Most SPLA conversations focus on counting, but there is a question that comes before counting and carries more risk when it is wrong: is the product eligible for SPLA at all. A perfectly accurate monthly count of a product that should never have been reported under SPLA is still a compliance problem, and one that an accurate count cannot fix. In 2026, with the eligible set continuing to shift as Microsoft updates the program, confirming eligibility is a practical step every hoster should take before each reporting cycle. This article explains how.
For the full defensive method around reporting and audit, read the SPLA audit defense guide. Here we focus on the eligibility gate.
Why eligibility comes first
SPLA lets a hoster deliver Microsoft software to external customers on a pay as you consume basis, but only for the products Microsoft makes available through the program and only under the conditions the SPUR sets. The eligibility question has two parts. The first is whether the product can be licensed under SPLA at all. The second is whether your specific delivery model meets the conditions attached to that product. Get either wrong and you have exposure that does not depend on the count, because the issue is that the consumption should not have been under SPLA in the way you ran it.
An accurate count of an ineligible product is still a finding. Eligibility is the gate, and the count comes after.
What changes year to year
The SPUR is updated regularly, and the set of products available under SPLA is not fixed. Products are added, conditions are tightened, and some products move out of the program or change how they may be delivered. A hoster that confirmed eligibility two years ago and assumed it still holds is exposed to the gap between then and now. The practical consequence is that eligibility must be read against the current SPUR for the products you are actually running, not against a memory of how the program looked when you set it up.
- New products may become eligible, opening efficient options you are not using
- Conditions on existing products may tighten, making a delivery model that was compliant non compliant
- Products may leave the program, so continuing to report them under SPLA becomes an error
- Version specific rules may change what edition you are permitted to deliver
A practical eligibility check
The check itself is straightforward when done as a routine. For every product in your estate, confirm against the current SPUR that it is eligible for SPLA, that your delivery model meets the product's conditions, and that the version you deliver is permitted. Record the result alongside your monthly report so the interpretation is documented. The table below frames the check.
| Question | What you confirm | If the answer is no |
|---|---|---|
| Is the product eligible? | It appears in the current SPUR for SPLA | Stop reporting it under SPLA, find the right program |
| Does delivery meet conditions? | Multi tenancy and delivery match the rules | Adjust the delivery or the licensing |
| Is the version permitted? | The edition delivered is allowed | Align the version or the report |
How eligibility shows up in an audit
A SPLA audit, run by a Big Four firm under the MBSA audit clause across a 36 month lookback, tests eligibility as part of the reconciliation. If the auditor finds a product reported under SPLA that was not eligible, or a delivery model that did not meet the conditions, that becomes a finding regardless of how accurately you counted it. Back fees at the price file rate for genuine shortfalls are not negotiable, and the penalty uplift of 25 to 125 percent depends in part on whether the issue looks like an oversight or a pattern. An eligibility error that ran unchecked for years is harder to frame as good faith than one caught and corrected promptly.
Where this leaves you
Eligibility is the gate that sits in front of all your SPLA counting, and it changes. Confirm every product against the current SPUR each cycle, check that your delivery meets the conditions and the version is permitted, and document the result. Catching an eligibility issue yourself, before an auditor does, is both cheaper and easier to defend.
If you are not certain that everything you report under SPLA is eligible and delivered within the conditions, that uncertainty is exposure. We work on a fixed fee from $18,000 or on gainshare, a share of verified savings or avoided penalty with zero retainer and no risk to you, and we reduce your exposure or we reimburse our service fee. Get a quote and we will review your product eligibility against your actual estate.
If this is live on your desk right now, our SPLA audit defense service manages the Big Four auditor on your behalf.