SAP just blinked. Europe’s biggest software maker agreed to rewrite key parts of its on-premises maintenance contracts. The move ends a European Commission antitrust probe launched in September 2025. It also averts what could have been a hefty fine.
Regulators had zeroed in on how SAP structured its support deals. Those terms allegedly made it tough for customers to leave for third-party providers. They also raised costs and limited options. But on July 9, 2026, the Commission accepted SAP’s binding commitments. The changes apply worldwide for the next 10 years.
Policy shifts that matter to every on-prem SAP user
Customers gain concrete flexibility. They can now split their system landscapes into separate commercial installations. This allows different support levels — or none at all — for different parts of their estate. SAP will permit partial terminations in justified cases. Think workforce reductions or bankruptcy. It will expand access to single-metric contracts that tie fees to a simpler, more predictable base.
Fees change too. SAP eliminates reinstatement charges for customers who left and want to return. Back-maintenance fees drop. The minimum now sits at six months or 50 percent in many cases. Certain outdated products face no back fees whatsoever. These adjustments directly tackle complaints that SAP’s pricing locked users in.
The software giant also promises clearer contract language. Its policies become more transparent. Training and oversight improve. Independent checks ensure consistent application. SAP described the package as delivering “greater clarity, choice and safeguards for customers managing complex on-premise environments.”
EU antitrust chief Teresa Ribera welcomed the outcome. “Today’s decision gives customers using SAP’s popular on-premises business management software more freedom to choose maintenance and support services without unfair restrictions that raised their costs and stifled competition,” she said in a statement, as reported by Reuters.
The investigation had gathered steam quickly. Brussels opened formal proceedings in September 2025 after receiving complaints. It worried that SAP blocked rivals in the aftermarket for maintenance and support. Customers reportedly faced barriers when they tried to mix providers or drop coverage on unused licenses. Reuters first revealed SAP was preparing concessions in November 2025. The company later adjusted its offer after third-party feedback. That refinement won approval.
SAP itself framed the changes as customer-focused. In its official blog post, the company detailed how the updates respond to input from users and groups such as DSAG, the German-speaking SAP user association. Jens Hungershausen, chairman of DSAG’s executive board, called it “an important step in the right direction.” He noted the flexibility helps companies decide the fate of systems that still deliver value even as SAP pushes its cloud strategy.
Industry observers see broader implications. Many large organizations run decades-old SAP ECC instances. Mainstream support for several versions ends in late 2025 or 2026, with extended options available until 2030 for extra fees. The new rules make it simpler to shop around for third-party maintenance instead of paying SAP premiums or rushing into S/4HANA migrations. One example cited by The Register involves retailers like Kingfisher that opted for alternative support to avoid full cloud transitions.
But the commitments stop short of a full overhaul. Cloud offerings remain untouched. SAP continues to steer new deals toward its RISE and GROW programs. Critics inside the user community have long argued that on-prem customers felt treated as cash cows during the long migration push. These tweaks ease some pressure. They don’t erase the strategic tension.
Analysts point out the 10-year global scope carries weight. SAP must comply everywhere or risk fresh penalties. The Commission can reopen the case if breaches occur. That enforcement mechanism gives the concessions teeth. It also signals Brussels’ willingness to extract behavioral remedies rather than impose billion-euro fines when companies offer meaningful concessions early.
For enterprise technology leaders, the practical effects arrive soon. Procurement teams can negotiate with greater leverage. They may combine SAP support on core modules with cheaper third-party coverage on peripherals. Finance departments gain visibility into true total cost of ownership. CIOs win breathing room to evaluate whether to stay on premises longer or accelerate cloud moves on their own timeline.
SAP’s blog post emphasized that details will appear in updated support documentation. It directed customers to specific pages for guidance. The company also pledged internal training so sales and support staff apply the new rules uniformly. Those steps aim to prevent the very inconsistencies that fueled the original complaints.
Of course, not every customer will rush to drop SAP maintenance. Many value the vendor’s direct expertise, especially for complex customizations or upcoming regulatory updates. Yet the option itself changes the power balance. Third-party providers such as Rimini Street have already signaled they expect more inquiries. Their model often delivers lower costs and extended support beyond SAP’s own timelines.
The episode fits a larger pattern. Regulators worldwide scrutinize how dominant software vendors control aftermarkets. Similar questions have surfaced in database, operating system and cloud infrastructure disputes. SAP’s case stands out because it involves business-critical ERP systems that many Fortune 500 companies cannot easily replace. The fact that the Commission settled without a fine suggests SAP’s offer struck the right balance between relief for customers and preservation of its core business model.
Still, questions linger. Will the clarified terms truly open the door for meaningful competition? Or will SAP’s scale and integration advantages keep most customers loyal? User groups will watch implementation closely. DSAG and others plan to monitor whether the promised flexibility materializes in real contract negotiations.
One thing is clear. SAP moved faster than many expected. It offered remedies before the probe dragged into lengthy litigation. That pragmatism likely saved it from worse outcomes. For an organization that once enjoyed near-total control over its installed base, the concessions mark a quiet but significant shift. Customers now hold cards they lacked before. How they play them will shape the next decade of enterprise software spending.
The original concerns that sparked TechRadar’s coverage — that SAP was siding with customers to avoid regulatory heat — proved accurate. The changes detailed there, including easier exits and no reinstatement fees, now carry the force of EU approval. As TechRadar first outlined, these adjustments could help SAP dodge antitrust trouble while giving users genuine alternatives.
WebProNews is an iEntry Publication