Yep, seems that 16.24% must be the lowest APR. My credit score is perfect, and that's the best Apple Card will do for me. All of my money (everything, groceries to utility payments, all of it) flows through the card and paid off every month. But that APR is a little nuts, so I keep an old credit union Visa around that has an 8% APR grandfathered in from 15 or 20 years ago. If for some reason I found myself needing to run a balance, even for a short time, that's the card I'd use.
Just have to remind myself to use it occasionally so they don't kill it for inactivity.
That's why some high end cards charge a yearly fee. Its to recoup some of the rewards & perks costs in aggregate.
But I do seem to have some vague recollection that some state like South Dakota knows not of this "usury" you speak of, and therefore the credit card company has a business address there.
Your point is well taken, but even with a high credit score Apple Card is still at 16% (for us). And after a surprisingly/not surprisingly difficult time finding that interest rate, Bank of America is charging us friggin' 20%. We pay both cards off each month, so it doesn't matter to us. But it probably does matter to the less-well-off person paying probably 22-25% on credit card debt that they don't zero at the end of the month.
(EDIT: I see @denimnerd42 ninja'ed me on this point.) Though Goldman-Sachs was losing money on the Apple Card, apparently. How does that happen? From what I've read, Apple wanted a high approval rate, so folks that would be paying those interest rates each month were getting approved but the rate of default was high. Again, so I've read. But it makes me wonder if it isn't more desirable to have customers that pay it off each month, but put everything on the credit card and thus generate the 2% (or whatever) merchant fee on, say, the $8K they spend each month. It might be smaller revenue, but far more reliable with less risk of default.