Apple CEO Tim Cook speaks at the Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) in California, June 2024. AFP-Yonhap
Pressure is mounting on Apple to commit to building a data center in Korea, as the government’s ruling on the company’s request to transfer high-precision map data overseas has effectively been pushed to next year. Industry experts say approval is unlikely unless Apple clearly commits to domestic infrastructure, especially as scrutiny intensifies following similar issues raised with Google.
“It’s unclear whether Apple will truly operate its own data centers, or if it’s just placing a few servers somewhere and calling that a data center or perhaps using a leased data center under the guise of an authentication system. In reality, it’s no different from Google,” an industry insider said.
“What is clear is that the government has three main requirements, and the most important one is the data center. Once a data center is in place, the other two are essentially resolved automatically.”
The National Geographic Information Institute said Friday that it will extend the processing period after Apple asked for more time to revise its original application, delaying the final decision, which had been scheduled for Monday.
Apple first applied in June to transfer 1:5,000-scale geographic data overseas, months after its 2023 request was rejected. The government deferred its decision once, citing the need for deeper review of national security risks and effects on the domestic industry. With the deadline now pushed to next year, Apple’s supplemental filing is expected to face detailed review.
A central remaining issue is whether the company will commit to installing a data center in Korea — a condition the government views as essential for approving map data exports.
In its original application, Apple said it would limit the exported map data’s storage location to Korea, the United States and Singapore, and expressed willingness to cooperate with two other government requests regarding video blurring and coordinate masking. However, the company did not state that it intends to establish or operate a physical data center in Korea, raising concerns among regulators and industry officials.
Google ran into similar problems. Although it expressed willingness to adopt security measures, its application lacked specific details. This led the government to postpone its review last month and give the company 60 days to revise technical elements and resolve inconsistencies between its public comments and documents — a process Apple is now widely expected to undergo as well.
The dispute is unfolding as Seoul and Washington prepare for non-tariff negotiations. A joint fact sheet issued after the recent Korea-U.S. summit emphasized the elimination of discriminatory barriers for digital services and the facilitation of cross-border data transfers.
“Things have become quite tricky, as this issue has become entangled with tariff negotiations. The U.S. has labeled this a non-tariff barrier, even though the Korean government is not really making unreasonable demands,” the insider said.
“While they talk about ‘equal treatment,’ Korean companies receive data export permissions because they actually operate servers and data centers in Korea, and by that logic, the same standards would apply to U.S. companies.”
Korea and the U.S. are scheduled to hold another round of negotiations this month to work toward the commitments outlined in the summit fact sheet.
Jang Sang-sik, head of trade trend analysis at the Korea International Trade Association, said a conditional approval could emerge as the most realistic compromise amid bilateral pressure.
“Since Korea and the U.S. have already reached a certain level of agreement on cross-border data transfers in the digital sphere, it seems realistically difficult to completely block this as we did in the past,” he said.
“If U.S. companies insist that, due to tax and regulatory issues, it is difficult for them to keep their data fully in Korea, then from the Korean government’s standpoint, it is likely that approvals will end up being granted on a conditional basis in the context of Korea-U.S. relations.”
He added that Korea may pursue an alternative approach that keeps only the most sensitive data onshore.
“Only highly sensitive data, such as information related to national security, would be kept in Korea, while cross-border transfers would be permitted for the remaining data so that it can be combined and provided in real-time only when the service is being delivered… It appears to be the most likely scenario as a form of compromise.”
