# Guideline 3.2.2 Unacceptable: rejected business model fix > Guideline 3.2.2: Apple rejects features locked behind a rating and rewarded reviews. Reward actions inside your app, never on the App Store. Original page: [Guideline 3.2.2 Unacceptable: rejected business model fix](https://devoria.fr/en/blog/guideline-3-2-2-unacceptable-business-model-rejected) Author: [Mehdi Azizi](https://devoria.fr/en/mehdi-azizi) Published: 2026-11-04 Content last revised: 2026-11-04 Guideline 3.2.2 lists the business models Apple rejects. **For an indie app, the classic trap is trading a rating, a review or a download for a perk.** You can reward an action inside the app, like finishing a level or watching an ad. Not an action on the App Store. I publish my own iOS apps: Solys, TradaZen and Nolera are on the App Store. This guide is based on Apple's official text, read on October 15, 2026 in its June 8, 2026 version, and on 3.2.2 rejections published by developers. The practices mentioned below are examples. When to ask for a review falls under a different rule, which I cover in the [guideline 5.6.3](https://devoria.fr/en/blog/guideline-5-6-3-review-prompt-rejected) guide. ## What does guideline 3.2.2 say? 3.2.2 sits in section 3.2, "Other Business Model Issues", of the [App Review Guidelines](https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#3.2.2). Apple contrasts an "Acceptable" list, 3.2.1, with an "Unacceptable" list, 3.2.2. It notes that these lists aren't exhaustive. In the current version, 3.2.2 has ten clauses, two of them empty. | Clause | What's rejected | | ------ | ------------------------------------ | | (i) | A storefront for third-party apps | | (ii) | Empty ("omitted") | | (iii) | Inflating ad views, ad-driven apps | | (iv) | Donations without approval | | (v) | Restricted access for no reason | | (vi) | Empty ("omitted") | | (vii) | Inflating a ranking elsewhere | | (viii) | Binary options, CFDs without license | | (ix) | Loans above 36% APR | | (x) | Forcing users to rate, to download | For an indie app, the clause that matters most is (x): "Apps must not force users to rate the app, review the app, download other apps". It bans requiring a rating, a review, a download of another app or any other store-related action to access a feature, content or the app itself. The next sentence draws the line: "Apps may otherwise incentivize users to take specific actions within apps". The examples given: completing a level, watching an ad. The intro to [section 3](https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#3) backs this up. Apple targets reviews and rankings inflated with "paid, incentivized, filtered, or fake" feedback. The stated penalty can go as far as removal from the developer program. **You can't buy a rating or a review: not with money, not with coins, not with an unlocked feature.** ## What 3.2.2 doesn't cover Several articles online attribute to 3.2.2 cases that the current text files elsewhere. Three neighboring rules matter for an indie app. - **Charging for a system feature: 4.10.** [Guideline 4.10](https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#4.10) bans monetizing device or iOS capabilities, like push notifications, the camera or the gyroscope. It also names Apple services: iCloud storage, the Screen Time API. - **Requiring a task after purchase: 3.1.2(a).** [Rule 3.1.2(a)](https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#3.1.2) says people must get what they paid for without extra tasks: posting on social media, uploading contacts, opening the app a certain number of times. - **Switching to subscriptions: also 3.1.2(a).** You must not take the main feature away from people who already paid for it. Details are in the [guideline 3.1.2](https://devoria.fr/en/blog/guideline-3-1-2-app-rejected-subscription) guide. ## The most common cases for an indie app The four cases below are examples built to illustrate the rule. ### Unlocking a feature in exchange for a rating Example: "Rate the app to unlock dark mode." That's exactly what clause (x) bans. And the mechanism doesn't even work technically: Apple's rating prompt may not show up, and it doesn't tell your app whether the person rated. The fix: ask for the rating with the system prompt, after a success, with no conditions. Dark mode gets unlocked some other way, for free or through an in-app purchase. ### Rewarding a review or a download Example: "100 coins for a 5-star review", or an offerwall that gives coins for installing other apps. The first buys a review, and the "5-star" part filters it. The second pays for downloads. A 3.2.2 rejection from 2019, [posted on Apple's forums](https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/115883), targeted exactly an offerwall: "Your app includes content or features that can manipulate the user reviews or chart ranking on the App Store." The fix: reward actions that happen inside your app. Finishing the tutorial, winning three games, completing a challenge. ### Rewarded ads Rewarded video is allowed: clause (x) itself lists "watching an ad" among the actions an app can encourage. Two limits. Clause (iii) rejects apps designed mainly to show ads. And a 2022 rejection, [posted by a developer](https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/705534), says: "The primary purpose of your app is to encourage users to watch ads or perform marketing-oriented tasks". Another developer [reports a call with a reviewer](https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/685104) in 2021: according to him, rewards with real-world value, like cash or gift cards, weren't allowed, only in-app rewards. **Keep ads optional, and keep the reward inside the app.** The math on what they earn is in [how much a mobile app makes](https://devoria.fr/en/blog/how-much-does-a-mobile-app-make-ads-subscriptions). ### Making a free feature paid Example: an update puts PDF export, free until now, behind the subscription. No 3.2.2 clause targets this case, and the text doesn't ban changing your offer. What it protects is what was paid for: when an app switches to subscriptions, 3.1.2(a) requires leaving the main feature people already paid for to those users. Two precautions. [Guideline 2.3.2](https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#2.3.2) requires your description and screenshots to clearly show what needs a purchase: update your listing. Also explain the change in the review notes. What I'd do on top, by choice and not because it's required: keep export available to people who were already using it. The models are compared in [subscription or one-time purchase](https://devoria.fr/en/blog/subscription-vs-one-time-purchase-ios-app). ## The table: practice, 3.2.2 and compliant alternative Here's my grid before every submission. The middle column says whether the practice falls under 3.2.2, under another rule, or under none. | Practice | 3.2.2? | Compliant alternative | | ------------------------------- | ---------------------- | ----------------------------- | | Feature for a rating | Yes, clause (x) | System prompt after a success | | Coins for a review | Yes, rewarded review | Coins for a finished level | | Bonus for installing an app | Yes, clause (x) | Bonus for an in-app action | | Install offerwall | Yes, in practice | Simple rewarded video | | "Enjoying the app?" first | Risk, filtered reviews | Same prompt for everyone | | Ad video for a bonus | No, allowed | Keep it optional | | App made mostly of ads | Yes, clause (iii) | A real feature first | | Gift card for watching ads | Yes, in practice | In-app reward | | Paid notifications | No: rule 4.10 | Charge for your service | | Sharing required after purchase | No: 3.1.2(a) | Unlock as soon as paid | | Free turned paid | No, no clause | Listing and notes up to date | | Lifetime purchase removed | No: 3.1.2(a) | Honor past purchases | Two points need clarifying. "Yes, in practice" refers to the published rejections cited above, not to a clause that names these cases. The "Enjoying the app?" prompt that only sends happy users to the rating filters reviews, which is what the section 3 intro targets. I label it a risk because I haven't read a published rejection for this exact case. ## Fixing a 3.2.2 rejection The sentence after the heading tells you what the reviewer saw. Three phrasings posted on Apple's forums keep coming up: - "encourage users to watch ads or perform marketing-oriented tasks": the whole model is the problem, not one screen. - "manipulate the user reviews or chart ranking": a reward for a review or a download. - "displays or promotes third-party apps": promoting other apps, [even inside ads](https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/765722) according to one developer. Then: 1. **Remove the mechanism, not just the text.** If the reward exists in the code, the reviewer will find it. Plan a new build. 2. **Replace it with the alternative from the table.** A rating requested through the system prompt, a reward for an in-app action. 3. **Write precise review notes**: what changed, and where to check it. 4. **Appeal only if the app was misunderstood.** Reply in App Store Connect first. The [App Review Board](https://developer.apple.com/help/app-review/after-submitting-for-review/appeal-to-the-app-review-board) then accepts only one appeal per rejected app. The notes template I'd use, to adapt: ```text Hello App Review team, Thank you for your feedback regarding Guideline 3.2.2. What changed in build [X]: - Users no longer receive [reward] for [rating the app / writing a review / downloading other apps]. - [Feature] is now available [for free / through in-app purchase], with no store-related action required. - Ratings are requested only through the system prompt, after [completed action], for every user. Where to check: [screen > step]. Best regards, [Your name] ``` Only write what actually exists in the build you send. ## The 3.2.2 checklist before submitting - No feature or content depends on a rating, a review or a download. - No reward for a review, not even for an "honest" one. - The rating prompt is the same for everyone, with no screening question first. - Rewards come from in-app actions, and stay in the app. - Rewarded ads are optional, and the app has a real feature without them. - Nothing paid is about a system feature as such. - If a free feature becomes paid, the listing and review notes say so. ## A compliant business model from your next submission If your app was just rejected under 3.2.2, the [Review Kit](https://devoria.fr/en/kits/app-review) helps you find the cited rule and what it requires, with note templates for the reviewer. If you're building your business model, the [iOS & Android Kit](https://devoria.fr/en/kits/ios) gives you onboarding, a paywall and subscriptions already coded, which you configure. The most common paywall mistakes are in [iOS paywall: beginner mistakes](https://devoria.fr/en/blog/ios-paywall-beginner-mistakes). For a human eye, [book an hour with me](https://devoria.fr/en/coaching). The full process is on the [app rejected by Apple](https://devoria.fr/en/expertise/app-rejected-by-apple) page, and the technical side on the [iOS in-app subscriptions](https://devoria.fr/en/expertise/ios-in-app-subscription) page. If you're preparing your first release, [take the free diagnostic](https://devoria.fr/en/diagnostic): it puts the steps in order and sends you my Apple anti-rejection checklist. The home page shows how to [build a mobile app](https://devoria.fr/en) with review in mind from the start. ## Frequently asked questions ### What does "Guideline 3.2.2 - Business - Other Business Model Issues - Unacceptable" mean? Apple considers your business model one of the practices 3.2.2 rejects. The sentence after the heading specifies the problem: ads at the core of the app, promoting other apps, a reward for a review. The message doesn't always cite the clause: reread the list and your reward mechanisms. ### Can you offer a reward for an App Store review? No. The section 3 intro targets incentivized reviews, and clause (x) bans making a feature conditional on a rating. Ask for the rating with the system prompt, the same way for everyone, without promising anything. ### Are rewarded videos allowed? Yes. Clause (x) lists "watching an ad" among the actions an app can encourage. The rejection comes when ads become the point of the app, or when the reward has real value outside the app, like a gift card. ### Can you make a previously free feature paid? The text doesn't ban it. It protects what was paid for: 3.1.2(a) requires not taking the main feature away from people who bought it. Update your listing, as 2.3.2 requires, and explain the change in the review notes. ### What's the difference between guideline 3.2.2 and 5.6.3? 5.6.3 bans manipulating the App Store, and Apple also applies it to badly timed rating prompts, on first launch for example. 3.2.2 targets the business model: a feature locked behind a rating, a rewarded review or download. A single rating prompt can trigger both. ## Your project [Review Kit](https://devoria.fr/en/kits/app-review): My App Store review checklist, the Apple rejections I fixed, a Google Play checklist and three Claude Code skills. $55. [iOS & Android Kit](https://devoria.fr/en/kits/ios): Build your iPhone and Android app with Claude Code: the starter code from my apps, the path all the way to the stores, and every kit. $109. [Diagnostic: what's between you and your iPhone app](https://devoria.fr/en/diagnostic): 7 questions, 60 seconds: find out what's really stopping you from publishing your iPhone app, get your 4-step path and the kit that fits you.