Sub-capacity reinstatement as part of the settlement.

Why the gap opened.

Sub-capacity licensing lets you license only the virtual cores running IBM software instead of the whole physical host. The right is conditional on ILMT being deployed within 90 days of first eligible deployment, running continuously, with quarterly reports retained for two years. When an audit finds a break in that chain, IBM defaults the affected period to full-capacity charging. The finding is the symptom. The unaddressed condition is that, unless something changes, the same break will recur and the next review will charge full-capacity again.

Two problems, one settlement.

A settlement that only resolves the back charge treats the symptom. A settlement that also reinstates sub-capacity treats the cause. The negotiation should produce both: an agreed figure for the disputed period, and explicit confirmation that the products in scope are recognized as sub-capacity eligible going forward, with the remediation that supports that recognition documented in the same letter.

What reinstatement should name.

• The specific products returned to sub-capacity treatment, by name.
• The remediation completed: ILMT reinstalled or corrected, agents reporting, scans current, miscategorized installs fixed.
• The forward reporting commitment, so quarterly reports resume and are retained for the required two years.
• Acknowledgement that the corrected position, not the audit period default, applies from the settlement date.

What this means under audit.

The lever for reinstatement is strongest while the settlement is still open, because that is the moment both sides want closure. Once the letter is signed without it, you are negotiating from a weaker position later. Our audit negotiation work treats reinstatement as a named settlement term rather than a follow up task, so the deal you sign fixes the future capacity position at the same time it closes the past one.