resolution on this issue.