I have a question about upcoming FY26 on the Distributor side minimum of 30 million USD TTM billed.
I am in Tie Distribution, distributing in Thailand. i see New Update What does this mean, please elaborate. I want to know how the revenue is calculated and is the minimum really 30 million USD? How can I check how much the current amount is? How is the TTM billed CSP revenue measured, and where can we view our historical data?
Questions Regarding New CSP Authorization Enforcement Policies
I have the following questions about the scenario in which a direct bill partner does not meet the new requirements at the CSP tenant anniversary date: Restricted Status vs. Suspension/Revocation: Until recently, official documents indicated that at T+0, a direct bill partner would move to "Restricted" status, allowing them to continue billing and renewing existing customers, but not create new customers or subscriptions, for an indefinite period. This also allowed a reasonable timeframe for transition to indirect CSP. Now, the new enforcement policies state that at T+30, the tenant is placed in "Suspended" status, and at T+60, it is "Revoked," with no further possibility to operate on active customers and their subscriptions—even in cases where subscriptions have already been paid for annual or annual/monthly contracts. Could you clarify the reason for this change and the rationale behind the new, stricter enforcement timeline? Customer Transition Feasibility: How does Microsoft expect all customers to be transferred to an indirect provider within just 30–60 days after T+0? Is there any support or guidance for partners to manage such a rapid transition? Because in my opinion is not feasible and could be a potential risk to loose customers business. Prepaid Subscriptions: Even if it were possible to transfer all customers within the required timeframe, has Microsoft considered that many of these subscriptions have already been prepaid for an entire year or are in the middle of an annuality with monthly payments by the direct bill partner to Microsoft? We appreciate your attention to these concerns and look forward to your guidance on how to best manage compliance and customer impact under the new policies. My personal opinion is that is immediately necessary to restore the process as before with the Restricted Status if Direct Bill are not satisfied and give time (one year) to the partner to move to indirect provider all the customers/subscriptions. Thank you in advance for your support.
i have a Question FY26 Indirect reseller security score Can't access it.
I must say that I am a Distributor and my Partners do not have access to the Security page and I want to make sure that they can access it. From what I have found, it only says that it is enforced for direct bill partners, distributors (formerly indirect provider), and indirect resellers. Can you please update this because the FY26 document requires that you Complete the mandatory requirements of the Partner Center security score. Please provide clarity on compliance with the Security requirements. FY26 When I click on the link Adn i see in Security Role i Not see Indirect reseller access On Partner Center Indirect reseller Can't access Even if they are Global Admins, they cannot access it.
Deployments calculation for Modern Work
Deployments score is calculated by dividing the Active usage values by the Qualified usage values and multiplying by 100 - this result must be greater than or equal to 40 percent, in order for achieving points required for membership qualification, If the results are less than 40 percent, then the customer in question will not meet the basic requirements, and no points are given. As of now, the Active usage value is the number of licenses available on a tenant, and not the actual amount of active users with a valid license assigned. Customers often have licenses with yearly commitment and also have an overage of MS 365 licenses, due to employee hirings and layoffs. This means that the calculated usage percentage if mostly lower than the real life percentages and can never reach 100%. If a customer has a negative development in employee count during the year, it can result in a declining usage score, negatively affecting the points required for the Partners membership eligibility. This even if the actual usage percentage in the customer's end is increasing. We think that the calculation for Deployment score should be changed to reflect the number of acutal active and licensed users (like the Active usage value) , and not be based on the number of licenses available on the tenant.Unable to pass Employment Verifcation step in Partner Center
Hello everyone, I am stuck at the Employment Verification step while trying to enroll in the Microsoft Partner Center. I have already submitted the required documents, including the domain invoice and the assignment letter, but Microsoft responded with: "Based on the information you have provided to date, we have determined that your organization does not currently meet the requirements to pass verification." This leaves me very confused, as the reply does not explain what exactly is missing or what additional documents are required. I have carefully checked the documentation, but there is no clear guidance. As a company focusing on IT security, this is extremely frustrating. We recently shifted from Linux to Windows development, and without a Microsoft Partner account we are unable to proceed with building kernel-level antivirus solutions for our users. This has a devastating impact on our business. Could anyone please share their experience or advise on what specific documents or requirements Microsoft usually expects in order to pass Employment Verification? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!
NEW! Microsoft 365 Customer Self-Serve Template for CSP partners
We’re excited to share the Microsoft 365 Customer Self-Serve Template to support your self-serve capabilities and insights for optimizing the commerce experience. Today, online buying is the norm, and customers are increasingly looking for one-stop shopping with a self-serve experience that’s fast, convenient, and on demand. The Customer Self-Serve Template gives you the tools to offer a seamless self-serve experience, streamlining the customer journey. Whether you leverage the content for new customer acquisition or for customer expansion, this quick-start guide will help you optimize the customer purchasing and provisioning process. With your self-serve capabilities in place, customers can easily choose, pay for, and auto-provision users on Microsoft 365 without manual partner interaction. Download the Customer Self-Serve Template to get started
Legal-entities and sub-units in Microsoft Partner Center terms
Hi, I represent several partners with Microsoft, and we are fast growing. In our enterprise, we do as several others, we move around locations, merge them, and restructure to improve efficiency and quality. Recently Microsoft also notified us to update and improve several of our MPN/CSP identifiers with updated information, which resulted in this post about missing features and hidden Microsoft data not available in Partner Center. Starting out as a partner, you add your company in Partner Center, creating your PGA and first PLA account. Your PGA now refers to your legal entity, and your PLA is now a sub-unit under your PGA. So far so good (for a CSP business, you have your PGA be the MPN id and your PLA the CSP id). As time goes by, your business grows and you start buying other MS partner companies. In comes account merge in partner center to the rescue. This will merge your MPN (not CSP, I know, atleast not in terms of your GDAP or customer relationships, but everything else), so that all your competencies, reports and information is updated accordingly. The company you have bought and merged now still has their CSP business, but reporting under your PGA. Both their original PGA and PLA accounts are now PLA under you PGA. So far this seems to be good, but now you are missing out on some data hidden internally in Microsoft, that is nowhere to be seen, and impossible to update: this original merged PGA still refers to the original legal-entity, and the PLA is still NOT connected to your PGA, but the original PGA, which is now a PLA under your PGA. So, something like, Your PGA --> The merged PGA (which is now a PLA) --> The merged PLA. Confused yet? Now, this merged company should at some point in time become something else, maybe a department or separate location of your company. Or maybe you even move that as a department or location below some other company you have in your enterprise portfolio. Now comes the headache of updating your CSP - PLA identifiers with correct legal information. There is currently nowhere you can read what PLA id-s are considered as legal entities, and nowhere your PLA says which legal entity they are connected to. Even filing this with MS partner support is a no-go, this information is hidden so far behind support/MCAIPP/CSP/direct/indirect/vetting/engineering/developers and god knows what, that it is currently not possible to update any of it. Not even getting to read the structure of the identifiers is possible. I hope Microsoft can understand this is a big compliance issue over time. How many tax forms or payout accounts do you need? How many are using the same legal info for the same tax forms? Regardless of being a direct or indirect partner, who should really receive the bill? Who ends up as the owner of the different agreements? (I know this usually works out one way or another, but how many hours could have been saved on partner support if this was not a headache?) We need to be able to see where each identifier is connected in terms of sub-units and legal-entities. Whether by self-service or MS partner support, we need to be able to provide updates on this structure. We need to be able to change any PLA between being a legal entity or a sub-unit, and telling which legal-entity owns the sub-unit or parent legal-entity. Different partners have different setups, we have an enterprise setup where one company fully owns all the others and plan to fully merge them within a single legal entity, but still owned by the enterprise. Others have separate companies working together sharing Microsoft competencies and benefits under one umbrella. Having a way to let Microsoft know about structural changes and having this information visible and correct in partner center is crucial when working as a partner over time. Bonus tip: Most countries, even Norway has officially available records on all companies registered, on official website or by official APIs - by looking up any company registration id, you can have the 100% accurate information for all legal entities, and all sub-units, we even give you the company registration id inside partner center for your benefit.
