SAP avoids EU fine with commitments in maintenance dispute

Background: What the case is about

At the core of the allegations was the suspicion that SAP effectively forced customers to obtain maintenance and support exclusively from SAP. Specifically, the Commission objected that customers had to choose the same maintenance rate under the same conditions for all SAP solutions. This made it difficult for customers to combine providers for different parts of the SAP landscape – even when doing so would have been cheaper.

The Brussels competition watchdogs also criticized that customers could not cancel maintenance and support for unused licenses and therefore had to keep paying for unwanted services. Likewise, returning to SAP after a pause triggered re-entry fees and back payments. This could make switching to other providers unattractive.

Competition Commissioner Ribera defends the decision

Teresa Ribera, EU Commissioner for Competition, described SAP's software as "of critical importance for businesses across Europe and worldwide." Today's decision gives customers who use on-premise software more freedom in choosing maintenance and support services. Dominant companies in digital markets must not abuse their power to lock in users at the expense of choice and innovation.

To avert a fine, SAP committed, among other things, to giving customers free choice of maintenance and support provider for individual parts of the SAP landscape. Going forward, it should be possible to engage different providers for different SAP solutions.

The commitments in detail

The company also committed to allowing customers to terminate licenses and the associated maintenance and support fees in certain cases, such as insolvency, significant workforce reductions, or failed implementations for which SAP is responsible. No new license terms should begin with each additional license purchase, and contracts should more clearly regulate how long the original minimum term lasts, during which support contracts cannot be terminated.

For customers returning to SAP, administrative fees for resumption will be eliminated under the commitments. Customers with their own data centers will also find it easier to switch to competing maintenance providers. The updated policies apply worldwide to existing and future customers of SAP's on-premise products.

The commitments have a term of ten years. SAP must comply with the commitments worldwide. The EU Commission expressly noted that, by accepting the commitments, it did not decide whether SAP had actually infringed European competition law.

Heavy penalties still looming

If SAP violates the commitments, severe sanctions loom. The Commission can impose a fine of up to ten percent of global annual revenue. In addition, a daily penalty payment of five percent of daily revenue is possible for each day of the violation. Pressure on the group therefore remains considerable even after the settlement.

SAP already rejected the antitrust allegations in September 2025. The company stated at the time that it believed its own policies and measures were fully consistent with the competition rules. At the same time, the company signaled it was open to dialogue: "Wir nehmen die Bedenken der Kommission jedoch ernst und arbeiten eng mit ihr zusammen, um eine Lösung zu finden. Materielle Auswirkungen auf unsere Finanzergebnisse werden nicht erwartet."

The group welcomed the Commission's decision to accept the concessions. In a constructive dialogue with the European Commission, SAP had committed to a series of adjustments intended to further improve flexibility, transparency, and predictability. The commitments would provide more clarity, choice, and protective mechanisms for customers with complex on-premise environments.

Market reactions and outlook

On the stock market, the news triggered a slightly negative reaction: the SAP share lost 1.16 percent at one point in XETRA trading, falling to 136.36 euros. Analysts at Berenberg Bank expressed skepticism after the decision became known, questioning whether the pledged adjustments would actually suffice to satisfy the competition authorities in the long term.

At the same time, Ribera underscored the signaling effect beyond the individual case. The commitments should also be understood as a warning against similar practices in cloud markets. The Commission is thereby extending pressure on providers of digital services to offer customers more choice going forward and to avoid lock-in effects.

For SAP, the settlement represents an important stage victory, since a conviction could have entailed a fine in the billions. At the same time, antitrust scrutiny of the company continues. The competition watchdogs in Brussels reserve the right to respond swiftly and severely to future violations – whether through the agreed penalty payments or through a new proceeding.

With the acceptance of the commitments, the proceeding opened in September 2025 does not end conclusively, but it enters a new phase: SAP must now operationally implement the pledged changes and comply with them for ten years. The Commission will monitor compliance and apply the agreed sanction mechanisms in the event of violations.

The case is regarded in European competition practice as a typical example of a commitment decision: rather than concluding a lengthy investigation with an uncertain outcome, the authority and the company agree on concrete rules of conduct that address the competition concerns. For the EU competition authority, this is a means of opening up markets swiftly without being dependent on a formal finding of guilt.