The withdrawal of Microsoft’s Power Apps per app plan marks a significant shift in how organisations should think about low-code licensing, cost control, and long-term platform strategy.
For UK businesses that have embedded Power Apps into operational workflows, this change is not simply a licensing update; it is a prompt to reassess how applications are deployed, governed, and scaled across the organisation.
At its core, the per app plan was popular because it offered predictability. Organisations could license individual applications for specific user groups, making it easier to justify costs and control spend as solutions were rolled out incrementally. Its end of sale alters that balance, particularly for organisations running multiple apps for different teams, or those planning to extend Power Platform usage as part of wider digital transformation programmes.
Microsoft’s Role As A Third-Party Platform Provider
Microsoft, as a third-party platform provider, continues to evolve its commercial model to reflect how customers use its technology at scale. The move away from per app licensing signals a stronger emphasis on broader, role-based or per-user licensing that encourages deeper adoption of the Power Platform ecosystem.
From Microsoft’s perspective, this simplifies licensing structures and aligns Power Apps more closely with other Dynamics 365 and Microsoft 365 workloads.
From a customer perspective, however, it introduces new considerations around cost modelling, user access, and solution design. Understanding this distinction is critical.
Microsoft provides the platform and licensing frameworks, but responsibility for optimising usage and value sits firmly with the customer.
Assessing The Financial Impact Of Licensing Changes
For many organisations, the immediate challenge is understanding the financial impact. Teams that previously licensed a small number of apps for a large number of users may see costs increase under alternative licensing models. Conversely, organisations with power users accessing multiple apps may find opportunities to consolidate and simplify.
The key point is that there is no universal “best” option. Outcomes depend heavily on how Power Apps is actually being used across the business, how frequently applications are accessed, and whether they support mission-critical or peripheral processes.
Licensing As A Strategic, Not Tactical, Decision
Beyond cost, there is a strategic dimension. Power Apps rarely exist in isolation. It is typically part of a wider application landscape that includes Dynamics 365, Azure, data platforms, and third-party systems. Licensing changes, therefore, have knock-on effects for architecture decisions, security models, and governance.
Without a clear view of current usage and future plans, organisations risk making short-term licensing decisions that constrain long-term value. Treating Power Apps purely as a tactical development tool, rather than as part of a managed business applications strategy, increases the likelihood of inefficiency as licensing models evolve.
Governance, Control, And Application Sprawl
The end of the Power Apps per app plan also brings governance into sharper focus. As Power Apps adoption grows, so does the potential for duplicated functionality, inconsistent user experiences, and unmanaged technical debt.
Licensing constraints can either exacerbate these issues or act as a catalyst for improvement. Organisations that take this moment to rationalise their app portfolio, define clearer ownership, and align development to measurable business outcomes are better placed to absorb licensing changes without disruption.
The People And Process Dimension
There is also a people dimension to consider. Low-code platforms empower citizen developers, which is a strength, but only when supported by the right guardrails. Changes in licensing reinforce the need for clearer guidance on who builds what, for whom, and why.
Aligning Power Apps development with IT, finance, and operational leadership ensures that licensing decisions support productivity rather than becoming a blocker to innovation or growth.
Turning Licensing Change Into Long-Term Value
Ultimately, this change should be viewed less as a problem to fix and more as an opportunity to mature how Power Apps is used within the organisation. Microsoft’s licensing evolution reflects a broader trend: business applications are no longer standalone tools but part of integrated digital platforms.
Organisations that respond by taking a more joined-up, strategic approach will extract greater value, even as commercial models shift.
End Of The Power Apps Per App Plan: What To Do Now
The priority is not to rush into a like-for-like replacement for the per app plan, but to step back and assess. This means understanding current Power Apps usage, mapping applications to business processes, and modelling how different licensing options align with both today’s needs and future growth.
This is where speaking to Akita’s consultants adds tangible value.
As a specialist in Microsoft business applications, Akita Intelligent Solutions helps organisations interpret Microsoft’s licensing changes in a business context, not just a technical one. Akita works with you to assess impact, optimise licensing, and ensure your Power Apps strategy supports operational efficiency, better insight, and long-term profitability.
Rather than treating Microsoft licensing as an isolated procurement exercise, Akita positions it as part of a broader digital transformation conversation. By engaging, organisations can avoid reactive decisions, control costs, and build a Power Platform roadmap that remains robust as Microsoft continues to evolve its third-party offerings.
