Comment by dlubarov

If usage of an app gives Apple some justification for taxing payments, by similar logic would usage of the iPhone itself, and Safari, give them a similar some justification?

"The user would have used our payment rails had there not been other options" seems to apply universally; Apple could say the same thing about website owners steering users away from some expensive "Apple web pay" option.

I think the difference is just leverage. Apple isn't curating what websites iOS users are allowed to visit (yet...), so they can't tell website owners "pay up or we'll block you".