The European Commission’s investigation into SAP’s support for on-premises ERP software ended on July 9, 2026, when the Commission accepted binding commitments from SAP. The case concerned customer choice in the European Economic Area (EEA) aftermarket for maintaining and supporting SAP systems. It did not end with a conventional decision finding that SAP had infringed competition law.
What happened in the SAP case?
The European Commission opened formal proceedings against SAP on September 25, 2025, under Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 54 of the EEA Agreement. The case, AT.40823, concerned maintenance and support for SAP’s on-premises ERP software in the EEA—not SAP’s entire ERP business or all of its pricing.
On November 17, 2025, the Commission published a notice summarizing its preliminary concerns and SAP’s proposed commitments, inviting interested parties to comment. On July 9, 2026, it accepted the commitments and made them binding. The Commission’s case materials describe a commitments resolution, not a final infringement finding. The Commission’s announcement sets out the outcome; the EUR-Lex notice summarizes the case and proposed terms.
What did the Commission investigate?
The Commission’s preliminary assessment raised concerns that SAP might have abused a dominant position in the EEA aftermarket for maintenance and support of its on-premises ERP software. An aftermarket is the services market customers turn to after acquiring or licensing a product. Here, the question was whether customers already using SAP software had meaningful options for obtaining ongoing support, including from third-party providers.
PC Slower Than It Used to Be?
A free scan shows the junk files, broken settings and background clutter dragging Windows down - then fixes them in one click.Free scan · Windows 10 & 11Crashes, No Sound, or Screen Glitches?
Random freezes, missing sound and display glitches usually trace back to one bad driver. Find and replace yours safely.Free scan · under a minute#1 Best Overall
The Commission examined four practices. These were preliminary concerns, not proven findings of wrongdoing:
- All-or-nothing support: SAP’s policy could require a customer to obtain support for all relevant on-premises ERP software at the same support level and under the same pricing conditions. That could make it harder to choose different arrangements for different products or installations.
- Unused licenses, or “shelfware”: The Commission was concerned that customers could be prevented from ending support for licenses they no longer used or needed.
- Initial non-cancellable terms: The Commission examined whether initial license terms required customers to keep maintenance and support for a period during which they could not terminate it. Contract terms may differ by product, purchase date, geography, and later amendments.
- Reinstatement and back-maintenance charges: The Commission raised concerns about fees customers could face when returning to SAP support after a period without coverage.
What did SAP agree to change?
SAP did not agree with the Commission’s preliminary assessment but offered commitments to address the concerns. The Commission made those commitments binding on July 9, 2026. The published notice describes changes intended to give customers more flexibility over support coverage and a different method for calculating license fees used to calculate maintenance and service fees.
Rank #2
The notice also provides for the abolition of reinstatement fees and changes to back-maintenance charges. Under the published terms, back-maintenance is reduced to 50% of the maintenance and support fees that would otherwise have been payable during the gap, with the calculation capped at six months. These are commitment terms, not evidence that customers are entitled to refunds of every charge paid in the past.
Reuters, in a report republished by Euronext on July 9, 2026, reported that the commitments run globally for 10 years. That reported reach is distinct from the Commission’s competition case, which concerned the EEA aftermarket. A customer should check the operative terms and its own contract before relying on the commitments in a particular country or situation.
Why support choice is different from replacing SAP
Using a third-party maintenance provider generally means keeping an existing SAP environment while changing who provides some support services. It is not the same as replacing SAP with another ERP system, a project that can involve data migration, process redesign, integrations, implementation costs, and a lengthy transition.
Nor is it the same as moving an existing system to cloud hosting or buying a cloud subscription. The Commission materials concern maintenance and support for on-premises ERP software. They do not establish that the commitments change terms for SAP S/4HANA Cloud Public Edition, SAP S/4HANA Cloud Private Edition, RISE with SAP, SAP Business Technology Platform, SaaS subscriptions generally, or non-ERP SAP products. Companies with mixed estates should map each environment and contract separately.
Rank #4
What could the decision mean for SAP customers?
The commitments may give customers a stronger basis to ask about narrower support coverage, alternatives to an all-or-nothing arrangement, or the treatment of support gaps. They can also be relevant when negotiating a renewal, even if a customer ultimately retains SAP support. The practical value depends on the applicable commitment terms, contract language, product scope, and implementation details.
Review unused licenses carefully
Before seeking to remove support for shelfware, verify that the licenses are genuinely unused and identify dependencies on other modules or systems. Also consider audit, security, compliance, and business-continuity obligations. A license that appears inactive may still matter to a connected process, and reactivating it later could have contractual or cost consequences.
Recommended Free Tools
Compare support providers against your actual needs
Third-party support may offer flexibility or lower costs for some organizations, but there is no universal savings figure. Compare written proposals against your systems, releases, and required services. Check whether a provider can support your custom code, integrations, and add-ons; how it handles security issues and legally required updates; and who is responsible for patches, testing, and incident response.
Keep future plans in view
A third-party arrangement may be less attractive if you are preparing for an SAP upgrade or migration, depend on SAP-originated updates, or have extensive customizations that a new provider would need to understand. If you expect to return to SAP support, assess the applicable re-entry terms. Ending on-premises support also does not necessarily reduce overall ERP spending if you are simultaneously funding hosting, cloud migration, implementation, and integration work.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What the decision does—and does not—settle
- It does address: competition concerns about support practices in the EEA aftermarket for SAP on-premises ERP software, through commitments that the Commission made binding.
- It does not establish: a final Commission finding that SAP infringed Article 102 or Article 54.
- It does not ban: SAP maintenance contracts or require customers to leave SAP support.
- It does not guarantee: that every customer can cancel immediately, receive a refund, or use a third-party provider without technical or contractual consequences.
- It does not automatically change: cloud subscription terms or every SAP product’s commercial arrangements.
Although Reuters reported a global commitment period, the Commission case itself was EEA-focused. US customers should not assume the decision overrides their contracts or local competition law; applicability depends on the operative commitment text and their circumstances.
A practical checklist before changing support
Before changing providers or reducing coverage, assemble the information needed for both contract and technical review:
- Your SAP license schedule, current support agreement, order forms, amendments, and renewal or termination notices.
- An inventory of products, releases, modules, installations, and their dependencies, plus usage information for licenses you consider removing from support.
- An inventory of custom code, integrations, add-ons, and hosting arrangements.
- Requirements for security patches, tax or legal updates, audits, regulatory controls, and business continuity.
- Recent support incidents and any service levels you need, including severity-one response expectations.
- A written responsibility plan covering SAP, any third-party provider, hosting or cloud partners, and your internal IT team.
- Written clarification of eligibility, effective dates, notice requirements, support-gap charges, and the mechanics of any alternative fee calculation under the commitments.
- If considering third-party support, a service-level agreement covering supported products and releases, updates, custom-code scope, transition assistance, and future re-entry terms.
The decision affects support options, not the underlying work of choosing and operating them. A consequential change warrants review by procurement, technical teams, and legal counsel familiar with the relevant contract and applicable commitments.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
