Microsoft Licensing Programs Explained: EA vs MPSA vs CSP vs MCA

Introduction – Navigating Microsoft’s Licensing Options

If sorting through Microsoft’s licensing programs gives you a headache, you’re not alone.

Microsoft offers four major agreements: the Enterprise Agreement (EA), the Microsoft Products & Services Agreement (MPSA), the Cloud Solution Provider (CSP) program, and the Microsoft Customer Agreement (MCA), each with distinct rules and acronyms.

Choosing the right one is crucial: it impacts your costs, flexibility to scale up or down, and how locked-in you’ll be over the long term.

In this introduction, we’ll briefly set the stage for why licensing is confusing and why it matters to pick the right contract model for your organization’s needs.

Microsoft licensing can feel overwhelming because each program was designed for a different type of customer and scenario.

A CIO or IT procurement lead might hear Microsoft pitch the EA as the “best value” for large enterprises, while a partner might tout CSP’s flexibility for smaller businesses. The truth is, no single agreement fits everyone.

You need to navigate terms related to commitments, minimum sizes, pricing structures, and even negotiation wiggle room.

The stakes are high – choose poorly and you could overpay or be stuck in a rigid contract that doesn’t suit your business changes.

This guide will break down EA vs MPSA vs CSP vs MCA in plain terms, with a healthy dose of skepticism about Microsoft’s sales spin.

By the end, you’ll have a clearer view of which program best fits your organization and how to leverage each to your advantage.

Enterprise Agreement (EA) Overview

The Enterprise Agreement (EA) is Microsoft’s flagship volume licensing contract for large organizations. It’s typically geared for enterprises with 500 or more users or devices that want to standardize on Microsoft products company-wide.

An EA is a 3-year agreement that locks in pricing and requires an enterprise-wide commitment to license key products (such as Windows, Office, or Microsoft 365) for every “qualified” user or device within the organization.

In exchange for that commitment, you get volume-based discounts and price protection for the term – a big selling point for CFOs who want budgeting predictability.

Under an EA, you agree to an initial quantity of licenses, and you can add more as your organization grows (called “true-up” each year). However, one major limitation is flexibility: you generally cannot reduce your license counts mid-term.

If your headcount drops or you over-provisioned, you’re stuck paying for the originally committed quantity until the EA term ends. This rigidity is a key drawback – you’re effectively locked in for three years, which can be painful if business needs change.

Microsoft offers an Enterprise Subscription Agreement (EAS) variant that allows for some annual adjustments and does not require owning the licenses; however, true-downs (reductions) are typically only allowed at specific times or for certain cloud services.

Pros: The EA’s strengths are in bulk pricing and comprehensive coverage.

You’ll usually get the best unit pricing on software licenses or Microsoft 365 subscriptions via an EA, especially if you negotiate well and have a large user count.

It also includes Software Assurance benefits (like upgrade rights, training vouchers, support) as a standard, and you can customize the deal with Microsoft, such as adding special terms, combining on-premises and cloud licensing, and spreading payments annually.

For a stable enterprise planning to use a broad array of Microsoft tech for years to come, the EA offers the convenience of one big agreement to cover everything with one renewal date.

Cons: The flipside is inflexibility and potential waste. You’re committed to a 3-year spend – there’s no easy way out if budgets shrink or you want to drop a product. You must report and pay for any additional usage each year, but you can’t scale down until renewal.

True-down rights in an EA are very limited (usually only on the subscription version or in specific cases).

Additionally, while you get discounts, Microsoft expects a serious commitment, typically all-or-nothing, on core products. This can limit your ability to mix and match licensing strategies.

Ultimately, negotiating an EA can be a complex process. Without careful attention, you might accept Microsoft’s standard terms that favor Microsoft (for example, automatic 3-year renewal clauses or limited ability to swap products).

It’s a high-value, high-commitment option best suited for large, stable organizations that can leverage its perks fully.

Microsoft Products & Services Agreement (MPSA) Overview

The Microsoft Products & Services Agreement (MPSA) is a somewhat legacy volume licensing program targeted at mid-sized organizations or those with a mix of needs.

It’s a transactional, flexible purchasing agreement, unlike the EA; there’s no enterprise-wide commitment or three-year term.

In fact, an MPSA is a non-expiring master agreement under which you can buy licenses as needed, when needed. Microsoft generally designed MPSA for organizations with 250 or more users/devices that want volume licensing advantages without the strict enrollment commitments of an EA.

Under MPSA, you can purchase Microsoft software licenses (perpetual licenses for on-premises products) and also cloud services subscriptions, but you do so in a pay-as-you-go style.

There’s optional Software Assurance (SA) on purchases; you can choose to add SA for benefits like upgrade rights if you want, or skip it to save cost. The pricing in MPSA can still be tiered via a points system (similar to old Select agreements). As you buy more, you accumulate points that may bump you into better discount levels.

However, the discounts are generally smaller than EA because you’re not committing upfront to a huge quantity or term.

Think of MPSA as “volume licensing on your own terms.” It works best for organizations that still invest in on-premises software or have hybrid needs, and who don’t want the all-or-nothing nature of an EA.

Pros: Flexibility is the big one. With MPSA, you are not forced to standardize enterprise-wide – you can license 100 copies of Project here, 50 of SQL Server there, 200 Office 365 seats elsewhere, all under the same agreement, without covering everyone in the company.

You also aren’t locked into a multi-year contract – the MPSA itself stays in place, but you buy licenses when you need them. This means no annual true-up hassle and no penalties for not meeting growth targets.

It’s straightforward: if you need an extra license or subscription, you just place an order (often through a partner or Microsoft business portal) and that’s it.

MPSA is useful for mid-market companies that may not meet the 500-seat EA minimum or simply don’t want that kind of commitment.

It’s also relatively easy to manage via Microsoft’s Business Center portal, and you can have multiple affiliates or departments buying under one MPSA with separate “Purchasing Accounts,” giving procurement flexibility.

Cons: MPSA is becoming a legacy program in the cloud era.

Microsoft hasn’t heavily promoted MPSA since the rise of CSP and the newer MCA. If your environment is heavily cloud-focused (e.g,. mostly Azure and Microsoft 365), MPSA may feel a bit clunky – it was a better fit for the days of buying lots of perpetual licenses.

Cloud subscriptions can be bought through MPSA, but many cloud-only customers prefer CSP or direct (MCA) for more agility.

Additionally, because MPSA is transactional, you lose some pricing advantage you’d get by committing to an EA. For instance, an EA might yield deeper discounts on Microsoft 365 E5 licenses than buying the same licenses one-off via MPSA. Microsoft also offers fewer special incentives on MPSA.

Another downside: since Microsoft sees this as a legacy volume licensing route, there’s a sense that MPSA could be phased out in the future. (As of 2025, it’s still available, but new alternatives are taking the spotlight.)

In short, MPSA is great for flexibility with on-prem and mixed needs today, but it’s not the forward-looking cloud-first choice.

Cloud Solution Provider (CSP) Program Overview

The Cloud Solution Provider (CSP) program is Microsoft’s modern, cloud-centric licensing channel largely aimed at small and mid-sized businesses – though it’s open to larger orgs too.

In CSP, you don’t contract directly with Microsoft for licenses; instead, you buy through a Microsoft partner (such as a reseller or solutions provider) who handles the sale, billing, and often support.

Think of CSP as a subscription-based, reseller-driven model: you pay either monthly or annually for what you use, and you can adjust fairly easily. There’s no long-term contract with Microsoft, only whatever agreement you sign with the partner (which is usually more service-oriented).

CSP is highly popular among organizations that require flexibility. Through CSP, you can subscribe to Microsoft cloud services like Microsoft 365, Office 365, Azure credits, Dynamics 365, etc., and even some perpetual software licenses.

The billing is month-to-month or annual: for example, you might commit to 100 Microsoft 365 licenses for a year (often at an annual rate), or you might choose a monthly term where you can increase or decrease users month by month. (Note: Microsoft introduced a “New Commerce Experience” for CSP, which makes monthly terms about 20% more expensive than annual, as a premium for that flexibility.

Many organizations still appreciate the option to go month-to-month if their headcount fluctuates, even if it costs a bit more.)

Pros: The CSP program’s main advantage is agility. Need to add 5 Azure Virtual Machines this month? Do it in the portal via your CSP provider, and if you don’t need them next month, turn them off, and you won’t be billed further. You’re not tied into a big, inflexible contract.

This is great for SMBs or rapidly changing organizations. CSP also allows you to outsource license management to a partner – a good partner can consolidate your bills, provide support, and even bundle in their own services or discounts.

There’s no minimum user requirement; a 10-person company can use CSP, and so can a 1000-person company that doesn’t want an EA.

Another pro is that CSP is constantly updated with the latest cloud offerings (it’s basically the retail cloud commerce platform). If Microsoft launches a new cloud service, it’s often available through CSP immediately.

Cons: The discounts in CSP are usually smaller. The pricing you get is typically based on Microsoft’s standard rates, possibly with a small partner discount or promotions. You won’t see the kind of volume price reductions an EA might give for huge orders.

Also, pricing in CSP is not locked long-term – if Microsoft raises the price of a service next year, your partner can raise your costs accordingly (unless you prepaid for a longer term).

In other words, there’s less price protection than an EA provides. Another concern: you’re dependent on the partner.

The quality of support and responsiveness you get will depend on them. A bad or inattentive reseller can make license management harder.

Additionally, contract terms are standard – you can’t really negotiate custom legal terms or product use concessions; you’re bound by Microsoft’s Cloud Agreement terms and the partner’s own contract, which are generally take-it-or-leave-it.

Finally, certain enterprise features may not be available in CSP; for instance, not every legacy product or specific large-scale feature is offered via CSP (although this gap has narrowed significantly in recent years).

In summary, CSP is ideal for flexibility and simplicity, but it can come at a slightly higher per-unit cost and less direct control compared to an EA.

Microsoft Customer Agreement (MCA) Overview

The Microsoft Customer Agreement (MCA) is a newer, streamlined contract model introduced by Microsoft in the last few years.

It’s essentially an evergreen (no end date) agreement directly between you and Microsoft that covers purchases of cloud services.

Microsoft created the MCA to simplify purchasing in the cloud era. It’s a digital, click-through style contract that anyone can accept and start buying Azure or other services quickly, without the complexity of traditional volume licensing paperwork.

Unlike an EA, the MCA is transactional and open-ended: there’s no 3-year term or minimum commitment baked in. And unlike CSP, you’re buying directly from Microsoft rather than through a middleman (though interestingly, the MCA uses the same underlying commerce platform as CSP).

Originally, the MCA was primarily used for Azure. For example, if you set up a new Azure account through Microsoft’s website, you likely accept an MCA. It’s great for Azure consumption-based billing – you pay for what you use each month (or for any Azure subscriptions you purchase).

Now, Microsoft is expanding the MCA to also allow the direct purchase of other cloud subscriptions, such as Microsoft 365 and Dynamics 365. There’s no minimum seat count required; even a tiny organization (or a specific department of a larger one) could use an MCA.

Microsoft often refers to the enterprise-targeted version as “MCA for Enterprise (MCA-E)” – but it’s essentially the same concept with possibly some additional options for big customers.

Pros: The MCA offers maximum purchasing flexibility without the need for a long-term binding contract.

Because it’s evergreen, you don’t have to renegotiate a new contract every few years – it just keeps going until you decide to stop buying through it. It’s very simple and fast to set up (no lengthy negotiation or paperwork; it can be accepted online in minutes).

For organizations that are “cloud-first,” especially those focusing on Azure, the MCA provides a direct way to buy cloud services and scale usage up or down freely.

You aren’t committing to a lump sum or number of users for multiple years, which is ideal if your usage is variable or you’re a growing company that wants to avoid over-committing.

Additionally, by eliminating the reseller, some customers appreciate the direct relationship with Microsoft – it can simplify who they deal with for support and billing. Another advantage is that MCA has no minimum purchase requirement, making it more accessible.

And if you do have a significant spend (say, large Azure consumption), you might negotiate an Azure consumption commitment or volume discount under the umbrella of the MCA without needing a formal EA – though this typically requires working with Microsoft sales to set up an Azure plan or commitment deal.

Cons: With flexibility comes some trade-offs. Under an MCA, you usually get standard pricing for services unless you arrange a special deal. There aren’t automatic volume discount tiers like in an EA.

Microsoft isn’t going to give you 15% off just because you’re buying a lot, unless you specifically enter an Azure consumption commitment or some negotiated plan. In general, discount potential is limited compared to an EA.

The MCA is a “cookie-cutter” contract, meaning you don’t have much room to negotiate custom clauses – unlike an EA, where large enterprises often add custom terms or concessions (e.g., special audit terms, or product-use flexibilities). So, the MCA can feel a bit one-size-fits-all.

Additionally, while it’s great that it’s evergreen, it also means no defined renewal point at which you can easily renegotiate terms or shop around – you have to proactively manage your costs and any deals with Microsoft continuously.

It’s worth noting that Microsoft’s strategy is to move more customers to the MCA model over time (even some who traditionally used EA).

Still, today, the MCA is most beneficial for organizations focused on Azure or those that simply don’t want a large EA commitment. If you’re primarily an Azure customer and don’t need the legacy software coverage of an EA, an MCA is probably a good fit.

But if you’re a huge enterprise trying to get special pricing on thousands of Office 365 licenses, you might still lean towards an EA for the deeper discount and custom negotiation aspect.

Key Differences – EA vs MPSA vs CSP vs MCA

To clarify how these agreements compare, here’s a quick comparison table highlighting key factors and differences among the Enterprise Agreement, MPSA, CSP, and MCA:

Key takeaway: The EA is all about commitment for discount; MPSA is about flexibility in a volume license framework; CSP offers flexibility via a partner with standard pricing; MCA offers flexibility via Microsoft direct, with a focus on cloud services.

Choosing the Right Program

Given these differences, how should you decide between EA, MPSA, CSP, or MCA? The choice boils down to your organization’s size, the stability of your IT needs, your mix of on-prem vs cloud, and how much flexibility or negotiating power you want.

Below, we break down typical scenarios and which Microsoft licensing program tends to fit best.

Which Program Fits You Best? (Checklist – match your situation to a program)

• Choose an EA if… You are a large enterprise (500+ seats) that plans to use Microsoft’s products broadly and consistently. An EA is ideal when you want the deepest discounts and price lock in exchange for a three-year commitment across all users. If your organization is relatively stable in size (or growing) and you have the budget to commit to Microsoft up front, the EA likely offers the best value. It’s also the only way to get certain enterprise-level perks and custom terms. (Example: A corporation with 5,000 employees standardizing on Windows 11, Office 365 E5, and Azure could use an EA to get volume pricing and manage all those licenses in one agreement.)
• Choose an MPSA if… You are a mid-market organization that still invests in on-premises software, or simply don’t meet the EA minimums, or you dislike the idea of an enterprise-wide mandate. MPSA works well if you want to buy licenses as-needed without committing to every user or every product. It’s good for a company that might be, say, 300 seats and only wants to purchase certain software licenses in volume (like SQL Server or Visual Studio subscriptions), but not everything. Also, if you’re in a transition phase and not ready to go all-in on cloud subscriptions, an MPSA gives you the flexibility to manage both software and cloud purchases transactionally. (Example: A 250-employee company running a mix of on-prem servers and some Office 365 might use MPSA to buy server licenses and a few cloud services, maintaining flexibility.)
• Choose CSP if… You are a small or midsize business or an organization with volatile headcount and need maximum flexibility every month. CSP is great if you prefer to avoid long contracts and would like a partner to handle your licensing. If your user count goes up and down, or you run project-based staffing, CSP allows you to scale licenses quickly. It’s also often the easiest path for newcomers to Microsoft licensing – you simply start subscriptions through a partner, with minimal fuss. This model is also useful if you require extensive hand-holding or managed services from a provider, in addition to the licenses. (Example: A startup with 50 employees today (but 30 last month and who knows next month) opts for CSP so they can add or remove Office 365 licenses monthly. They work with a local IT provider who bundles support with the CSP subscriptions.)
• Choose MCA if… You are a cloud-first organization or primarily an Azure customer, and you want a direct relationship with Microsoft with no commitment term. An MCA is fitting if you don’t want to negotiate a big contract and just want to pay for what you use, while still benefiting from a unified agreement. This is often the case for tech firms or any business that mostly consumes Azure services (or Power Platform, etc.) and maybe some Microsoft 365, but doesn’t want an EA. It can also appeal to enterprises that are trying to move away from traditional licensing toward a more agile model – especially if Microsoft has made the MCA available in your region for large accounts. (Example: A software company that uses a lot of Azure infrastructure but only has 200 employees for Microsoft 365 might choose the MCA, buying Azure directly from Microsoft and handling their cloud subscriptions without an EA.)

Of course, some organizations fall in between these scenarios. It’s not uncommon to use a mix – for instance, a large enterprise might have an EA but still use CSP for a specific subsidiary or for Azure dev/test subscriptions.

The key is to ensure that mixing programs doesn’t violate any agreements (e.g., covering the same users twice or evading an EA’s requirements) and doesn’t create management chaos.

In general, match the program to your size, purchasing style, and strategic priorities. If you’re huge and want the best prices – EA. If you’re mid-size or need on-prem licensing flexibility – MPSA. If you crave month-to-month agility – CSP. If you’re all-in on cloud and hate contracts – MCA.

Negotiation Angle

No matter which program you lean toward, remember that you have leverage as a customer.

Microsoft’s sales teams and partners have targets, and you can often negotiate better terms or pricing, especially if you pit programs against each other. Here are some negotiation angles and tips for each scenario:

• Leverage CSP/MCA as Alternatives: If you’re renewing an EA, let Microsoft know you’re evaluating CSP or MCA options. The possibility that you might drop the EA and go CSP (or direct via MCA) can spur Microsoft to sharpen its pencil on the EA renewal quote. They know that if a customer finds CSP/MCA “good enough,” the customer might leave the EA program, which Microsoft generally wants to prevent for large accounts. So, use that. Solicit a CSP proposal from a partner and have those numbers handy in negotiations. Even if you ultimately stick with the EA, showing that you have viable alternatives gives you bargaining power to get better discounts or concessions from Microsoft.
• If Staying with EA – Push for Protections: When you do choose to sign or renew an EA, don’t just accept the boilerplate. Negotiate protections into your EA if you can. Common asks include price caps (for example, limiting how much prices can increase on renewal or for added licenses), the right to true-down certain services (Microsoft has been somewhat more flexible recently on allowing reductions for cloud subscriptions in an EA – see if you can get that in writing for your deal), and flexible payment terms. You can also negotiate for some extras like training credits, support upgrades, or even a pool of Azure credits as part of the EA. Microsoft won’t give these unless you ask, and they see you’re serious about exploring other options.
• If Going CSP – Shop Around and Seek Value-Adds: One of the beauties of CSP is that you have a choice of partners. Use that to your advantage by getting quotes from multiple CSP providers. Each CSP partner can set their own pricing (to a degree) and may offer value-added services or incentives. For instance, one partner might offer a 5% discount on Microsoft 365 licenses, another might offer free migration assistance or a certain amount of consulting hours bundled in. Also, ask about credits or promotions – sometimes partners have promos funded by Microsoft (like Azure credits for new customers) or can give you a one-time deal to win your business. Don’t be afraid to negotiate with the partner on their management fees or support terms. While you can’t change Microsoft’s underlying product terms in CSP, you can definitely negotiate your deal with the reseller.
• If Azure-Heavy – Optimize Your MCA Deal: If you’re leaning on an MCA because of substantial Azure usage, you still have negotiation room – it’s just a different kind. Talk to Microsoft about an Azure consumption commitment or volume plan under the MCA. Essentially, suppose you can forecast your Azure spend for 1-3 years. In that case, Microsoft might offer better pricing or credits if you commit to a certain level (this can often be done via an “Azure plan” or similar on the MCA). Also, negotiate rate protection for critical services if possible – e.g., ensuring your rates for key Azure resources won’t jump wildly, or that you have a notice period to adjust if they do. Additionally, if you also use Microsoft 365 or Dynamics, see if bundling those purchases under the MCA (once available) can get you any incentive. While MCA is a standard agreement, for larger customers, Microsoft can still provide custom incentives in the form of discounts or free credits, even if the legal terms stay the same. The key is to signal to Microsoft that you might otherwise put that spend through another channel (EA or CSP) if they don’t make it worth your while to do MCA directly.

In all cases, knowledge is power. Understand what each program’s strengths and weaknesses are (hopefully this guide helps with that), and use that in discussions with Microsoft or partners.

Microsoft reps might push the program that aligns with their current sales motions – for example, lately Microsoft has been nudging smaller enterprises away from EA and into CSP/MCA.

Be wary of the first deal you’re offered. By knowing your options, you can push back and craft a more favorable licensing strategy.

FAQs

Q: Is MPSA still available in 2025?
A: Yes – the MPSA program is still technically available in 2025 for commercial, government, and academic customers. Microsoft hasn’t formally retired it. However, it’s not heavily promoted, and many customers have been transitioning to other models (like CSP for cloud services).

Microsoft introduced MPSA years ago to simplify volume licensing (it replaced the old Select Plus agreement). While it’s still in use (especially for those who need on-premises licenses without an EA), new customers are increasingly rare.

So, if you already have MPSA, you can continue using it, and if you need what it offers, it’s an option – just be aware that Microsoft’s focus has shifted to cloud-centric agreements.

Q: Can CSP replace an EA for us?
A: It depends on your size and needs, but for many organizations, CSP can replace an EA, especially if you’re not that large or if most of what you use are cloud subscriptions. We’ve seen companies in the 500-1000 seat range opt not to renew an EA and instead buy via CSP to avoid long commitments. CSP can indeed provide all the same Microsoft 365 and Azure services you’d get in an EA – just on a more flexible billing model.

The caution is that if you’re a very large enterprise or have complex requirements, CSP might end up being a bit more expensive (due to less discounting) and operationally different.

Also, some EA-specific benefits (like unlimited problem support or certain license rights) might not directly carry over. But as a pure licensing vehicle, yes, you can move from EA to CSP. It often makes sense to evaluate this at the time of EA renewal.

Many mid-sized organizations find that, with Level A EA pricing (the lowest discount tier) versus CSP pricing, the costs are similar, so they opt for flexibility. Larger enterprises (with Level D discounts in EA) often stick with EA for the better pricing, but even some of them carve out pieces (like dev/test subscriptions or smaller business units) to put on CSP.

Q: Is the Microsoft Customer Agreement (MCA) better for Azure-only customers?
A: Generally, yes – if you are an “Azure-only” customer, the MCA is often the simplest and most flexible option.

The MCA was practically designed for this scenario. Under an MCA, you can utilize Azure on a pay-as-you-go basis or through Azure subscription plans, scaling resources up or down without the formality of an EA.

There’s no need to project three years of usage or commit to a big pre-buy; you just pay for Azure consumption as you go (or commit to shorter terms for specific Azure offers if you want).

If you truly have no need for other Microsoft licensing (like Windows or Office for a large user base), then an EA’s main advantages (volume discounts on user software) aren’t relevant, making the EA overkill. MCA keeps things straightforward.

Plus, if down the line you decide to purchase Microsoft 365 or other cloud services directly, Microsoft is expanding the MCA to cover those as well, so you could potentially do all your cloud licensing in one MCA portal.

The only case where an Azure-centric customer might still consider an EA is if their Azure spend is massive (think millions per year). They want to negotiate a dedicated discount, or they also want some enterprise-level support benefits that come with an EA. Even then, Microsoft can handle large Azure commitments under an MCA, too. So, for most practical purposes, Azure-focused customers love the flexibility of MCA.

Q: Which program gives the biggest discount?
A: If a pure discount percentage is your goal, the Enterprise Agreement typically gives the biggest discounts. Microsoft’s best pricing tiers (Level D pricing, etc.) are achieved in an EA for very large quantities, and you can negotiate an additional percentage off on top for big deals.

EAs also shield you from list price increases during the term. MPSA can offer volume discounts, too, but since it’s more ad-hoc, the discounts plateau unless you’re buying a lot continuously. CSP pricing is usually closer to pay-as-you-go retail rates – you might get a few percent off via a partner, but you won’t see huge volume discounts in CSP. MCA is similar: by default, you pay the standard prices (like Azure published rates or Microsoft 365 web direct price).

You can negotiate some discounts for commitments in MCA, but that ends up looking more like an EA-style negotiation anyway. So, in short: EA = best discounts for big volumes; MPSA = some discounts but not as deep; CSP/MCA = convenience and flexibility prioritized over big discounts.

Remember, though, a big discount on something you don’t ultimately need can be worse than a smaller discount on something you use efficiently – so consider overall cost, not just percentage off.

Q: Can we mix CSP and EA (or other agreements)?
A: Yes, you can use multiple licensing programs at once, and many organizations do. For example, you might have an EA covering your core desktop software (Windows, Office, etc., for all employees), but you could still buy some Azure or Power Platform subscriptions through a CSP partner for a specific project. Or perhaps a subsidiary or branch office that isn’t part of the central EA operates on CSP or MPSA. Microsoft generally allows mixing as long as you abide by each agreement’s rules.

The caution is to avoid double-dipping or conflicts: If your EA says you must license all users for Windows Enterprise, you shouldn’t try to put a few of those users on CSP just to circumvent the EA – that could violate the EA terms.

Also, you need to manage the licenses separately in their respective portals, which is an administrative consideration.

Some companies intentionally mix to test a new program before fully switching (e.g., trying out CSP with a small department while the rest stay on EA). Mixing CSP and EA is common when an organization is gradually transitioning away from EA or wants the flexibility of CSP for certain workloads but still values the EA for others.

The key is good internal tracking to ensure compliance and to optimize costs.

And if you mix in an MCA as well (say, using MCA for Azure while EA for Microsoft 365), make sure you’re not missing any holistic discounts you could get by consolidating – sometimes Microsoft might offer a better deal if you keep more in one agreement, so weigh that against the benefits of splitting.

Related articles

• Microsoft Customer Agreement (MCA) vs. Enterprise Agreement: What’s the Difference?
• EA vs. MPSA vs. CSP: Choosing the Right Microsoft Licensing Program
• Microsoft CSP Program for Enterprises: Pros, Cons, and Cost Considerations
• Enterprise Agreement vs. Enterprise Subscription (EAS): True-Down Benefits Explained

Five Expert Recommendations

Finally, here are five expert tips to guide your Microsoft licensing strategy and ensure you’re getting the best deal for your situation:

1. Don’t assume the EA is always best. Evaluate and benchmark CSP and MCA alternatives before renewing or signing an Enterprise Agreement. Many organizations have discovered they can meet their needs without the hefty EA commitment – sometimes at a comparable cost. Always do the math and consider a pilot on CSP/MCA to see potential savings.
2. Match the agreement to your size and growth. Align your choice with your organization’s size and growth profile. If you expect significant growth or contractions, a flexible model (CSP/MCA) may serve you better than a rigid EA. Conversely, if you’re large and steady, an EA might yield better long-term value. The right program should fit your current needs and scale with you.
3. Negotiate key protections. Whichever program you choose, try to negotiate protections and favorable terms. For EAs, push for price caps, the ability to reduce counts if possible, and multi-year planning discounts. For CSP, negotiate with your partner on their margins or support terms. Even for an MCA, if you have clout, work with Microsoft on things like Azure spending forecasts to secure some cost predictability. Don’t just accept the first offer – there’s usually room to improve terms if you ask.
4. Bundle strategically. Take a holistic view of Microsoft products you use (Azure, Microsoft 365, Dynamics, security suites, etc.) and consider bundling them in one agreement to get a better deal. Microsoft often provides incentives when you bring more business their way in a single negotiation (for example, adding Azure to your EA might improve your discount, or moving all your disparate cloud subscriptions under one MCA could simplify management and potentially get you a commitment discount). Smart bundling – and timing those purchases together – can improve your bargaining position and unlock savings.
5. Reassess at every renewal. Don’t auto-renew agreements blindly. The Microsoft licensing landscape changes frequently (new programs, pricing changes, policy shifts like the 2025 discount changes). Your business changes, too. Treat each renewal or each year as an opportunity to reevaluate your licensing mix. Perhaps three years ago, an EA made sense, but now you’re more cloud-based, and CSP/MCA could work better (or vice versa). Maybe Microsoft’s discount structures have changed, tilting the scales. Always do a fresh comparison of options when a contract is ending. This ensures you don’t stick with an outdated model out of habit and miss out on a better approach.

Conclusion: Microsoft’s EA, MPSA, CSP, and MCA each have their place. By understanding how they differ and following a strategic, buyer-first approach, you can choose the best licensing program for your organization – and negotiate it to your advantage.

Licensing may never be the most fun part of IT, but with the right agreement, you’ll gain cost savings, flexibility, or both. Use the comparisons and tips above as a compass as you navigate Microsoft’s licensing maze with confidence.

Read about our Microsoft Services

Do you want to know more about our Microsoft Advisory Services?

Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.

Name *

Email *

Company

Message *

Submit