EU vs Microsoft: The Battle Over Teams and Digital Market Regulation

Microsoft’s ongoing tussle with European Union regulators over the integration of Teams with its Office 365 and Microsoft 365 suites represents one of the highest-stakes antitrust battles in the modern digital era. As collaborative tools become integral to business operations, the outcome of this dispute will reverberate across the global software industry, testing the EU's newly reinforced regulatory powers and setting precedents for digital market competition.

Microsoft Under the Regulatory Microscope​

In July 2023, the European Commission (EC) escalated its scrutiny of Microsoft’s practices, formally charging the company with breaching competition law. The heart of the case is the bundling of Microsoft Teams with productivity suites, beginning as a seemingly benign convenience in 2017 but quickly evolving into a concern. Regulators argue this strategy confers an undue advantage, squeezing out rivals such as Slack and Zoom by defaulting enterprises into using Teams.
The EC’s stance echoes earlier, headline-making antitrust cases—most famously against Microsoft itself regarding Internet Explorer in the 2000s, and Google’s Android case more recently. At issue is what the EC terms “forced integration”: when a dominant platform-operator leverages its breadth to foreclose competition in adjacent markets. Microsoft’s embedding of Teams in its flagship subscription products, according to the Commission, tips procurement decisions in its favor, stifling diverse software ecosystems.

Microsoft’s Concessions: The Decoupling Strategy​

In response to the mounting regulatory heat, Microsoft proposed a series of remedies designed to appease European authorities and avert a potentially colossal fine, which could equal up to 10% of its worldwide revenue. The centerpiece of these concessions is to decouple Teams from its Office and Microsoft 365 bundles in the European Economic Area.

What Has Microsoft Offered?​

• Standalone Office/Microsoft 365 Without Teams: Since late 2023, Microsoft has begun offering versions of its productivity suites in some EU markets without Teams, in an apparent gesture of good faith.
• Improved Interoperability: Promises include enhanced technical collaboration with competing services and publishing more detailed technical documentation. This theoretically allows competitors like Slack or Zoom to interface more seamlessly with Microsoft's core productivity and cloud offerings.
• Pricing Transparency: Microsoft has pledged to clarify its licensing models and pricing structures, so customers can more clearly contrast costs between options with and without Teams.

These measures, Microsoft claims, reflect constructive engagement with competition concerns and show a willingness to create a level playing field. However, Brussels remains unconvinced.

EC’s Response: Demanding More Than Cosmetic Change​

Despite Microsoft’s moves, the European Commission has signaled dissatisfaction with their scope and depth. According to a report from May 2025, regulators consider these efforts insufficient, viewing them as incremental rather than transformative. There’s a sense that unless Microsoft implements structural changes, the risk of recurrence or circumvention persists.
The Commission, leveraging the investigatory teeth granted by the Digital Markets Act, wants more than just new product SKUs or surface-level transparency. Specifically, the EC is seeking:

• Long-term Structural Guarantees: Solid mechanisms that ensure competitors can access Microsoft’s user base and infrastructure on equitable terms.
• Open Ecosystem Access: This could mean richer, public APIs and better data portability, so that rivals aren’t boxed out or at a technical disadvantage.
• Transparent and Non-Discriminatory Pricing: The Commission is highly attuned to the capacity for “shadow bundling”—offering steep discounts for bundled products, making alternatives artificially unattractive.

Industry insiders suggest that Brussels’ ultimate objective is to establish precedents that govern not just Microsoft, but all digital “gatekeepers,” thus influencing the wider competitive landscape for years to come.

What’s At Stake? The Digital Markets Act in Action​

This skirmish forms a pivotal early test of the EU’s Digital Markets Act (DMA), a sweeping regulation intended to rein in “core platform services” operated by Big Tech companies. The DMA restricts a range of business practices—including self-preferencing and product tying—seen as antithetical to fair competition.
By honing in on Microsoft Teams’ integration, Brussels is not just targeting an individual case but seeking to validate its broader regulatory apparatus. How Microsoft responds, and how stringently the EC applies these rules, will serve as a bellwether for the continent’s digital sovereignty and competitive posture.

The Broader Market Implications​

If Microsoft is ultimately compelled to create a clean legal and technical separation between Teams and Office 365—avoiding any implicit or explicit pressure on customers to choose bundled solutions—it could transform procurement dynamics across enterprise IT.

• Greater Market Choice: Enterprises would have clearer, less-biased choices among communications and collaboration platforms.
• Potential Price Impact: If the decoupling leads to more differentiated pricing, small and midsize organizations could see cost reductions or be able to negotiate more flexibly.
• Catalyst for Innovation: True interoperability and open APIs could foster a thriving ecosystem of third-party add-ons and integrations, rather than a closed set of sanctioned solutions.

Conversely, there’s a risk that fragmentation or overly rigid regulation could stifle convenience, degrade user experience, or unintentionally increase costs, especially if vendors shift away from economies of scale.

Critical Analysis: Strengths and Weaknesses of the EU’s Approach​

Notable Strengths​

• Guarding Against Entrenchment: The Commission’s persistent focus on platform neutrality is a bulwark against single-vendor lock-in, often cited as the bane of enterprise IT. By insisting on more modular solutions, the EC may foster a more competitive—and thus, innovative—market.
• Setting a Global Standard: The DMA, if enforced robustly, will set a template that other regions (such as the US or Asia-Pacific) may eventually adopt. The precedent effect could enhance global digital fairness.
• Targeted, Well-Documented Concerns: The EC’s emphasis on non-discriminatory technical access and transparent pricing aligns well with the actual pain points voiced by rivals such as Slack (whose complaints in 2020 partly triggered the case).

Potential Risks and Pitfalls​

• Overregulation Backlash: The risk of “overcorrecting” is real; imposing overly granular rules may backfire, generating compliance overhead and discouraging investment or fast-moving product improvements.
• Technological Unintended Consequences: If decoupling is executed poorly, it may create jarring user experiences, compatibility headaches, or costly re-engineering for customer IT departments.
• Geopolitical Tensions: The case has already attracted comments from US policymakers, most notably former president Donald Trump, who frames EU actions as “protectionist” and damaging to US interests. This could escalate into a broader transatlantic regulatory clash, with implications for global technology partnerships.

Industry Perspective: Voices from the Trenches​

What Do Rivals Say?​

Slack, Zoom, and other competitors have long argued that their growth has been hampered not by product inferiority but by Microsoft’s bundling tactics. Former Slack CEO Stewart Butterfield called Microsoft’s Teams move, “the classic embrace, extend, extinguish strategy,” a reference to Microsoft’s checkered antitrust history.
Zoom and smaller EU collaboration startups echo this, flagging difficulties in integrating deeply with Office 365 or reaching enterprise buyers accustomed to all-in-one licensing. They welcome the EC’s muscular stance but remain wary of partial or easily reversible measures.

Customer Considerations​

Enterprises face trade-offs. Many customers value the convenience and price efficiency of bundled suites, preferring fewer vendors and a unified experience. On the other hand, procurement officers and CIOs often bristle at opaque price lists and the lack of flexibility in choosing “best of breed” solutions.
Whether the Commission’s push will result in real, tangible improvements for customers—not just competitors—will depend largely on how strict and detailed the final remedies are.

Microsoft’s Predicament: Between a Rock and a Hard Market​

Microsoft’s negotiating position is delicate. Its leadership is publicly supportive of European regulation and “digital sovereignty” but also must act to defend its strategic positions. Teams, born out of the ashes of Skype for Business, has become both a revenue driver and a linchpin in Microsoft’s cloud-first ecosystem.
If forced to accept the EC’s strictest terms, Microsoft may lose its “stickiness” in European enterprise, especially as Google Workspace, Slack, and Zoom continue to vie for similar customers. The uncertainty is compounded by the global context: US policymakers, under both Democratic and Republican leadership, have decried what they see as EU overreach into American tech champions.
Still, Microsoft may calculate that conceding on Teams bundling—particularly in a specific region—presents less risk than a multi-billion dollar fine or a far-reaching regulatory order setting new precedents.

What Happens Next? Scenarios and Strategic Calculus​

1. Genuine Decoupling Wins Approval​

If Microsoft’s eventual proposals meet the EC’s bar for openness, enterprises could see much greater autonomy in assembling their productivity and communications stack. This would likely be accompanied by strict regulatory monitoring and ongoing compliance audits.

2. Ongoing Disputes and Appeals​

Should Microsoft’s measures fall short, the dispute could drag on for years—potentially triggering the vast fine threatened by the Commission or a series of courtroom battles echoing the 2000s browser saga. Such a long tail could introduce uncertainty into enterprise IT roadmaps across Europe.

3. “Shadow Bundling” Risks​

Industry experts caution that even if Teams is no longer a default software bundle, subtler forms of linkage—such as complex licensing incentives, deep menu integration, or bundled premium support—could persist. Only vigilant regulatory oversight, including ongoing data and API audits, can address this possibility.

How Should Businesses Prepare?​

It’s too early to predict the final contours of Microsoft’s legal settlement or product roadmap within the EU. Nonetheless, IT decision-makers and CIOs can take several constructive steps:

• Audit Existing Contracts: Businesses should closely review their current Microsoft licensing terms, identify Teams dependencies, and consider potential switches.
• Explore Alternatives: With the regulatory environment in flux, now may be the time to pilot alternatives—either for collaboration (e.g., Slack, Zoom, Webex) or core productivity (Google Workspace).
• Engage with Vendor Account Managers: Enterprises should leverage the regulatory spotlight to negotiate more transparent, flexible deals—using heightened scrutiny as bargaining leverage.
• Monitor Compliance Announcements: The next wave of technical FAQs and compliance documents from Microsoft (and rivals) will be telling as to whether changes are cosmetic or substantive.

Conclusion: A Defining Moment in Digital Competition​

Microsoft’s battle with EU regulators isn’t just a corporate power struggle—it reflects the very heart of modern digital market governance. As software has become a utility, access to core platforms and fair competition have taken on outsized importance not just for rivals, but for entire digital ecosystems.
While Microsoft’s move to split Teams from Office 365 marks a tangible shift—and a rare capitulation by a tech titan—the EU’s resolve suggests that only structural, lasting commitment to openness will suffice. Whether this delivers more choice, better prices, and robust innovation for European business remains to be seen.
For now, global eyes are watching Brussels: both for the future direction of digital market regulation, and for signals as to how tech’s biggest players must navigate a newly assertive regulatory frontier. As negotiations continue, the outcome stands to shape not just one company’s fortunes, but the entire digital landscape for years to come.

---

Source: Jason Deegan Microsoft May Split Teams from Office 365 – Will It Satisfy Brussels Regulators?