The Home Office has demanded the right to access data from Apple users that have turned on Advanced Data Protection (ADP), a tool that prevents anyone other than the user – including the tech giant – from reading their files.

Apple says it is important for privacy – but the UK government says it needs to be able access data if there is a national security risk.

The BBC – along with civil liberties groups and some US politicians – argue the case should be heard in public.

But Friday’s session of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal – which is hearing the matter – was held behind closed doors.

It is not clear whether later phases of the case will be opened to the public – the BBC has submitted a written argument that it should be.

As well as the BBC, journalists from the Guardian, the Telegraph, PA, Bloomberg, and Computer Weekly attended the Royal Courts of Justice but were not admitted into the court room.

Sir James Eadie KC, who previously represented the government in significant cases such as Shamima Begum’s citizenship appeal, was seen entering the hearing.

On Thursday, five US politicians from across the political divide urged the court to remove what they call the “cloak of secrecy” surrounding the row – which they say has major security implications.

A group of civil liberties groups made a similar plea, saying barring the media would be an “affront to the global privacy and security issues that are being discussed.

The case is about balancing national security against privacy rights.

ADP is end to end encrypted, meaning no-one can access files that have been secured with it apart from their owner.

Other end to end encrypted services in the UK include Signal, Meta’s WhatsApp, and Apple’s iMessage.

In February, it emerged the UK government was seeking the right to be able to access data protected in this way using powers granted to it under the Investigatory Powers Act.

The Act allows it to compel firms to provide information to law enforcement agencies.

Apple responded by pulling ADP in the UK and then launching legal action to challenge the government’s demand.

Apple says agreeing to what the UK is asking for it would require the creation of a so-called backdoor, a capability critics say would eventually be exploited by hackers.

“As we have said many times before, we have never built a backdoor or master key to any of our products or services and we never will,” Apple says on its website.

The Home Office has previously told the BBC: “The UK has a longstanding position of protecting our citizens from the very worst crimes, such as child sex abuse and terrorism, at the same time as protecting people’s privacy.

“The UK has robust safeguards and independent oversight to protect privacy and privacy is only impacted on an exceptional basis, in relation to the most serious crimes and only when it is necessary and proportionate to do so.”

The tech giant has suggested the issue with its Dictation service has been caused by a problem it has distinguishing between words with an “r” in them.

“We are aware of an issue with the speech recognition model that powers Dictation and we are rolling out a fix today,” an Apple spokesperson said.

However an expert in speech recognition told the BBC this explanation was “just not plausible.”

Peter Bell, professor of speech technology at the University of Edinburgh, said it was more likely that someone had altered the underlying software that the tool used.

Videos shared online show people speaking the word “racist” into the Dictation tool.

Sometimes it is transcribed correctly – but on other occasions it is turned into “Trump”, before being quickly restored to the correct word.

The BBC has not been able to replicate the mistake, suggesting Apple’s fix is already taking effect.

Prof Bell said Apple’s explanation of phonetic overlap did not make sense because the two words were not similar enough to confuse an artificial intelligence (AI) system.

Speech-to-text recognition models are trained by inputting clips of real people speaking alongside an accurate transcript of what they say.

They are also taught to understand words in context – for example, they could distinguish the word “cup” from “cut” if it was within the phrase “a cup of tea”.

Prof Bell says the situation with Apple is unlikely to be a genuine mistake with its data because its English language model would be trained on hundreds of thousands of hours of speech, which should give it a high level of accuracy.

For “less well-resourced languages” he said it could be an AI training issue.

But he said in this case: “it probably points to somebody that’s got access to the process.”

A former Apple employee who worked on its AI assistant Siri told the New York Times: “This smells like a serious prank.”

Apple had to row back on another AI-powered feature last month after complaints from the BBC and other news organisations.

It suspended its AI summaries of news headlines after it displayed false notifications on stories – including one where it said tennis player Rafael Nadal had come out as gay.

The company announced yesterday it would be investing $500bn (£395bn) in the US over the next four year, including on a large data centre in Texas to power Apple Intelligence.

The company’s chief executive Tim Cook also said it may have to change its policies on diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) after President Donald Trump has called for an end to DEI programmes.

His comments came just minutes after a majority of shareholders rejected a proposal calling on the tech giant to consider ending its diversity policies, such as the use of race and sex in hiring decisions.

Apple had urged shareholders to vote against the measure, which the company had argued was “inappropriately” trying “to micromanage” its business.

The scrutiny of the firm comes as US President Donald Trump has called for an end to diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programmes in the government and private sector, including at Apple.

In a social media post the day after the meeting, Trump ramped up the pressure on the company.

“Apple should get rid of DEI rules, not just make adjustments to them,” he wrote in a all-capital-letters post. “DEI was a hoax that has been very bad for our country. DEI is gone!!!”

Trump’s DEI orders have run into legal roadblocks, but many companies in the US, including big names such as Meta, Amazon and Goldman Sachs, have already ended or rolled back their own policies, citing legal risks.

Apple’s decision to fight the shareholder proposal had bucked that tide.

Shareholder measures opposed by companies rarely succeed, so the outcome of Tuesday’s vote was expected.

It marked the second high-profile defeat of shareholder proposal targeting DEI, after a similar rejection at retailer Costco.

However, despite the vote, Mr Cook on Tuesday acknowledged that the firm may have to alter some of its practices.

“As the legal landscape around this issue evolves, we may need to make some changes to comply, but our north star of dignity and respect for everyone and our work to that end will never waver,” Mr Cook said during a question-and-answer session at the company’s annual shareholder meeting.

He noted that Apple did not use “quotas” for hiring – a practice that has come in for some of the fiercest criticism – while saying the firm’s strength came from a culture where “people with diverse backgrounds and perspectives come together”.

“We’ll continue to work together to create a culture of belonging where everyone can do their best work,” he added, saying the company would remain “committed to the values that have always made us who we are”.

The proposal targeting Apple’s DEI policies was backed by the National Center for Public Policy Research, a conservative think tank, which had also put forward the proposal at Costco.

It argued that the existence of Apple’s diversity and inclusion programmes exposed the firm to “litigation, reputational and financial risks”, pointing to the wider corporate retreat andnoting that recent lawsuits have made it easier for workers to sue over discrimination.

Stefan Padfield of the organisation’s Free Enterprise Project, who presented the proposal at Tuesday’s meeting, said the risks to Apple had increased after the Trump administration recently ordered staff to investigate DEI in the private sector.

“The vibe shift is clear,” he said. “DEI is out and merit is in.”

Apple’s decision to push back against the shareholder proposal, while simultaneously opening the door to changing its policy is an effort to satisfy both sides of the fight, said Angela Jackson, a senior advisor to the Project on Workforce at Harvard University and author of the forthcoming book, The Win-Win Workplace.

But she warned that it left Apple “playing defence”. She said she wanted to see the company lead by making a more robust business case for the programmes.

“They’ve made the right moves. The one step they could go further… is to really say, ‘Yes it’s our values, we believe it’s the right thing to do, but it’s also an economic imperative.”

The fight over DEI in the US has raised questions about whether such policies in other countries will face similar challenges.

Catherine Howarth, chief executive of the responsible investment charity ShareAction, said she thought that Apple – a global, consumer-facing firm – had made the bet that the benefits of pushing back against the shareholder proposal outweighed the risks.

“It’s not popular with consumers and it’s not popular with employees to abandon what were supposedly your principles in this area until very recently,” she said.

“They think it would go down very badly – and it would – with their global consumer base.”

Shareholders also rejected proposals that would have required Apple to report about its AI privacy practices, charitable giving and policies to combat child sex abuse.

They backed the board members supported by the company, as well as its executive compensation, including a pay package for Mr Cook worth more than $74m.

The tech giant said it expected to create 20,000 new jobs over that time, with the “vast majority” of roles in research and development, software and artificial intelligence (AI).

It is not clear to what extent the spending is an acceleration of the company’s current activities. Apple said the sum included everything from spending on suppliers to Apple TV+ productions.

The announcement comes days after Apple boss Tim Cook met with President Donald Trump, who has made increased corporate investment in the US a priority.

In its announcement, Apple said its investment was its “largest-ever spend commitment” and would expand its support for American manufacturing.

“We are bullish on the future of American innovation,” Cook said.

The new 250,000 square foot factory in Houston, Texas, is set to produce servers that were “previously manufactured outside the US” to support Apple Intelligence, the company’s AI system, the company said.

The iPhone maker added it would open in 2026 and create “thousands” of jobs.

Apple is also expanding its data centre capacity in North Carolina, Iowa, Oregon, Arizona, and Nevada, and doubling its support for a fund dedicated to US manufacturing, which it created in Trump’s first term, from $5bn to $10bn.

Trump previewed the announcement last week, claiming it was partially a response to his trade policies, including tariffs.

On Monday, the president took credit for the news on social media, saying the reason for the investment was “faith in what we are doing, without which, they wouldn’t be investing ten cents”.

Trump has said he wants to see more companies making their products in the US, threatening to raise tariffs drastically in a bid to make domestic manufacturing more attractive.

Last month, he imposed a new 10% border tax on all imports from China, where Apple has a significant manufacturing presence.

He has also proposed tariffs on products made in many other countries, including neighbouring nations Mexico and Canada.

Dan Ives, analyst at Wedbush Securities, said the announcement was a “strategic move” to diversify the company’s manufacturing operations “while also playing well into Trump’s US investment theme”.

“Cook continues to prove that he is 10% politician and 90% CEO,” he wrote in a note.

Ives said the initiatives announced by Apple on Monday did not seem to signal a big shift in the company’s manufacturing plans for China, noting that the areas in question were not a focus of its activities there.

Advanced Data Protection (ADP) means only account holders can view items such as photos or documents they have stored online through a process known as end-to-end encryption.

But earlier this month the UK government asked for the right to see the data, which currently not even Apple can access.

Apple did not comment at the time but has consistently opposed creating a “backdoor” in its encryption service, arguing that if it did so, it would only be a matter of time before bad actors also found a way in.

Now the tech giant has decided it will no longer be possible to activate ADP in the UK.

It means eventually not all UK customer data stored on iCloud – Apple’s cloud storage service – will be fully encrypted.

Data with standard encryption is accessible by Apple and shareable with law enforcement, if they have a warrant.

The Home Office told the BBC: “We do not comment on operational matters, including for example confirming or denying the existence of any such notices.”

In a statement Apple said it was “gravely disappointed” that the security feature would no longer be available to British customers.

“As we have said many times before, we have never built a backdoor or master key to any of our products, and we never will,” it continued.

The ADP service is opt-in, meaning people have to sign up to get the protection it provides.

From 1500GMT on Friday, any Apple user in the UK attempting to turn it on has been met with an error message.

Existing users’ access will be disabled at a later date.

It is not known how many people have signed up for ADP since it became available to British Apple customers in December 2022.

Prof Alan Woodward – a cyber-security expert at Surrey University – said it was a “very disappointing development” which amounted to “an act of self harm” by the government.

“All the UK government has achieved is to weaken online security and privacy for UK based users,” he told the BBC, adding it was “naïve” of the UK to “think they could tell a US technology company what to do globally”.

Online privacy expert Caro Robson said she believed it was “unprecedented” for a company “simply to withdraw a product rather than cooperate with a government”.

“It would be a very, very worrying precedent if other communications operators felt they simply could withdraw products and not be held accountable by governments,” she told the BBC.

Meanwhile, Bruce Daisley, a former senior executive at X, then known as Twitter, told BBC Radio 4’s PM programme: “Apple saw this as a point of principle – if they were going to concede this to the UK then every other government around the world would want this.”

The request was served by the Home Office under the Investigatory Powers Act (IPA), which compels firms to provide information to law enforcement agencies.

Apple would not comment on the notice and the Home Office refused to either confirm or deny its existence, but the BBC and the Washington Post spoke to a number of sources familiar with the matter.

It provoked a fierce backlash from privacy campaigners, who called it an “unprecedented attack” on the private data of individuals.

Last week, Will Cathcart, head of WhatsApp, responded to a post on X expressing his concerns about the government’s request.

He wrote: “If the UK forces a global backdoor into Apple’s security, it will make everyone in every country less safe. One country’s secret order risks putting all of us in danger and it should be stopped.”

Two senior US politicians said it was so serious a threat to American national security that the US government should re-evaluate its intelligence-sharing agreements with the UK unless it was withdrawn.

It is not clear that Apple’s actions will fully address those concerns, as the IPA order applies worldwide and ADP will continue to operate in other countries.

One of those US politicians – Senator Ron Wyden – told BBC News that Apple withdrawing end-to-end encrypted backups from the UK “creates a dangerous precedent which authoritarian countries will surely follow”.

Senator Wyden believes the move will “not be enough” for the UK to drop its demands, which would “seriously threaten” the privacy of US users.

In its statement, Apple said it regretted the action it had taken.

“Enhancing the security of cloud storage with end-to-end-encryption is more urgent than ever before,” it said.

“Apple remains committed to offering our users the highest level of security for their personal data and are hopeful that we will be able to do so in future in the UK.”

Rani Govender, policy manager for child safety online at the NSPCC, said it wants tech firms like Apple to ensure they are balancing child and user safety with privacy.

“As Apple looks to change its approach to encryption, we’re calling on them to make sure that they also implement more child safety measures, so that children are properly protected on their services,” she told BBC News.

The UK children’s charity has said that end-to-end encrypted services can hinder child safety and protection efforts, such as identifying the sharing of child sexual abuse material (CSAM).

But Emily Taylor, the co-founder of Global Signal Exchange which provides insights into supply-chain scams, said that encryption was more about protecting consumer privacy and that it is not the same as the dark web where CSAM is usually distributed.

“The trouble with this long-running debate, zero-sum debate about encryption and child protection is that the tech companies can come out sounding incredibly callous, but that’s not the point,” she told Radio 4’s Today programme.

“Encryption is something that we use every day; whether its communicating with our bank, whether its on messaging apps that are end-to-end encrypted, encryption is a form of privacy in an otherwise very insecure online world.”

The row comes amid growing push-back in the US against regulation being imposed on its tech sector from elsewhere.

In a speech at the AI Action Summit in Paris at the beginning of February, US Vice President JD Vance made it clear that the US was increasingly concerned about it.

“The Trump administration is troubled by reports that some foreign governments are considering tightening the screws on US tech companies with international footprints,” he said.

The iPhone 16e has the same processor as the more expensive iPhone 16, Apple said, with similar storage options, though a lower spec elsewhere, including fewer cameras.

Apple has been struggling to find a new product that excites consumers – sales of iPhones dropped at the end of last year.

It will be hoping that bringing enhanced AI functionality to a less expensive phone will address that – however analysts have been cautious about the sales boost such tools bring.

ADVERTISEMENT

Its name is clearly a nod to its iPhone SE series, which were released from 2016 to 2022, and were also lower priced.

Apple said the iPhone 16e would be available for pre-order from 21 February in 59 countries.

It will launch in the UK for £599, which is £200 less than the iPhone 16 – but more than double the price of the original iPhone SE went for when it launched in 2016.

“This now becomes one of the most affordable powerful iPhones now on the market,” industry analyst Paolo Pescatore told BBC News.

“The move should help accelerate adoption and especially its foray into AI with Apple Intelligence.”

However other experts have questioned how much value consumers put on AI – an area Apple has spent $189bn (£150bn) on in the last decade.

“All we have to show for that is the HomePod and $3,500 ski goggles,” said Cory Johnson, Epistrophy Capital Research chief market strategist, referring to Apple’s Vision Pro headset, which has not sold many units.

“AI should be right in Apple’s wheelhouse. But Apple fanboys, fangirls, and investors are right to be disappointed so far,” Mr Johnson added.

Meanwhile, tech influencer Marques Brownlee said in a post on X (formerly Twitter) that the “most lowkey interesting thing” about the iPhone 16e was its new C1 modem.

It is the first time Apple has used its own modem design for the iPhone, having previously relied on Qualcomm and Intel’s chips to provide cellular connectivity.

This also meant paying costly licensing fees to those chip giants – something Apple has previously wrangled over with Qualcomm in court.

Adopting its own modems would also help the tech giant realise a vision laid out by chief executive Tim Cook in 2009 of owning and controlling the tech powering its products.

Much of the conversation around the new handset will probably centre around its power, with Apple electing to use the same A18 chip behind its more expensive devices.

This means the 16e will be capable of playing the same games and running the same apps as other iPhones – though AI is almost certainly at the heart of this decision.

Mr Cook said in the announcement the new model featured “the performance, intelligence and privacy” Apple fans “expect” from the firm.

And he said the Apple Intelligence features on the device would “help you save time, quickly get more things done, and express yourself in new ways”.

The firm introduced its spin on the tech – Apple Intelligence – with this series of devices, which includes new tools for writing and incorporating OpenAI’s chatbot ChatGPT into Siri.

It hasn’t always gone well, with the firm at one point suspending its AI-generated news alerts after they created false headlines attributed to news organisations including the BBC.

It now presents the summaries in italics.

Apple said its new phone is “built for Apple Intelligence”, and pointed to certain features of the tech, like an easy way to clean up photos or search your image library.

Other phone manufacturers have similar features on their devices – though the iPhone 16e will be by far the cheapest way to access AI on an Apple handset.

“The iPhone 16e generates a new revenue stream for Apple, and this will be particularly noticeable in key markets like India, where iPhones are out of reach for most people,” said Forrester principal analyst Dipanjan Chatterjee.

“There is also a second-order effect of cheaper devices like the iPhone 16e, bringing new customers into the Apple ecosystem,” he added.

The tech giant also appears to aiming its new handset at owners of older models, in the hope of boosting upgrades.

A graphic on its website says “there’s never been a better time to upgrade” and allows users to compare the iPhone 16e’s specs to models dating back to 2019.

“We’ve seen a limited appetite among many of the installed base to upgrade from previous versions, but the new phone reduces the cost hurdle of joining the Apple Intelligence bandwagon,” said Mr Chatterjee.

Senator Ron Wyden and Congressman Andy Biggs have written to national intelligence director Tulsi Gabbard saying the demand threatens the privacy and security of the US.

They urge her to give the UK an ultimatum: “Back down from this dangerous attack on US cybersecurity, or face serious consequences.”

“While the UK has been a trusted ally, the US government must not permit what is effectively a foreign cyberattack waged through political means”, the US politicians wrote.

If the UK does not back down Ms Gabbard should “reevaluate US-UK cybersecurity arrangements and programs as well as US intelligence sharing”, they suggest.

The request for the data emerged last week.

It applies to all content stored using what Apple calls “Advanced Data Protection” (ADP).

This uses end-to-end encryption, where only the account holder can access the data stored. Apple itself cannot see it.

It is an opt-in service, and not all users choose to activate it.

The demand was first reported by the Washington Post, quoting sources familiar with the matter, and the BBC has spoken to similar contacts.

The Home Office said then: “We do not comment on operational matters, including for example confirming or denying the existence of any such notices.”

Apple declined to comment, but says on its website that it views privacy as a “fundamental human right”.

The order has been served by the Home Office under the Investigatory Powers Act, which compels firms to provide information to law enforcement agencies.

Under the law, the demand by the Home Office cannot be made public.

Senator Wyden and Congressman Biggs say agreeing to the request would “undermine Americans’ privacy rights and expose them to espionage by China, Russia and other adversaries”.

They state that Apple does not make different versions of its encryption software for each country it operates in and, therefore, Apple customers in the UK will use the same software as Americans.

“If Apple is forced to build a backdoor in its products, that backdoor will end up in Americans’ phones, tablets, and computers, undermining the security of Americans’ data, as well as of the countless federal, state and local government agencies that entrust sensitive data to Apple products.”

The move by the UK government has stunned experts and worried privacy campaigners, with Privacy International calling it an “unprecedented attack” on the private data of individuals.

However the US government has previously asked Apple to break its encryption as part of criminal investigations.

In 2016, Apple resisted a court order to write software which would allow US officials to access the iPhone of a gunman – though this was resolved after the FBI were able to successfully access the device.

That same year, the US dropped a similar case after it was able to gain access by discovering the passcode of an alleged drug dealer.

Similar cases have followed, including in 2020, when Apple refused to unlock iPhones of a man who carried out a mass shooting at a US air base. The FBI later said it had been able to “gain access” to the phones.

It is understood that the UK government does not want to start combing through everybody’s data.

Rather it would want to access it if there were a risk to national security – in other words, it would be targeting an individual, rather than using it for mass surveillance.

Authorities would still have to follow a legal process, have a good reason and request permission for a specific account in order to access data – just as they do now with unencrypted data.

Apple has previously said it would pull encryption services like ADP from the UK market rather than comply with such government demands – telling Parliament it would “never build a back door” in its products.

WhatsApp, owned by Meta, has also previously said it would choose being blocked over weakening message security.

But even withdrawing the product from the UK might not be enough to ensure compliance – the Investigatory Powers Act applies worldwide to any tech firm with a UK market, even if they are not based there.

Chief executive Tim Cook said the new features helped to drive stronger sales in the countries where they were available, such as the US.

But iPhone sales slipped about 1% overall compared with last year, to $69.1bn (£55bn).

The company is also contending with other challenges, including a sales dropin China and the possibility its US sales will be hit by tariffs threatened by President Donald Trump.

He has called for tariffs of up to 60% on products made in China, where Apple does much of its manufacturing.

But the timing and full scope of those plans, which would put a new tax on imports into the US, remains highly uncertain.

Mr Cook told investors on Thursday the company was monitoring the situation.

Apple has been gradually introducing AI features to its products, starting last year in the US.

Investors have been hoping this will re-ignite sales, which have slowed as customers hold onto their phones and other products for longer.

Mr Cook said Apple was expecting to push out the AI features to more languages in April.

However, the features have not been without controversy. The AI’s news roundup alerts came under fire earlier this month for making repeated mistakes in their summaries of news headlines – including ones from the BBC.

The feature was eventually suspended following over a week of criticism.

Meanwhile, Mr Cook said on Thursday Apple had seen a record number of purchases of new iPhones from people who already own older iPhones.

The company said overall sales rose 4% to $124.3bn, lifted by a jump in its computer sales and strong growth in its services business, which includes Apple TV, Apple News and Apple Pay.

Profits rose 7% year-on-year to $36.3bn.

Emarketer analyst Jacob Bourne said Apple was going to have to have to speed up the roll-out and start looking at new kinds of products to maintain its edge.

“The results show Apple can still execute, but the next few quarters will test whether it can balance its cautious approach with the market’s hunger for AI innovation,” he said.

The tech giant had been facing mounting pressure to withdraw the service, which sent notifications that appeared to come from within news organisations’ apps.

“We are working on improvements and will make them available in a future software update,” an Apple spokesperson said.

Journalism body Reporters Without Borders (RSF) said it showed the dangers of rushing out new features.

“Innovation must never come at the expense of the right of citizens to receive reliable information,” it said in a statement.

“This feature should not be rolled out again until there is zero risk it will publish inaccurate headlines,” RSF’s Vincent Berthier added.

The BBC was among the groups to complain about the feature, after an alert generated by Apple’s AI falsely told some readers that Luigi Mangione, the man accused of killing UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, had shot himself.

The feature had also inaccurately summarised headlines from Sky News, the New York Times and the Washington Post, according to reports from journalists and others on social media.

“There is a huge imperative [for tech firms] to be the first one to release new features,” said Jonathan Bright, head of AI for public services at the Alan Turing Institute.

Hallucinations – where an AI model makes things up – are a “real concern,” he added, “and as yet firms don’t have a way of systematically guaranteeing that AI models will never hallucinate, apart from human oversight.

“As well as misinforming the public, such hallucinations have the potential to further damage trust in the news media,” he said.

Media outlets and press groups had pushed the company to pull back, warning that the feature was not ready and that AI-generated errors were adding to issues of misinformation and falling trust in news.

The BBC complained to Apple in December but it did not respond until January when it promised a software update that would clarify the role of AI in creating the summaries, which were optional and only available to readers with the latest iPhones.

That prompted a further wave of criticism that the tech giant was not going far enough.

Apple has now decided to disable the feature entirely for news and entertainment apps.

“With the latest beta software releases of iOS 18.3, iPadOS 18.3, and macOS Sequoia 15.3, Notification summaries for the News & Entertainment category will be temporarily unavailable,” an Apple spokesperson said.

The company said that for other apps the AI-generated summaries of app alerts will appear using italicised text.

“We’re pleased that Apple has listened to our concerns and is pausing the summarisation feature for news,” a BBC spokesperson said.

“We look forward to working with them constructively on next steps. Our priority is the accuracy of the news we deliver to audiences which is essential to building and maintaining trust.”

It comes after a conservative group, the National Center for Public Policy Research (NCPPR), called on the technology giant to abolish its DEI policies, saying they expose firms to “litigation, reputational and financial risks”.

Apple’s directors say the NCPPR’s proposal is unnecessary because the company has appropriate checks and balances in place.

Other major US firms, including Meta and Amazon, have rolled back DEI programmes ahead of the return to the White House this month of Donald Trump, who has been highly critical of DEI policies.

“The proposal is unnecessary as Apple already has a well-established compliance program,” the firm’s filing to investors said.

Apple’s board also said the DEI rollback plan “inappropriately seeks to micromanage the Company’s programs and policies by suggesting a specific means of legal compliance.”

NCPPR’s proposal is set to be put to a vote by shareholders at Apple’s annual general meeting on 25 February.

Conservative groups have threatened to take legal action against major companies over their DEI programmes, saying such policies are at odds with a Supreme Court decision in 2023 against affirmative action at universities.

Last week, Facebook owner Meta became the latest US company to roll back its DEI initiatives, joining a growing list of major firms that includes Amazon, Walmart and McDonald’s.

In a memo to staff about the decision – which affects, hiring, supplier and training efforts – Meta cited a “shifting legal and policy landscape”.

It also referred to the Supreme Court’s affirmative action ruling.

Meta’s boss, Mark Zuckerberg, has been moving to reconcile with Trump since his election in November.

The firm has donated $1m (£820,000) to the President-elect’s inauguration fund, hired a Republican as his public affairs chief and announced it is getting rid of fact-checkers on Meta’s social media platforms.

Mr Zuckerberg is not alone among top executives making such moves in the face of mounting pressure from conservative groups.