App Rejection Fix
Apple App Store

Submitting to the App Store? Clear These Before You Send the Build.

App Review rejects first submissions for a small, predictable set of reasons: the reviewer could not use the app, the build crashed or was incomplete, privacy declarations did not match behaviour, purchases were not reviewable, or the metadata promised something else. Everything below is ordered the way a submission actually fails — upload requirements first, then what a reviewer does in the first five minutes, then the paperwork.

Free initial review · No payment required · No source code required initially

On this page (7 sections)

1. Requirements that stop the upload

  • Built with Xcode 26 and the iOS 26 SDK (or the current SDK for the platform) — uploads from older toolchains are refused at the door. Modernizing an old project.
  • Signing and provisioning — distribution certificate valid, profile includes the right entitlements and bundle ID, no wildcard profile for an app using capabilities. Signing and profile errors.
  • Privacy manifest and required-reason APIs for the app and every listed SDK. ITMS-91053 explained.
  • Export compliance answered, or ITSAppUsesNonExemptEncryption set in Info.plist, so the build does not sit in “Missing Compliance”.
  • Build version and number higher than anything uploaded before; dSYMs included for crash symbolication.
  • Agreements — the Paid Applications agreement accepted before any in-app purchase can be reviewed, tax and banking complete.

2. What a reviewer does in the first five minutes

Most Guideline 2.1 rejections happen here, and almost all of them are avoidable.

  • Sign-in. Provide a working demo account in App Review Information, including a code path for OTP/2FA that does not depend on the reviewer's phone. Test it on a device that has never run the app.
  • Every gated feature reachable. If a region, subscription, hardware or invitation gates something, say so in the review notes and give the reviewer a way through.
  • No placeholders. Lorem ipsum, “coming soon” screens, dead buttons and staging URLs are completeness failures.
  • It must not crash. Run the exact archive you are submitting on a clean device with a fresh install, offline and on a slow network.
  • Backends must be up for the whole review, including any staging service the build points at.

Details: Guideline 2.1 — app completeness.

3. Privacy declarations that must match the build

  • App privacy details (“nutrition labels”) match what the app and its SDKs actually collect and link to the user.
  • Purpose strings for every permission explain the real, user-visible reason — not “needed for app to work”.
  • App Tracking Transparency prompt implemented if anything tracks across apps or sites, with the declaration to match.
  • Account deletion in-app for any app that lets users create an account (Guideline 5.1.1(v)).
  • Privacy policy URL reachable, app-specific, and consistent with the labels.
  • Sign in with Apple offered where a third-party social login is the only other option, unless an exception applies.

Details: privacy rejections (Guideline 5.1).

4. Purchases, if the app has them

  • Every in-app purchase has complete metadata, a review screenshot and review notes, and shows Ready to Submit — products in Prepare for Submission are not part of the review.
  • The first submission of a purchase goes with an app version; the reviewer must be able to reach the paywall and complete a sandbox purchase.
  • Digital content uses In-App Purchase; physical goods and services do not. Subscriptions show price, period and terms before purchase, and a restore path exists.
  • If products do not appear at all in TestFlight or sandbox, fix that before submitting: in-app purchases not showing.

Rule-level detail: Guideline 3.1 payments.

5. Metadata and product page

  • Screenshots show the real app on the right devices; no device frames with marketing copy that misrepresents the UI.
  • Name, subtitle, keywords and description describe the current build; no competitor names, no pricing claims in metadata, no “beta”.
  • Age rating answered honestly, including the updated questions Apple introduced for 2026 submissions.
  • Support URL and marketing URL resolve and are about this app.
  • Review notes explain anything unusual: hardware, regional gating, physical products, regulated features.

Details: metadata rejections (Guideline 2.3).

6. Is there enough app?

Guideline 4.2 rejections hit thin apps hardest: a website in a WebView, a template rebuilt for a new client, a single-feature utility with no native value. If the app is a wrapper or a template variant, decide before submitting what makes this one genuinely useful — see minimum functionality and spam / similar apps.

7. After you press submit

  • Watch the status: Waiting for Review, In Review, Pending Developer Release each mean something specific, and a reviewer question pauses everything until you answer.
  • Keep the build available in TestFlight so you can reproduce whatever the reviewer reports.
  • If a genuinely critical fix is queued, an expedited review request exists — for critical bugs and events only.
  • If it is rejected, read the guideline number before reacting: App Store rejection help.

Pre-submission review, same free review

Send the app description, how a reviewer signs in, the SDK list and the purchase model. Our technical team tells you which guidelines this build is most likely to be stopped under and what to change first. Nothing about approval is promised — Apple decides — but most first-submission rejections are predictable, and predictable is fixable.

Shipping to both stores? The Google Play blockers are different: Google Play submission checklist.

Rejection messages covered by this guide

Exact notice wording from the Rejection Library, with what each one means and what to check.

Get the rejection reasons before App Review finds them.

Send the app description, the sign-in path for a reviewer, the SDK list and the purchase model. The pre-submission review returns the guidelines your build is most likely to be stopped under, the privacy declarations that will not match, and what we would fix first.

What happens next: an engineer on our technical team reads the notice you send — not an autoresponder. We work out what it most likely means and what we would check, and reply with that assessment and a recommended next step.

The initial pre-submission review is free. Implementation work, if you want us to do it, is quoted separately.

Get My Free Pre-Submission Review

Free initial review · No payment required · No source code required initially