Apple Will Pay Up to $95 Per iPhone After Delaying the Siri AI Features It Heavily Advertised

Apple is about to cut checks to iPhone owners over the Siri AI it promoted and then failed to ship on time. The settlement website went live this week, opening a claims window that runs from September 21 to December 21, 2026.

The payout comes out of a $250 million pot Apple agreed to in May to settle a US class action. Each eligible person gets an estimated $25 per device, though the amount can climb to a maximum of $95 if fewer people file than expected. A final approval hearing is set for February 24, 2027, so money is not expected to reach customers until sometime next year.

Eligibility is narrow. You need to be a US resident who bought one of the listed iPhones in the US for something other than resale between June 10, 2024 and March 29, 2025. The list covers the iPhone 15 Pro and 15 Pro Max, plus the iPhone 16, 16e, 16 Plus, 16 Pro, and 16 Pro Max.

The lawsuit traces back to what Apple showed off and what it actually delivered. In June 2024, the company previewed a personal-context Siri, powered by Apple Intelligence, that could pull details from your Mail and Messages to answer questions like when your mother's flight lands. Apple pushed those capabilities in keynote demos, on its website, and in a TV commercial starring Bella Ramsey.

Then in March 2025, Apple delayed the personalized Siri, and the false-advertising suit followed. Apple denies the allegations and says it settled to avoid the cost and risk of a trial and "to stay focused" on shipping products.

The feature did eventually arrive. Apple announced Siri AI at WWDC 2026, and it now runs on iPhone 15 Pro models and newer on iOS 27. Even though iOS 27 shipped last week and left beta, the new Siri is still labeled a beta feature.

Big-tech settlements have become a recurring line item rather than a rare event. Apple's payout lands in the same stretch as TikTok's $400 million DOJ children's privacy deal and Meta's $16.68 billion accord with states over youth harms. What separates this one is that the product at the center of the complaint finally exists, just later and rougher than the ads promised.