Divestiture transactions routinely leave the Microsoft licensing posture as a residual item to be sorted out during the TSA period. By the time it surfaces as urgent, the parent is paying for entitlements the SpinCo is using and neither side has the leverage to renegotiate cleanly. The licensing carve out has to be planned before the transaction signs. We sit on the buyer side for both the parent and the SpinCo.
Microsoft enterprise licenses are not portable by default. Most enterprise agreements explicitly prohibit assignment without Microsoft consent, which means a divested business unit cannot simply walk away with the licenses it was using. The result is a negotiation that has to happen between the parent, the SpinCo, and Microsoft, and the leverage available to each party varies enormously depending on when the licensing carve out is engaged. Late in the process the customer is captive. Early in the process the customer has options.
The divestiture licensing engagement produces a documented carve out plan. License transfer rights negotiated with Microsoft, TSA period coverage for shared workloads, residual parent contract treatment after the SpinCo separates, and the entitlement reconciliation that prevents the parent from continuing to pay for the SpinCo’s consumption. Each element is documented in writing and signed by the relevant Microsoft authority.
The most common divestiture licensing failure is the parent continuing to pay for entitlements the SpinCo is using under the TSA, while the SpinCo separately procures the same entitlements from Microsoft at full List. The double payment can run for the full TSA duration (typically twelve to twenty four months) and represents a real cost that compounds across the affected SKUs. The engagement closes the double payment exposure before the transaction signs.
The divestiture licensing engagement is structured into four work streams that run in parallel from announcement through TSA exit. Each work stream has its own deliverable, its own Microsoft counterparty, and its own exit criterion.
Which licenses, subscriptions, and consumption commits belong to which entity after separation. The reconciliation is rarely clean. Shared services, divided workloads, mixed identity environments. The scoping work produces the authoritative entitlement map that the rest of the engagement runs against.
Negotiation with Microsoft on the assignment posture. Which entitlements transfer with the SpinCo, which entitlements stay with the parent, and which entitlements have to be procured fresh by the SpinCo as a new customer. The transfer rights are negotiated separately and the deal desk treats divestiture assignment as a discrete commercial conversation.
During the TSA period, shared workloads continue to run on parent infrastructure under parent licenses. The TSA licensing model documents which licenses are provisioned for the SpinCo under the parent agreement, how those licenses are billed back, and when the SpinCo separates onto its own contract. The TSA model has to be approved by Microsoft to avoid compliance exposure.
After the SpinCo separates, the parent contract has to be right sized to the reduced footprint. The reduction is not automatic. Mid term true downs are not standard. The engagement negotiates the residual contract treatment with Microsoft so the parent does not continue paying for the SpinCo’s entitlement after separation completes.
The SpinCo will need its own Microsoft contract after the TSA exit. The standalone contract negotiation is a separate engagement that the practice can run on the SpinCo side or hand off to internal procurement once the scoping work is complete. Pricing posture, EA versus MCA E selection, MACC structure, and audit posture all have to be set at SpinCo formation.
Each of the work streams above requires Microsoft sign off at a defined authority level. The engagement manages the approval cadence end to end. Account team alignment, deal desk escalation where required, licensing team review of the transfer language, and final amendment execution before TSA close. The amendment language is what survives the transaction.
The ideal engagement window opens six to nine months before transaction close. Earlier than that, the entitlement scoping cannot be done because the carve out perimeter is not yet defined. Later than that, the Microsoft approval cycle compresses against the close timeline and the parent loses negotiating leverage.
Carve out announcement triggers entitlement scoping work. Perimeter definition begins. Microsoft account team engaged on transaction.
Entitlement map complete. License transfer posture drafted. TSA licensing model documented. Initial Microsoft conversation opened.
Transfer rights and TSA coverage negotiated with Microsoft. Residual parent contract treatment documented. Amendment language drafted.
Amendment executed. TSA period opens with documented licensing model. SpinCo standalone contract work begins for TSA exit.
The licensing carve out is treated as an afterthought in most divestitures. It is almost never an afterthought to Microsoft. The deal desk has been waiting to renegotiate this contract since the transaction was announced.Managing analyst · Divestiture licensing practice
Two analyst calls. No pitch. We tell you what we would do, what the leverage actually is, and whether we are the right firm for this engagement.