Background: My app uses a third-party SDK for payments, and it uses Original StoreKit internally for IAP payments. Now I'm getting ready to migrate to StoreKit2, and during the transition, users may use either method to initiate payments, and there's no way to avoid the coexistence of StoreKit2 and Original StoreKit. Problem: When a user has an unfinished transaction, if the app is restarted, both StoreKit2 and Original StoreKit will receive a notification of the transaction: Original StoreKit's '-paymentQueue:updatedTransactions:' method StoreKit2's 'Transaction.updated' method resulting in duplicate calls to the shipping API. My current treatment is to only add '-paymentQueue:updatedTransactions:' to listen for unfinished transactions. Even if the user is using StoreKit2 to initiate the payment, if the transaction is not Finished, it will be fetched via this method after restarting the app to process this transaction. Is this approach feasible and are there any best practices for this scenario? To summarize: Is it feasible to fetch unfinished StoreKit2 transactions via Original StoreKit methods when StoreKit2 coexists with Original StoreKit? Is there a recommended way

I implemented consumable in-app purchases in an iPhone app using StoreKit's ProductView(). When I tap the payment button in ProductView(), I am taken to the payment screen and once the payment is completed, the desired code appears to be executed, so there doesn't seem to be a problem, but when I tap the payment button in ProductView() again, the desired code is executed without being taken to the payment screen. So one payment can be used any number of times. I thought I wrote it exactly according to the reference, but will it be okay in a production environment? Is there any code that is necessary?

Hello, I’m experiencing repeated rejections related to Guideline 2.1 – App Completeness for an iOS app using auto-renewable subscriptions, and I’m struggling to understand what is missing, as the purchase flow works correctly in sandbox and TestFlight. App setup: iOS app built with React Native (Expo + react-native-iap) Auto-renewable subscriptions: • Monthly: €4.99 • Yearly: €39.99 Paid Apps Agreement accepted Subscriptions configured and active in App Store Connect Privacy Policy and Apple Standard EULA included: • Visible inside the app on the subscription screen • Added in App Store metadata What App Review reports: App Review states they are unable to buy the in-app purchase, resulting in a rejection under Guideline 2.1 (App Completeness). What works correctly: getSubscriptions() returns valid products in sandbox Subscription titles, prices, and durations are displayed in the app UI requestSubscription() is triggered when tapping the subscribe button Apple purchase sheet appears and completes successfully in: • Sandbox testing • TestFlight (external testers) What I’ve verified: No conditional logic blocks purchases in review builds Purchase button always calls requestSubscription purchaseUpdatedListener and purchaseErrorListener are correctly registered No hardcoded prices; prices come from StoreKit Same behavior on iPhone and iPad Question: Is there any known limitation or requirement in the App Review environment for auto-renewable subscriptions that differs from sandbox/TestFlight when using a custom subscription UI (not SubscriptionStoreView)? If App Review requires a specific implementation detail (StoreKit 2, SubscriptionStoreView, or something else), I would really appreciate clarification, as this is not explicitly stated in the rejection. Thank you for your help.

This is a hybrid app built with JavaScript (Vue) + Capacitor. It is a reader app and has been authorized by Apple to use the External Link Account Entitlement, allowing users to manage their subscriptions outside of the app. I have implemented the External Link Account API. When I click on "Gerenciar Assinatura em...", I use the External Link Account API to check if the modal is available (using ExternalLinkAccount.canOpen()). I always get "false". my plugin in swift: my app: I believe this is due to the fact that I am in a development environment. My project is configured correctly in the following files: info.plist and App.entitlements. I also have the authorization in my profile visible in Xcode. I have attached screenshots for validation. The question is: should the External Link Account API work in a test environment? I am testing the build in Xcode with a physical iPhone with iOS 18. file info.plist: file App.entitlements: xcode with authorization in my profile: If you could let me know if I am doing something wrong, I would greatly appreciate it.

We use Transaction.currentEntitlements in StokeKit 2 to unlock functionality based on a Non-Consumable IAP but we have a case involving a refund that seems wrong and I am trying to understand the interation between transactionId, originalTransactionId & revocationReason. The Context: We have a universal App on macOS and iOS that offers a shared Non-Consumable IAP. For this example I have named it "app.lifetime" On macOS we use StoreKit 2 and I am calling the Transaction.currentEntitlements and Transaction.all functions. On iOS we are still using StoreKit 1. This example customer: Originally purchased "app.lifetime" on 2024-10-27 Was refunded by Apple for "app.lifetime" on 2024-10-29 Re-purchased "app.lifetime on 2025-02-24 (I have seen an email receipt of this transaction but it never shows up in Transaction data) (all the above happened on the mac via StoreKit 2) The Transactions (all lightly redacted for privacy): on macOS the following is returned from Transaction.currentEntitlements... { "appTransactionId" : "...8123", "bundleId" : "app", "currency" : "USD", "deviceVerification" : "...", "deviceVerificationNonce" : "...", "environment" : "Production", "inAppOwnershipType" : "PURCHASED", "originalPurchaseDate" : 1729997808000, "originalTransactionId" : "...9955", "price" : 1, "productId" : "app.lifetime", "purchaseDate" : 1729997808000, "quantity" : 1, "signedDate" : 1740416289102, "storefront" : "USA", "storefrontId" : "143441", "transactionId" : "...7511", "transactionReason" : "PURCHASE", "type" : "Non-Consumable" } Note in the above example the originalTransactionId & transactionId are different. Transaction.all however returns both transactions: [ { "appTransactionId" : "...8123", "bundleId" : "app", "currency" : "USD", "deviceVerification" : "...", "deviceVerificationNonce" : "...", "environment" : "Production", "inAppOwnershipType" : "PURCHASED", "originalPurchaseDate" : 1729997808000, "originalTransactionId" : "...9955", "price" : 1, "productId" : "app.lifetime", "purchaseDate" : 1729997808000, "quantity" : 1, "revocationDate" : 1730224102000, "revocationReason" : 0, "signedDate" : 1740415969925, "storefront" : "USA", "storefrontId" : "143441", "transactionId" : "...9955", "transactionReason" : "PURCHASE", "type" : "Non-Consumable" }, { "appTransactionId" : "...8123", "bundleId" : "app", "currency" : "USD", "deviceVerification" : "...", "deviceVerificationNonce" : "...", "environment" : "Production", "inAppOwnershipType" : "PURCHASED", "originalPurchaseDate" : 1729997808000, "originalTransactionId" : "...9955", "price" : 1, "productId" : "app.lifetime", "purchaseDate" : 1729997808000, "quantity" : 1, "signedDate" : 1740416289102, "storefront" : "USA", "storefrontId" : "143441", "transactionId" : "...7511", "transactionReason" : "PURCHASE", "type" : "Non-Consumable" } ] Note here that the original transaction ("...9955") includes a revocationDate and revocationReason that match the expected refund but the secondary transaction that seems to match on all other details is missing the revocation info. Looking at the iOS SK1 receipt data to compare, after a receipt refresh I see only a single transaction "...9955" which includes the cancellation info and transaction "...7511" is not present at all. The impact of this is that on iOS we are considering the purchase void but on macOS we are following currentEntitlements and consdering it still valid. Calling the inApps/v1/history/... server API with the "...7511" transactionId that is shown in the currentEntitlements response returns the "...9955" transaction with the correct revocation status but "...7511" is no returned at all. To Summarise: currentEntitlements on macOS shows transaction "...7511" as active and with an originalTransactionId of "...9955" all on macOS includes both "...7511" as active and "...9955" as revoked iOS reciept data shows only "...9955" as revoked Server API shows only "...9955" as revoked event when explicitly called with "...7511" Neither of them show a more recent purchase the same customer made for the same IAP product. My questions are: Is this a StoreKit bug or am I mis-understanding something? If it's a bug how can I work around it to ensure revoked purchases aren't still appearing in currentEntitlements? Under what conditions can StoreKit generate multiple transactionIds for the same underlying originalTransactionId? I had assumed (and the docs suggest) this only happens for subscriptions but here it is happening for a Non-Consumable IAP. Why would transactionId "...7511" only be present on macOS/SK2 and not visible at all on iOS/SK1 or API? I don't understand why the latest IAP from 2025-02-24 that the customer assures me they made (and has shown me the receipt for is not showing up in the Transactions history at all. Any ideas?

I want to add in-app purchasing to my app, but I can't figure out what part of my workflow is wrong. I created a product for my app in iTunes Connect (the product ID is com.mycompany.products.***) and it's in "Ready to submit" status. I created a sandbox test user for this app. I connected to iTunes on a real device using the sandbox AppleID. I went back to XCode and added in-app purchasing to my app. I turned on developer mode on the real device and logged in as the sandbox user. I built the app and ran it on a real device (not the simulator). I tried to get product information (com.mycompany.products.***) but nothing was returned. In-app purchasing is registered in App Store Connect and the status is "Ready to submit". The code only retrieves product information in a simple way, so I don't think there's a problem. inAppPurchase.getProducts(["com.mycompany.products.***"]).then(console.log).catch(console.error); But it only returns an empty array. What could be wrong? Any help would be much appreciated.

We are seeking clarification on the behavior of App Store Server Notifications V2. Summary In our production environment, we received a notification with notificationType: DID_FAIL_TO_RENEW and subtype: GRACE_PERIOD. However, the gracePeriodExpiresDate field in the payload was null. We understand this notification indicates that a user's subscription has entered a grace period. The null value for its expiration date is unexpected, and we are looking for an official explanation of this behavior and the correct way to handle it. The Scenario Here are the details of the notification we received: Notification Type: DID_FAIL_TO_RENEW Notification Subtype: GRACE_PERIOD Environment: Production Upon decoding the signedRenewalInfo JWS from the responseBodyV2, we found that the gracePeriodExpiresDate field inside the JWSRenewalInfoDecodedPayload was null. The notificationUUID for this event was in the format xxxxxxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx. Our Implementation and its Impact Our backend is designed to ensure service continuity during a grace period, as recommended in the documentation. Current Logic: Receive the DID_FAIL_TO_RENEW / GRACE_PERIOD notification. Extract the gracePeriodExpiresDate. Extend the user's subscription expiration date in our database to match this date. Because the gracePeriodExpiresDate was null in this case, our logic failed, creating a risk of service interruption for the user. Context and Investigation We have performed the following checks: App Store Connect Settings: We have confirmed that Billing Grace Period is enabled for the relevant subscription group. Sandbox Environment: We have been unable to reproduce this scenario in the Sandbox. User Context: We believe the user in this case was experiencing a failed payment when attempting to renew for the first time after a free trial period. Questions To ensure we handle this scenario correctly, we would appreciate clarification on the following points: Conditions for Null: Under what specific conditions does a DID_FAIL_TO_RENEW notification with a GRACE_PERIOD subtype contain a null gracePeriodExpiresDate? Expected Behavior: Is this null value an expected behavior for certain scenarios, such as the first failed renewal after a free trial? Best Practice: If this is an expected behavior, what is the correct way to handle it? How should our backend interpret a null gracePeriodExpiresDate to ensure service continuity for the user?

We have some users who have upgraded to iOS 26 beta3. Currently, we observe that when these users make in-app purchases, our code calls [[SKPaymentQueue defaultQueue] finishTransaction:transaction]; method, and we clearly receive the successful removal callback in the delegate method - (void)paymentQueue:(SKPaymentQueue *)queue removedTransactions:(NSArray<SKPaymentTransaction *> *)transactions. However, when users click on products with the same productId again, the method - (void)paymentQueue:(SKPaymentQueue *)queue updatedTransactions:(NSArray *)transactions still returns information about previously removed transactions, preventing users from making further in-app purchases.

When creating a subscription charging system for an iOS app, I am trying to change the display to yen, dollars, or euros depending on the user's country. I am using [priceLocale] of [SKProduct] in [StoreKit] to obtain currency information linked to the Apple account from the App Store and change the display. The smartphone I am testing on uses an Apple account created in Japan, and the nationality of the App Store is also set to Japan, so I expect the display to be in yen. As a result, the TestFligh version displayed dollars, but the official release version displayed yen. Why doesn't the TestFligh version display yen?

a UK-based user is having trouble completing an in-app purchase. after going through the typical purchase flow (tapping the button to trigger the in-app purchase sheet, completing Face ID) they see this verification sheet appear over my app and have to go to their banking app to approve the purchase. after approving the purchase from their banking app, they tap "Payment confirmed on Mobile App" to close the sheet, but then see an alert that suggests the result is .userCancelled. the purchase does not seem to have completed. the user reports not being charged (despite numerous attempts). plus, i have a "restore purchases" function on App init that would've restored a purchase if it existed. i have implemented what i think is a typical Storekit.purchase() method (again, the message the user sees is for the .userCancelled case): func purchase(productId: String) async -> (Bool, String?) { guard let product = subscriptionProducts.first(where: { $0.id == productId }) else { return (false, "Product not found") } do { let result = try await product.purchase() switch result { case .success(let verification): switch verification { case .verified(let transaction): await transaction.finish() hasSubscription = true return (true, nil) case .unverified: return (false, "Transaction verification failed") } case .userCancelled: return (false, "No worries, take your time. 😌") case .pending: return (false, "Purchase is pending") u/unknown default: return (false, "Error purchasing product. If this keeps happening, please contact [email].") } } catch { return (false, "Error purchasing product: \(error.localizedDescription)") } } has anyone dealt with this issue? i was seeing an unusually high number of .userCancelled purchase events from users outside the US, and i'm wondering if some of them were genuine purchase attempts that were blocked by this verification step. 😕

Hello, I’m integrating promotional offers for auto-renewable subscriptions using StoreKit 2. The offer is displayed correctly, the Apple purchase sheet appears, and I can start the payment flow. The sheet shows the correct discounted price and the end date of the offer. However, after confirming the purchase, an alert appears saying “Unable to Purchase - Contact the developer for more information” When dismissing the alert, Xcode logs the following: Purchase did not return a transaction: Error Domain=ASDServerErrorDomain Code=3902 "No se ha podido realizar la compra" UserInfo={ NSLocalizedFailureReason=No se ha podido realizar la compra, client-environment-type=Sandbox, AMSServerErrorCode=3902, storefront-country-code=ESP } Test environment: App installed from Xcode on a real iPhone Logged in with a Sandbox Apple ID Using StoreKit 2 Promotional offer applied using: Product.PurchaseOption.promotionalOffer(_:compactJWS:) On the server side, I generate the promotional offer signature exactly as described in Apple’s documentation: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/storekit/generating-a-signature-for-promotional-offers The signature is generated using a Subscription Key Signed with ECDSA + SHA256 Uses the correct invisible separator (U+2063) The signature is validated locally using the derived public key and verifies correctly The sandbox user has had previous subscriptions, which is why this promotional offer is eligible and shown. Given that: The offer is displayed correctly The purchase sheet shows the discounted price and duration The signature validates locally The error occurs only after confirming the purchase My question is: Is this a known limitation or issue with promotional offers in the Sandbox environment? Should promotional offers be tested exclusively via TestFlight instead of Sandbox? Any clarification would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!

"In iTunes IAP space" Give a monthly subscription with 7 days freeTrail, what would be sequence of iTunes V2 notification for the following behaviour? When an end user purchases a subscription that includes a free trial. When the user transitions from the free‑trial period to the paid subscription period.

Yesterday I noticed that if I purchase a free trial subscription in my app using a sandbox account, when the subscription expires I see a “Billing Problem” message every time I open the app. ”allow purchases &amp; renewals“ setting is ON so this shouldn’t happen. has anyone else seen this or knows how to resolve? observed on iOS 18.3.2 &amp; 16.7.10 thanks

Some paid users are unable to use the paid features unlocked by purchasing our subscription plan. It seems that this is due to StoreKit 2's Transaction.currentEntitlements not working the way we would expect it to work. Are you also encountering this issue? Do you have any idea to improve this situation? At launch, our app checks if the user is subscribed to the plan, using Transaction.currentEntitlements. As a result, the currentEntitlements array was empty. Our app then fetches the products from StoreKit 2 using Product.products(for:). As a result, the Product.SubscriptionInfo.RenewalState value of the corresponding Product (product.subscription.status.first.state) is subscribed, which confirms that the user has indeed purchased our plan, but seems to contradict the absence of the corresponding transaction in Transaction.currentEntitlements. Proactive in-app purchase restore and a restore purchase button calling the AppStore.sync() method are implemented, but using the button did not solve the issue.

We have encountered an issue when verifying transactions using the Get Transaction Info API. We tested the behavior in both the sandbox and production environments and observed the following results. When calling the production endpoint: https://api.storekit.itunes.apple.com/inApps/v1/transactions/{transactionId} with a transactionId generated in the sandbox environment, the API returns HTTP 401 Unauthorized. However, based on the documentation and common understanding, we expected HTTP 404 Not Found in this case. Using the same JWT token, if we call the sandbox endpoint: https://api.storekit-sandbox.itunes.apple.com/inApps/v1/transactions/{transactionId}, we receive HTTP 200 OK with the expected response body. We have also confirmed that the same behavior occurs when using the Get Transaction History API — it works correctly in the sandbox environment but returns 401 in production. Could you please confirm whether this behavior (receiving 401 instead of 404) is expected by design, or if it indicates a potential issue? If this is not the intended behavior, we would appreciate any guidance or instructions to resolve it. Thank you very much for your technical support. 「Get Transaction Info」APIを用いてトランザクションの検証を行ったところ、以下の問題が発生しました。 サンドボックス環境および本番環境の両方で検証を行い、次の結果を確認しています。 本番環境エンドポイント https://api.storekit.itunes.apple.com/inApps/v1/transactions/{transactionId} に対して サンドボックス環境で生成された transactionId を使用すると、HTTP 401 Unauthorized が返却されます。 （一般的には、この場合 404 Not Found が返る想定であると理解しています。） 同一のJWTトークン を用いて サンドボックス環境のエンドポイント https://api.storekit-sandbox.itunes.apple.com/inApps/v1/transactions/{transactionId} を呼び出した場合は、HTTP 200 OK が返り、期待通りのレスポンスボディを受け取ることができています。 また、同様の挙動が Get Transaction History を使用した場合にも発生することを確認しています。 サンドボックス環境では正常に動作しますが、本番環境では401が返却されます。 この挙動（401が返却されること）は仕様上想定されたものか、または何らかの問題によるものかご確認をお願いいたします。 もし想定外の挙動である場合は、解決に向けたご案内をいただけますと幸いです。 本件について、技術的なサポートをお願いいたします。 よろしくお願いいたします。

Description SKTestSession.setSimulatedError() does not throw the configured error when testing StoreKit with the .loadProducts API in iOS 26.2. The simulated error is ignored, and products load successfully instead. Environment iOS: 26.2 (Simulator) Xcode: 26.2 beta 2 (Build 17C5038g) macOS: 15.6.1 Framework: StoreKitTest Testing Framework: Swift Testing base project: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/StoreKit/implementing-a-store-in-your-app-using-the-storekit-api Expected Behavior After calling session.setSimulatedError(.generic(.notAvailableInStorefront), forAPI: .loadProducts), the subsequent call to Product.products(for:) should throw StoreKitError.notAvailableInStorefront. Actual Behavior The error is not thrown. Products load successfully as if setSimulatedError() was never called. Steps to Reproduce Create an SKTestSession with a StoreKit configuration file Call session.setSimulatedError(.generic(.notAvailableInStorefront), forAPI: .loadProducts) Call Product.products(for:) with a valid product ID Observe that no error is thrown and the product loads successfully Sample Code import StoreKitTest import Testing struct SKDemoTests { let productID: String = "plus.standard" @Test func testSimulatedErrorForLoadProducts() async throws { let storeKitConfigURL = try Self.getStoreKitConfigurationURL() let session = try SKTestSession(contentsOf: storeKitConfigURL) try await session.setSimulatedError( .generic(.notAvailableInStorefront), forAPI: .loadProducts ) try await confirmation("StoreKitError throw") { throwStoreKitError in do { _ = try await Self.execute(productID: productID) } catch let error as StoreKitError { guard case StoreKitError.notAvailableInStorefront = error else { throw error } throwStoreKitError() } catch { Issue.record( "Expect StoreKitError. Error: \(error.localizedDescription)" ) } } #expect(session.allTransactions().isEmpty) } static func execute(productID: String) async throws { guard let product = try await Product.products(for: [productID]).first( where: { $0.id == productID }) else { throw NSError( domain: "SKDemoTests", code: 404, userInfo: [NSLocalizedDescriptionKey: "Product not found for ID: \(productID)"] ) } _ = product } static func getStoreKitConfigurationURL() throws -> URL { guard let bundle = Bundle(identifier: "your.bundle.identifier"), let url = bundle.url(forResource: "Products", withExtension: "storekit") else { fatalError("StoreKit configuration not found") } return url } } Test Result The test fails because the expected StoreKitError.notAvailableInStorefront is never thrown. Question Is this a known issue in iOS 26.2 / Xcode 26.2 beta 2, or is there a different approach required for simulating errors with SKTestSession in this version? Any guidance would be appreciated. Feedback Assistant report: FB21110809

Hello, I hope to find out more about how AppTransaction works on macOS, specifically about its internet connection requirements: if I use this to validate that the app is a legit purchase from the Mac App Store, I would not want it to have an always-on requirement just to validate. Does AppTransaction require the user to always be online for AppTransaction.shared ? When an app is downloaded from the Mac App Store, is the data needed for AppTransaction automatically embedded during that download, or is that data downloaded upon first launch of the app, therefore requiring an internet connection at launch time? Once the data/receipt has been downloaded by AppTransaction, is it cached until the app's next update, or is it cleared at some time during the version's life and needs to be re-downloaded, therefore requiring an internet connection at launch? Where is that receipt/data stored? Also, if you don't mind me sneaking in this non-related but sort of related question, in terms of receipt validation: Does macOS Sequoia's MAC address rotation feature affect receipt validation in any way when using IOKit? Thank you kindly, – Matthias

Hello, We are having an issue with the RequestReview API and were hoping to get some help. We know that there is no guarantee that the in-app review modal will show and we know that there are 3 circumstances in which it will definitely not appear: if the user has turned off in-app review/ratings in their settings if the user has submitted a review for that app on that device within the last 365 days if the user has been asked for a review >3 times in the last 365 days When testing our implementation, every single one of our testers did not receive the rating modal despite the fact that we had all our testers turn on the app rating setting and that we have never asked for reviews from our app before. So that seems suspicious. While it is possible that something is up with our code (and I have provided some snippets below) we are also concerned that apple maybe is suppressing it for another reason. We really want to go live with our app review code but unfortunately we are not able to get confidence that it will ever appear for the user. Can you please help us understand why this isn't working. The code: We are using the SwiftUI approach to requesting review. Here are some relevant code snippets Important to note, we have a modal that appears when the user is in our list of active, targeted users. If they tap yes on this modal, it should show the in app rate the app system modal. If they tap no, we present them with an airship survey so that they can give feedback. Here is the code for the Yes button action: @Environment(\.requestReview) private var requestReview private var yesButton: some View { Button( action: { dismiss() requestReview() }, label: { Text(Lingua.General.appRateFirstButton) .regularParagraph() .frame(width: 180, height: 35) } ) .customButtonStyle( foregroundColor: .black, backgroundColor: Color(.powderBlue), radius: 36 ) } and this is the logic we use to determine whether we want to show them the modal in the first place. Obviously, a lot of this code leads to deeper areas in our logic and code but to give an idea... private func showAppRateModalIfNeeded() { if preferencesManager.appRateReviewShown == nil, accountManager.userAccount?.permissions.rateTheApp == true { let appReviewModalVC = UIHostingController(rootView: AppReviewModal()) appReviewModalVC.view.backgroundColor = .init(white: 0, alpha: 0.6) appReviewModalVC.modalPresentationStyle = .overFullScreen appReviewModalVC.modalTransitionStyle = .crossDissolve parentVC?.navigationController?.present(appReviewModalVC, animated: true) preferencesManager.appRateReviewShown = true } } When testing in debug, we do find that the modal appears and works as expected. However, on release builds nobody is able to trigger it. Why? Are we doing something wrong here or is Apple just suppressing it. We are thinking about implementing the button taking the user directly into the app store review but we'd prefer to do the lower-friction dialog in-app if we can get it work so the user doesn't get sent out of the app.

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.

New subscriptions have been failing to renew in the sandbox for 3 days. I am seeing multiple posts and comments from people that appear to be experiencing the same issue. But I haven't seen any feedback from Apple representatives. I really do not want to launch a new app without seeing functioning renewals in the sandbox. Is there somewhere else we are intended to seek assistance?