Prajkta Waditwar-Senior Technology Sourcing Manager at Box, focused on AI strategy & Procurement Innovation. The views expressed are my own.
For years, software procurement teams in California have operated with a familiar assumption: Electronically delivered software and SaaS generally did not carry the same sales-tax treatment as prewritten software delivered on physical media. Beginning January 1, 2027, that distinction largely changes.
California’s SB 122 expands sales and use tax to digital products, including prewritten computer software transferred electronically or accessed remotely. For enterprise technology buyers, the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA) specifically includes SaaS involving access to prewritten software. Custom software continues to receive different treatment.
At first glance, this looks like a tax change. When I look at it through a procurement lens, I see something broader. Software is now embedded across nearly every business function, and adding another cost variable changes the economics of an already significant technology category.
Why California Makes This A Bigger Technology Story
The location of this change matters. California sits at the center of the technology economy. According to the National Venture Capital Association, California companies attracted approximately $191.2 billion in venture capital in 2025, roughly 60% of the U.S. total, with AI driving much of that investment. The San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland region alone accounted for 52.4% of U.S. venture-capital deal value.
California is home to technology producers, startups and large enterprises that are also significant technology consumers. That makes this more than an administrative tax change. It affects the economics of buying software in one of the world’s most important technology ecosystems, at a time when organizations are rapidly increasing investments in cloud, cybersecurity, data and AI.
For procurement leaders, the question is bigger than how to account for the tax. It is how the change should affect software demand, contract negotiations and portfolio decisions.
Why SaaS Rationalization Is Becoming More Valuable
SaaS sprawl rarely happens intentionally; it accumulates through overlapping tools, unused licenses and automatic renewals. California’s tax change makes that inefficiency more expensive, as organizations may also incur tax on software they aren’t meaningfully using.
I think this makes SaaS rationalization an ongoing procurement discipline rather than a periodic cost-saving exercise. Procurement needs better visibility into utilization, overlapping applications and unnecessary license tiers before renewal decisions are made.
My view is simple: Don’t optimize the tax on software you shouldn’t be buying in the first place. Start with demand.
How A Great Discount Can Still Produce A Bad Software Deal
Procurement organizations are good at negotiating discounts, but software economics increasingly extend beyond unit price.
Imagine procurement secures a 15% discount on a SaaS renewal while the company is buying 20% more licenses than it uses. The negotiation may look successful while the underlying economics remain poor.
Procurement should evaluate the fully loaded cost of the capability, including subscription fees, usage charges, implementation, support and applicable taxes. Contract flexibility becomes important as well. A smaller discount combined with meaningful true-down rights may create more value than a larger discount tied to an oversized multiyear commitment.
The headline discount tells you what procurement negotiated. The total economics tell you what the organization actually bought.
This is also where procurement and FinOps increasingly intersect. Cloud taught organizations that technology costs need to be managed throughout the lifecycle, not only when the contract is signed. SaaS and AI are moving in the same direction.
The Importance Of Contract Structure And Geography
Modern technology agreements frequently combine software subscriptions, implementation, support, managed services and custom development. CDTFA distinguishes custom computer software from prewritten software, making it important for technology buyers to understand how their software purchases are classified.
Procurement shouldn’t become the tax department. It should make sure contracts accurately describe what the organization is buying and bring in tax and legal expertise where necessary.
Geography also matters. A single enterprise agreement may support employees across California, other states and international locations. CDTFA’s guidance addresses digital products used outside California and circumstances in which purchasers can have responsibility for reporting and paying use tax.
That means procurement increasingly needs contract, entitlement, consumption and employee-location data to work together. Knowing the total number of licenses may no longer provide enough information.
Large enterprise buyers should pay particular attention. Under specified circumstances, CDTFA says that when a retailer’s aggregate gross receipts from certain digital products transferred electronically or accessed remotely to the same purchaser exceed $5 million during calendar year 2027, the purchaser can become responsible for reporting and paying use tax on the transaction that causes the threshold to be exceeded.
For large organizations, that makes preparation a cross-functional issue involving procurement, finance, tax and technology.
Focusing On Value, Not Just Cost
The predictable response to higher software costs is to reduce licenses, consolidate suppliers or freeze new applications. Some of that may be appropriate, but I would be careful about making software reduction the objective.
A heavily used engineering platform that accelerates releases may easily justify its fully loaded cost. The same could be true for cybersecurity software that reduces meaningful risk or an AI application that saves significant employee time. Meanwhile, a rarely used application duplicating functionality already available elsewhere becomes harder to defend.
The better question isn’t “How do we offset the tax?” It is “Which software creates enough value to justify its fully loaded cost?”
The scale of the policy shows why this matters. California’s nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office reported that the administration estimates the expansion could generate approximately $900 million annually for the state’s General Fund and $1.1 billion in local sales tax revenue in 2027-28 while noting uncertainty around those estimates.
What Procurement Leaders Should Do Now
Before January 1, procurement leaders should review major software agreements and 2027 renewals, focusing on utilization, overlapping applications, user location and contracts that combine software with services or custom work.
The response should go beyond adding tax to a spreadsheet. The bigger question is: “Do we actually know what our software costs us, how much we’re using and what we’re getting in return?”
California’s new tax may make the cost of not knowing harder to ignore.
Forbes Technology Council is an invitation-only community for world-class CIOs, CTOs and technology executives. Do I qualify?