How to Report Dating and Relationships in App Store Connect? 2026

Your upcoming app update has a new age-rating declaration, but your product is a chat app, not a dating app.

Fast answer: If your app connects real users for dating or relationships, or offers a virtual companion involving romantic or sexual content, assess it for Dating and Relationships and answer based on its actual features. Apple says apps that meet this descriptor receive a minimum 18+ age rating. The new declaration is scheduled to appear on November 16, 2026; complete it when submitting an app update or changing the age-rating questionnaire, and finish declarations for all your apps by January 12, 2027. Apple’s announcement sets out the scope, timing, and rating consequence.

Who should read this: Dating and relationship app maintainers who need to assess matching and connection features.
Virtual companion developers checking whether romantic or sexual interactions bring the descriptor into scope.
Indie developers preparing an update who need to track questionnaire completion across multiple apps.

Last updated: November 13, 2026. Dates and descriptor details are verified against Apple’s November 2 announcement and its age-rating questionnaire guidance. The new field is scheduled for November 16, so check its live wording in App Store Connect after it appears.

The name is not the test; the user journey is

The App Store Connect Dating and Relationships declaration concerns what your app enables, not just how you describe it. A dating-themed name does not settle the question. Neither does a general “social” category or a chat feature by itself.

Start with the user’s purpose and path through the app. Can people discover other users, receive matches or recommendations, and connect with the purpose of dating or forming a relationship? Those functions are stronger evidence of applicability than the presence of messaging alone. Apple’s age-rating definitions provide the official description; use that wording when you make the final call.

Product pattern	What to inspect	Initial assessment
Dating or relationship matching	Discovery, matching, recommendations, profiles, and contact flows designed to connect real users	Likely in scope; check the descriptor definition and current questionnaire
General chat or community	Whether conversation serves a broad community purpose or is part of a dating or relationship connection flow	Do not infer applicability from chat alone
Virtual companion	Whether the companion interaction includes romantic or sexual content	Assess the actual interaction and product design against Apple’s definition
Location sharing	Whether the feature shares a person’s real-world location with another person or group	Assess Shared Location separately; location access alone does not establish Dating and Relationships

This table is a triage aid, not a substitute for Apple’s current questionnaire. When your product has a mixed purpose, document the evidence behind the answer and check Apple’s wording before you submit.

Not automatically. A group chat, creator community, support forum, or social feed does not become a dating product simply because users can talk to each other. The important distinction is whether the product’s design and user flow facilitate dating or relationships between real users.

For example, a community app might let members message one another after joining a shared-interest group. That alone does not show that the app is designed for relationships. If the same app adds romantic matching, dating-oriented discovery, or recommendations intended to help users form relationships, those functions change the assessment. Examine the entire path, including optional features and where the app directs users after they make a connection.

Don’t use a broad label such as “social” as your evidence. Write down what a user can do, whom they can contact, and what purpose the app supports.

For each relevant feature, capture the screens or flow, the intended user action, and the product purpose. If the description remains ambiguous, avoid treating this guide as a guarantee. Compare your facts with Apple’s current descriptor and consult Apple’s official materials for the final boundary.

Dating products: inspect the connection mechanics

For an app built around dating, focus on the mechanics that create or support connections. Review profile discovery, search filters, match suggestions, mutual-interest flows, and the transition from a match to direct contact. A dating product may use a different label or emphasize friendship, but the name alone does not resolve whether its real user flows fit Apple’s definition.

A useful internal review asks:

Does the app present people to one another for dating or relationship purposes?
Do recommendations or matching tools help users find potential partners?
Does the app encourage users to contact people they discover through those features?
Are these functions central, optional, or limited to a particular part of the product?

These are review prompts, not extra Apple requirements. Use them to assemble a clear account of the product before answering the age-rating questionnaire. If you maintain several apps, make a separate assessment for each one; one app’s purpose does not automatically determine another’s answer.

Apple explains that teams manage age-rating responses through App Store Connect. Review the questionnaire instructions and the App information editing guidance when you check who can edit the relevant app details and where the declaration appears.

Virtual companions: assess the content, not the AI label

An AI or chat feature does not qualify automatically. For virtual companions, the key question in Apple’s announcement is whether the companion involves romantic or sexual content. Review the actual interaction and the way the feature is designed and presented, rather than making the decision based solely on words such as “AI,” “assistant,” or “companion.”

A conversational assistant that answers practical questions is not the same product pattern as a companion designed to sustain a romantic relationship. Likewise, a character chat should be assessed against its real content and use, not assumed to be in scope simply because it uses dialogue. If romantic or sexual interaction is part of the experience, treat that as a strong reason to check the descriptor and questionnaire carefully.

Can a virtual companion affect the age rating?

Yes, if the app meets the Dating and Relationships descriptor. Apple states that apps matching this descriptor receive a minimum age rating of 18+. This is a consequence of meeting the descriptor, not a blanket rule for every AI, chatbot, or conversational feature. Apple’s age-rating definitions provide the official rating context.

The distinction matters for product planning. Do not broaden the 18+ conclusion to features that do not meet the definition, but do not dismiss romantic or sexual companion interactions because they are virtual rather than between two human users. Where the interaction is borderline, record the relevant content and feature design, then verify the current Apple wording.

Shared Location is a separate assessment

A location-sharing feature and a dating or relationship feature answer different questions. Shared Location concerns sharing a person’s real-world location with another person or group. It does not, by itself, establish that an app connects users for dating or relationships.

A family safety app, for example, may let members share their location without providing dating discovery or relationship matching. A dating app might also have location-based discovery. In that second case, assess the relationship function and the location-sharing function independently. One feature should not be used as a shortcut answer for the other.

Apple’s announcement distinguishes these descriptors. If your app includes both, review the current questionnaire for both rather than assuming that one declaration covers the other. This is especially important when location visibility is optional, limited to selected contacts, or attached to a separate feature area.

A release checklist for the declaration

Use this checklist for each app record. Keep the evidence with your release notes so another maintainer can understand why you selected the answer.

[ ] List the app’s user-facing features, including optional or paid areas that enable discovery, matching, recommendations, or contact.
[ ] Trace the user journey from finding another person or companion to starting an interaction.
[ ] Mark whether each interaction is intended for dating or relationships, general community use, or another purpose.
[ ] Review virtual companion content for romantic or sexual interactions; assess it against Apple’s descriptor rather than the AI label.
[ ] Record any real-world location-sharing behavior separately from dating and relationship functions.
[ ] Open the app’s age-rating questionnaire in App Store Connect after the new field appears, and compare the live wording with Apple’s guidance.
[ ] Save the reason for each answer and identify any boundary case that still needs confirmation from Apple’s official materials.
[ ] Check every app you maintain; do not copy one app’s response across unrelated products.
[ ] Add questionnaire completion to the release checklist for the next update and track the remaining apps against January 12, 2027.

The deadline is specific: Apple says all apps must complete the relevant declarations by January 12, 2027. The new descriptor is scheduled to be added to App Store Connect on November 16, 2026. The announcement is the source for both dates. Check the actual interface after launch because the live field wording may differ from a summary of the announcement.

Timing	Action	Evidence to keep
Before the field appears	Inventory each app’s matching, chat, companion, and location features	Feature list and representative user flows
When the field appears	Review the live question and answer separately for each app	Selected responses and rationale
At the next app update or questionnaire change	Complete the applicable declaration as part of the submission work	Release checklist and completion status
By January 12, 2027	Confirm all maintained apps have completed the required declaration	Account-wide app inventory

Apple’s submission guide explains the app submission process. Keep the age-rating review separate from other release checks: an updated declaration does not replace your review of metadata, build selection, or the rest of Apple’s App Review Guidelines.

When the product boundary is unclear

Some apps combine community features, direct messages, location services, and optional relationship-oriented tools. In that situation, a single label such as “social app” hides the distinctions that matter. Build a short evidence record for each feature: who can use it, whom it connects, what the user is trying to do, and whether the feature supports dating or relationships.

If the app has separate modes or audiences, describe those separately rather than relying on the marketing description. If one mode introduces matching or romantic companion content, reassess that mode even if the rest of the app is a general-purpose community product. For multiple app records, keep separate conclusions and completion states.

When the current questionnaire does not clearly resolve a boundary case, do not treat an informal interpretation as Apple’s position. Refer to the official App Store Connect age-rating guidance and the published descriptor definitions. Recheck them if Apple updates the announcement or the questionnaire.

Preparing the build is a separate decision

The age-rating declaration is an App Store Connect task. It does not, by itself, establish that you need a new Mac or a different build setup. If you also need to rebuild, archive, sign, or validate an app update, assess that work separately and confirm that your macOS and Xcode environment can handle the project and submission process.

Your existing Mac is usually the simpler choice if it has enough available storage, supports the required development tools, and fits your release schedule. A remote Mac may be useful when you lack a suitable macOS environment, need access for a temporary release task, or want a separate build machine without purchasing hardware. It is less suitable if your workflow depends on local peripherals, frequent hands-on debugging, or a long-running workload that makes owning and maintaining a machine the better fit.

Before choosing, compare the purchase or maintenance burden, access method, and how you will move project files and credentials. You can use VpsHold’s Mac options to review remote Mac availability, and its Mac comparison page to weigh a remote environment against other approaches. Those choices are separate from Apple’s age-rating decision.

If your current setup means waiting for a shared machine, working around limited local storage, or keeping a dedicated Mac powered and maintained for occasional releases, a rented Mac can offer a more convenient temporary build environment without changing how you make the declaration. If you need that macOS/Xcode access for an upcoming update, review the actual environment and delivery details before committing; if you already have a reliable Mac and need no extra capacity, there is no reason to rent one just to complete the questionnaire.