Who Owns iPhone?

Apple has pledged to achieve carbon neutrality across its entire supply chain and product lifecycle by 2030. This commitment covers iPhone manufacturing, transportation, product use, and end-of-life recycling. As of 2024, Apple reports that its corporate operations are carbon neutral, and the company has reduced emissions across its supply chain by approximately 40 percent from 2015 baseline levels.

iPhone models incorporate recycled materials. The aluminum enclosures in iPhone models contain recycled aluminum. Rare earth elements used in iPhone magnets are sourced from recycled material. Apple has committed to using 100 percent recycled cobalt in all Apple-designed batteries by 2025. The company has also eliminated PVC from iPhone cables and has committed to removing plastics from all packaging by 2025.

Apple operates a trade-in program that allows consumers to return old iPhones for credit toward new purchases. Returned devices are either refurbished and resold or recycled through Apple's partner facilities. Apple's Daisy robot, introduced in 2018, can disassemble up to 200 iPhones per hour to recover materials for recycling.

However, iPhone manufacturing has faced persistent labor rights concerns. In September 2025, China Labor Watch released a report documenting labor violations at Foxconn's Zhengzhou plant, Apple's primary iPhone manufacturing facility. The report alleged wage withholding practices, excessive overtime of 60 to 75 hours per week (exceeding China's legal maximum and Apple's own 60-hour weekly cap), coercion of student workers, discriminatory hiring practices, and exposure to hazardous chemicals without adequate protective equipment. China Labor Watch claimed Apple representatives were present at the facility and aware of these conditions during iPhone production.

Apple responded by stating its commitment to "the highest standards of labor, human rights, environmental and ethical conduct" and announced investigations. The recurring nature of labor violations at Foxconn facilities, documented by China Labor Watch and other organizations over multiple years, suggests ongoing challenges in enforcing Apple's supplier code of conduct across its manufacturing network.

Apple publishes an annual Environmental Progress Report and a Supplier Responsibility Progress Report. These reports are available on Apple's website and provide data on carbon emissions, recycled material usage, and supplier audit results. Apple's environmental claims can be verified through these reports and through independent assessments by organizations including the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP).

Foxconn Labor Violations (September 2025): China Labor Watch released a report documenting labor rights violations at Foxconn's Zhengzhou iPhone manufacturing plant. The investigation alleged wage withholding, excessive overtime (60 to 75 hours weekly), coercion of student workers into night shifts, discriminatory hiring practices excluding certain ethnicities, hazardous chemical exposure without protective equipment, and worker intimidation. China Labor Watch claimed Apple representatives were aware of these conditions. Apple announced immediate investigations and reiterated its supplier code of conduct standards. The case remains ongoing as of 2025.

EU Digital Markets Act Fine (April 2024): The European Commission fined Apple 1.8 billion euros in March 2024 for violating EU competition rules by restricting music streaming app developers from informing users about alternative subscription options outside the App Store. Apple appealed the fine. Separately, Apple was fined 500 million euros in April 2024 under the Digital Markets Act for restricting app developers from steering users toward alternatives to the App Store. Apple has complied with DMA requirements by allowing alternative app stores and sideloading on iPhones in the EU, though it has criticized the regulations as compromising security.

Epic Games v. Apple (2020-present): Epic Games, the developer of Fortnite, sued Apple in August 2020 after Apple removed Fortnite from the App Store following Epic's implementation of a direct payment system that bypassed Apple's 30 percent commission. The case went to trial in 2021. U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers ruled that Apple was not a monopoly under antitrust law but prohibited Apple from preventing developers from linking to alternative payment methods. Both parties appealed. In 2023, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals largely upheld the original ruling. Epic subsequently petitioned the Supreme Court, which declined to hear the case in 2024. The dispute remains partially unresolved as enforcement of the injunction continues.

U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Lawsuit (March 2024): The U.S. Department of Justice, joined by 16 state attorneys general, filed an antitrust lawsuit against Apple in March 2024. The lawsuit alleges that Apple maintains an illegal monopoly in the smartphone market through restrictions on super apps, cloud gaming services, messaging apps, and smartwatches. The case is ongoing as of 2025 and could take years to resolve.

iPhone 6 Plus "Touch Disease" (2016): Some iPhone 6 Plus devices experienced a touchscreen failure known as "Touch Disease," caused by a design flaw in the touch screen controller. Apple launched a repair program in November 2016, offering to repair affected devices for a service fee of $149. The program was later expanded. Apple did not issue a formal recall but acknowledged the issue through the repair program.

iPhone Battery Performance Throttling (2017): In December 2017, Apple confirmed that it had been slowing down older iPhones with degraded batteries through software updates to prevent unexpected shutdowns. Apple apologized and reduced the price of battery replacements from $79 to $29 for one year. The company also added a battery health feature to iOS. Apple faced multiple class-action lawsuits and was fined 25 million euros by France's competition and fraud watchdog DGCCRF in February 2020 for failing to inform consumers about the software updates. Apple settled a U.S. class-action lawsuit for up to $500 million in March 2020.