① Licensing concept · Support and maintenance
Dropping support looks like a saving until you want it back. Reinstatement commonly means back fees for the lapsed period plus a premium, sometimes up to three times a renewal. The math is built to punish the round trip.
Lapsing is cheap. Coming back is not.
A reinstatement fee, sometimes called a reactivation fee, is what a vendor charges to restore software support after it has been allowed to lapse. With IBM Subscription and Support, the common pattern for restoring coverage is paying the applicable reactivation charge and acquiring S&S for all uses and installations of the program, not only the ones you want supported now. The charge exists to make the round trip, dropping support and returning, more expensive than simply keeping coverage in place, which is exactly why a lapse rarely saves what it appears to.
The numbers are built to discourage it. Reinstatement commonly requires paying retroactively for the lapsed period, often capped at one to two years of fees, plus the current renewal going forward. Where a vendor finds unauthorized use of support benefits during the lapse, the charge can climb substantially, in some cases to around three times a standard renewal. These are observed patterns rather than fixed rules, and the exact treatment varies by vendor and contract, so the figures should be confirmed against the specific agreement before any decision to let support drop.
What each path gives you and what it costs to get back to supported. The reinstatement figures are common patterns, not fixed terms; confirm against the specific contract.
| Path | What you keep | Cost to return to support |
|---|---|---|
| Maintain support | Updates, fixes, new versions, vendor support | None, coverage never broke |
| Lapse, then reinstate | Right to run the last entitled version | Back fees for the lapse plus current renewal |
| Lapse with unauthorized use | Right to run the last entitled version | Premium reinstatement, up to around 3x a renewal |
| Lapse, move to third party support | Last entitled version, third party maintenance | No vendor updates; return path is reinstatement |
A product whose annual support is an illustrative S. The estate drops support for two years, then needs to reinstate. The figures use common reinstatement patterns to show the mechanics; actual terms vary by contract and are not a quote.
| Measure | Saved during lapse | Cost to reinstate |
|---|---|---|
| Annual support charge | S | S |
| Two years not paid | +2S saved | n/a |
| Back fees for the lapsed period | n/a | up to 2S |
| Current renewal to resume | n/a | S |
| Net position on reinstatement | +2S | −3S |
The two years of skipped payments saved 2S, but reinstatement asks for up to 2S in back fees plus the renewal, so the round trip can end roughly S worse off than never lapsing, before any premium for unauthorized use. The lapse only pays if you never reinstate and never need an update, which is a narrow case. The moment a return is possible, the back fees usually erase the saving, which is the whole point of how the fee is structured.
Reinstatement commonly charges retroactively for the lapsed period plus the renewal, so the money saved by skipping support is clawed back on return. The lapse only nets out ahead if you genuinely never come back.
Returning typically means acquiring support for all uses and installations of the program, not just the subset you want supported. You cannot reinstate a corner of the estate cheaply while leaving the rest lapsed.
Using support benefits, such as fixes or downloads, during a lapse is the trigger for the steepest reinstatement charges, observed in some cases at up to around three times a renewal. A quiet lapse is one thing; a lapse that still pulls fixes is an audit finding.
A lapse freezes you on the last entitled version with download access commonly restricted. If a security fix or a compatibility update lands, you cannot take it without reinstating, which can force the round trip at the worst moment.
Lapse only what is frozen, keep the last version, model the round trip.
Treat a support lapse as a one way decision until proven otherwise. It can make sense for a genuinely frozen product at end of life that you will not patch, upgrade, or return to vendor support, and not much else. Before dropping coverage, secure and archive the latest entitled version while download access is still open, because that right is what you keep and the access is what you lose. Model the full round trip, the back fees plus the renewal, against the years of saving, and weigh third party support as an alternative that maintains the product without vendor updates. If reinstatement is even possible, assume the back fees will erase most of the saving.
Support cost sits alongside the pricing levers, so read GSSP, where active S&S is a condition of the entry pricing, and MIPS and MSU explained for how the underlying charges scale. If a renewal is forcing the lapse question, see the z16 to z17 question, which often coincides with it. When a vendor frames reinstatement as the only way back, our mainframe license negotiation and contract review teams test that framing before you accept the premium.
What a vendor charges to restore support after it lapses. With IBM S&S it typically means the reactivation charge plus acquiring support for all uses and installations, structured to make the round trip cost more than maintaining coverage.
It varies, but the pattern is punitive: back fees for the lapsed period, often capped at one to two years, plus the current renewal. Where unauthorized use is found, the charge can reach around three times a renewal. Confirm against the contract.
For a perpetual license, generally yes: you keep the right to the last version released while support was active, but lose updates, fixes, and new versions, with downloads commonly restricted. Archive the latest entitled version before lapsing.
Sometimes, for a frozen end of life product you will not patch or return to support. If a return or an update is plausible, the back fees usually erase the saving, so model the round trip and consider third party support first.