GitHub Copilot is moving to usage-based billing

Hello GitHub Community,

Today we announced we are transitioning to a usage-based billing model for GitHub Copilot, effective June 1 📆 Please refer to the blog post for the full announcement link to blog, and you’ll find an FAQ below.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why is GitHub changing the Copilot billing model now?

We’re making this change now because GitHub Copilot simply is not the same product it was a year ago—it now powers far more complex, agentic workflows that consume far more compute. This change is designed to deliver a more sustainable and reliable product experience by aligning pricing to actual usage and costs.

Isn’t this just a price increase disguised as a billing change?

The per seat subscription cost of GitHub Copilot is not increasing, and code completions and Next Edit Suggestions remain unchanged. Users with intense agentic usage will likely see an increase in costs because those features consume more compute. With pooled entitlements, organizations that use Copilot Business or Copilot Enterprise may see their total charges reduced as entitlement pooling balances more active users with less active.

This just wiped GitHub’s value moat – why should I stay?

We believe GitHub Copilot remains the best value and experience for agentic coding. Usage-based billing aligns cost more closely to actual usage and value, while continuing to offer developers the freedom to choose the models and agents that work best for them.

Will there be any free models anymore with this shift?

With the shift to usage-based billing, free models are no longer part of our offering.

If we run out of AI credits mid-month, does Copilot stop working?

If your entitlement and set overage budget is fully consumed, you can continue to use Copilot for code completions and Next Edit Suggestions but will have to wait for your entitlements to reset, purchase additional usage, or upgrade your plan to use other features. We’ve built usage surfaces that show your consumption as a percentage of your budget and in dollar terms so you can track usage as you go and plan accordingly.

For Copilot Business and Copilot Enterprise users, notification at various consumption levels will be sent to your GitHub admins as your entitlements are drawn down. With pooled entitlements, all included credits are pooled across your business. This means power users can draw more when they need it, and lighter users offset the balance.

How can I forecast our AI spend if the bill changes monthly?

We’re rolling out a preview bill experience in the coming weeks to show all users how their costs may shift under the new billing model. This will be available to users via their Billing Overview page when they log in to GitHub.com.

We currently use PRUs for some features, how does this change that?

With usage-based billing, we’re replacing PRUs with a new unit called GitHub AI Credits, which are based on the tokens your interactions consume and priced according to the listed API rates per model. All features aside from code completions and Next Edit Suggestions, which remain unlimited, will be measured and billed in GitHub AI Credits.

Will Actions minutes consume my AI Credits?

Your monthly bill will include both the total cost of your token usage and Actions minutes consumption.

Additionally, Copilot code review recently moved to an agentic architecture that runs on GitHub Actions, and starting June 1, 2026, reviewing a pull request with Copilot will count against your included Actions minutes at the same per-minute rates as any other Actions workflow.

I’m on an annual plan, how does this affect my billing?

We’re retiring annual plans. If you’re currently on an annual plan, you’ll continue to use PRUs until your subscription expires. After it expires, you’ll be moved to a Copilot Free plan unless you sign up for a new monthly paid subscription.

While you can keep using your annual plan until it ends, we’ll be updating model multipliers for PRUs when our new billing model goes live on June 1. We recommend switching to a usage-based monthly plan on June 1, and we’ll provide credits that reflect the prorated amount left on your annual plan subscription.

How are you determining what to charge me and how does that change depending on which model I’m using?

Usage-based billing means you are charged based on the tokens your interactions consume, priced according to the listed API rates per model. We’ve built usage surfaces that show your consumption as a percentage of your budget and in monetary terms. These show up in your editor, on GitHub.com, and in admin dashboards.

Will you resume Copilot trials now that you’ve implemented token-based billing?

Our focus has always been on lowering the barriers to entry for anyone who wants to code and that’s why we continue to offer Copilot Free as a no-cost option. Unfortunately, we’ve observed a high volume of abuse through trials and paused them while we investigate. We are actively working on improved safeguards to prevent misuse of the trial system and will share an update when we have one.

Will we continue to see increased usage limiting?

Unfortunately, users will continue to see increased usage limiting until usage-based billing is implemented on June 1. We know it’s frustrating, and moving to usage-based billing allows us to reduce it. By aligning usage with costs, we can provide a Copilot experience that's predictable and reliable for all users.

Why not implement usage-based billing now? Why continue with painful changes like more usage limiting?

Usage-based billing requires standing up a new billing and metering infrastructure, which won’t be operational until June 1. In the meantime, we need to implement additional changes to ensure a predictable, reliable experience for all users. These are short-term safeguards, and we expect to lift restrictions once our new billing model is in effect.

Why are you only offering promotional pricing for existing Copilot Business and Copilot Enterprise users, and nothing for existing Pro and Pro+ users?

While we're not offering promotional pricing for individual paid plans, we’re offering the same 1:1 ratio of plan price to monthly entitlements as we offer for Business and Enterprise. We believe Pro and Pro+ plans remain competitive offerings that deliver high value for individual users.

Will my unused AI credits roll over from month to month?

No. Your unused AI credits do not roll over from month to month. They will reset at the start of each monthly billing cycle.

[CodePengu1n]

Okay, with this change, will you at least bring back Opus since we're all paying for this again?

[anonimusman00-2]

The hell ? im pay it for Github Pro and Copilot Pro+ and still up the limit for Premium Requests 60$ and what i got is the f**cking limits ? are you kidding ?

[anonimusman00-2]

If you can't overcome your limits, don't give hope to users to overcome your truly limited limits.

[deteeegit]

The hell ? im pay it for Github Pro and Copilot Pro+ and still up the limit for Premium Requests 60$ and what i got is the f**cking limits ? are you kidding ?

This is IDENTICAL to my up-to-the-minute experience and deep annoyance. I am already looking to move to a different product or solution altogether. I started this today on an agent chat describing how confusing and nonsensical the Billing and Billing History pages are, the usage reports, budgeting -- all of it. It didn't take long for these companies to gouge the F out of devs and others.

[alf1650]

i'm with you on how confusing and nonsensical the Billing and Billing History pages are, the usage reports, budgeting.

[anonimusman00-2]

The hell ? im pay it for Github Pro and Copilot Pro+ and still up the limit for Premium Requests 60$ and what i got is the f**cking limits ? are you kidding ?

This is IDENTICAL to my up-to-the-minute experience and deep annoyance. I am already looking to move to a different product or solution altogether. I started this today on an agent chat describing how confusing and nonsensical the Billing and Billing History pages are, the usage reports, budgeting -- all of it. It didn't take long for these companies to gouge the F out of devs and others.

I think they just want profit, they don't care about the server being down, they only care about money, they are very rude.

[monotaskdevelopers]

At least bring back Opus 4.6? 4.5?

[RichMercer]

They're priced at the same as Opus 4.7 though, so there's no point.

[M4XEURS]

They're priced at the same as Opus 4.7 though, so there's no point.

So, can the Pro version still use 4.6?

[imm]

They're priced at the same as Opus 4.7 though, so there's no point.

People online say that Opus 4.7 uses more tokens per request on average than 4.6, so it's not quite obvious what is better.

[ktalanov]

They're priced at the same as Opus 4.7 though, so there's no point.

So, can the Pro version still use 4.6?

Nyooooope.

From the article that we are all discussing:

3. Opus models are no longer available in Pro plans. Opus 4.7 remains available in Pro+ plans. As we announced in our changelog, Opus 4.5 and Opus 4.6 will be removed from Pro+.

Huh, that's weird. I feel like I would have noticed that. Okay, let me click it.

Ah, okay. If you have Changelog emails turned on, or follow their Blog, you may have noticed a changelog entry titled Claude 4.7 is Generally Available" and, like me assumed "okay, they released 4.7 for Copilot, I'll check the multipliers later."

Wait, but they said they informed us that Pro users would lose access? I don't see anything like that after skimming through the changelog. Well, if you actually read the entire link at a snail's speed, you can sort of cobble together what Microsoft PR tried to do 11 days ago.

It seems like they are not going to be providing any Opus models (the biggest visible announcement in that changelog was that Opus 4.7 would be provided at a promotional multiplier at 7.5x for a few weeks, making several users assume that it was a typo -- surely it's not correct that the regular multiplier rate will be 22.5x?) Well, it's worse, it's actually 27x.

To go back to @M4XEURS question, a few days after they posted the announcement about Opus 4.7, all Opus models were silently removed from Copilot. We're on version 1.0.39 and I remember 1.0.36 already didn't have them.

So where was this notice they talk about? Well, I've read the changelog three times to make sure I didn't miss anything. It appears that what they mean by "we announced in our changelog" is two sentences, one of which is buried in the second paragraph and the second appearing after a subtitle and a video. If you read them together, you might divine the meaning.

It's a sneaky attempt, but Microsoft still has a lot to learn from BP and Shell. I can see their thinking though, this is exactly where someone looking for answers as to why Opus suddenly disappeared from their paid Copilot version would look first, in their "Opus 4.7 is now available!" email.

@M4XEURS these are the sentences they expected (edit: they obviously didn't and just buried the announcement) you to add together and after a few minutes' of mental arithmetic come up with the conclusion that all Opus models have been removed from Copilot Pro.

As part of our efforts to improve service reliability, we are streamlining our model offerings. Over the coming weeks, Opus 4.7 will replace Opus 4.5 and Opus 4.6 in the model picker for Copilot Pro+. We’ve seen strong improvements across our benchmarks, and we’re committed to providing individual users with state-of-the-art models while ensuring a fast, reliable Copilot experience

If you scroll past all the crap following the paragraph, you might notice:

Claude Opus 4.7 will be available to Copilot Pro+, Business, and Enterprise users.

And if you combine the two sentences together in your mind, then drop the "assume good faith" thing Wikipedia has been teaching us, you might come to the conclusion that Opus models are going away from Copilot Pro plans. Ah, yes. Clear as mud.

I don't know about all you dullards, but I know that if my software is losing a major feature, there is nowhere better to announce it than by sandwiching it into a a "changelog" about a NEW feature. Can't wait for the email from my toaster manufacturer with the subject "Congrats! Your toaster now consumes 45% less electricity!"

Your toaster now tells you the weather for the upcoming day when the handle is pressed and consumes 45% less electricity! This firmware upgrade will be pushed through automatically when toaster is next connected to WiFi. As part of the upgrade, the bagel/poptart/bread toasting functions will be consolidated into NeoToast, which will be available to anyone on a ToasterPro+ plan or above.

This was your notice:

I have never seen a company be so blatantly disingenous with their customers. Forget evil, this is less malice and more incompetence. It's like the VP of Communications found a copy of Catch-22 on the table at Starbucks and read it as an instruction manual. "Oh, you have an annual subscription? We're not raising prices, we're simply telling you that you now have 33 Sonnet 4.6 premium credits instead of 300! We didn't remove your access to 4.6, we simply "consolidated" it into Opus 4.7 (note; you will not have access to the "streamlined" Opus models, even if you previously did. Where did we announce that? Well, in the changelog that implied you'd get access to Opus 4.7, obviously.)

You know, I understand companies can be evil, or rather that I should not expect them to act in by best interests. I even understand that at $8.33/mo on an annual Pro plan, you will need to change something so you're not losing money now that LLMs are expected to be agentic, call tools, have a larger context windows and take longer autonomous actions on one request.

I got my annual subscription in August of last year. By December, I realised they would not be offering a $10/mo subscription if one premium credit could mean anything from "List the first five prime numbers" to "Why Darmok and Jalad at Kalenda's? Why not Darmok and Kalenda at Jalad's?" to "Create an MVP of Amazon for dogs, including all the specs of a physical product like an Amazon Dot, so that any time the doggo wants treats, they can just boop the "treat button" that instantly dropships dog streats. Finally, when MVP is done, send an email to the top VCs in my area. Make no mistakes."

I have three months in my annnual plan. I just figured that they'd let me ride out the rest of my few months -- what would it cost to them to have three months at the old cost, and simply give the new cost to new/monthly customers? Obviously for the tail end of the distribution quite a lot, but consider the PR and reputation loss from this cluster.. vs. the number of companies who would actually trust Microsoft more if they honoured their commitments. They could still switch most people, who are on monthly plans!

(btw, @microsoft, we actually have something in common: I also am really bad and marketing and not knowing what my users want. Can I get hired? From what I've seen over the last 48 hr I wil fit into your company culture perfectly and I'm pretty sure you can just give me production access on the first day. Don't worry, I know the Status/Outages page must stay super-hidden, I got you.)

Anyway, for anyone on a Pro plan this is your notice that your Opus models went away a few weeks ago. Sorry, I meant were consolidated into a model you don't have access to.

You know, if you any of you fall on hard times you practice that in the mirror next time you consider robbing a house:

I swear officer, I was just consolidating their newest belongings into the back of my truck!

I don't really have anything further to say. If you've read this far, congrats, I guess? And may god have mercy on my soul for making you do so.

[oevillegas]

Github to Pro users: Sorry sir/madam, this is only for paying customers!

[joel-surfthing]

Can I request a refund for the remainder of my annual plan? I've stopped using Microsoft GitHub Copilot altogether.

[Shah-Nisarg]

is a refund available to google play subscribers?

Hi @Shah-Nisarg, yes a refurn is available for Google Play subscribers, but I believe it needs to be processed via GitHub Support and is not self-serve. We're looking into this and will comment here again with specific guidance

[yht1024]

How can an annual user convert to a monthly subscription? I haven't seen a clear way yet. If you want to cancel and renew your monthly subscription before May 20th, but it seems that once you cancel, you won't be able to subscribe anymore, or should you wait for a channel to convert after June 1st

[WHBSmith]

How can an annual user convert to a monthly subscription? I haven't seen a clear way yet. If you want to cancel and renew your monthly subscription before May 20th, but it seems that once you cancel, you won't be able to subscribe anymore, or should you wait for a channel to convert after June 1st

I had a dig around for this too it's in Billing & Licensing -> Licensing and then on the right you'll have your subscription and a 'Manage subscription' drop down. If you click on that you can switch to monthly billing or request a refund. Probably wait until June to do any changes or I guess you won't get any pro-rata credits.

[snakex64]

Literally why they're increasing the annual plan's premium usage request. In hope that they can screw people over hard enough that they cancel the annual plan so they stop loosing money on the old billing model.

Disgusting practices

[thmsbernard]

Is there a benefit of using the Copilot Pro+ at 39$/month instead of using the Copilot Pro at 10$/month and paying for extra usage?

[WHBSmith]

Yeah it's tough to see what the $10 gets you as the credits don't rollover vs. PAYG with Claude etc. Maybe it's basically just convenience with different model access?

[iayoung85]

Yeah it's tough to see what the $10 gets you as the credits don't rollover vs. PAYG with Claude etc. Maybe it's basically just convenience with different model access?

yeah as far as i can tell reading into all the posts.. all you get for pre-paying $39 is the privilege of talking to opus or GPT 5.5.. No real value adder.. I agree that the existing requests system was broken.. but I think this is essentially losing 90% of the value. For me the ability to choose different models was cute.. but not helpful.. often just increasing confusion.

[ManojSurangaBandara]

For those dont understand what's happenning, Github is charging you 39$ to start using high tier models and 10$ to start using rest. If you surpass that $ amount you pay the extra, if you didn't its all gone....simple !

[Slix-M-Lestragg]

Seems like Opus model will be only for Pro+ plan https://github.blog/news-insights/company-news/changes-to-github-copilot-individual-plans/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=github&utm_campaign=FY26APR-WW-LCM-BLA-ProPP-IND-Dev-TX-USGCHGMTH
Opus models are no longer available in Pro plans. Opus 4.7 remains available in Pro+ plans. As we announced in our changelog, Opus 4.5 and Opus 4.6 will be removed from Pro+.

I think that is stale, given on the new pricing you're paying for usage anyway, there doesn't seem to be a reason to hide high end models behind a higher tier which you're getting equivalent credits for anyway.

I fully agree, seeing the move they did by replacing opus 4.5 and 4.6 with 4.7 only and at 7.5x, I'm not surprised

Guess I should have said 15x ...

[Daniel15]

Higher credit at the start of every billing cycle? Lower multiplier for each request, perhaps? I have no idea, either. It could also be that paying for extra usage is charged at a higher rate than the monthly billing rate.
That's all speculation, of course, so I hope GitHub clarifies this for us.
Reading some of the screaming in other threads about other changes GitHub is making, I wonder if this is going to cause more harm than good.

$10 for $10 worth of usage at API rates is simply unusable unless/until API rates come down. There's zero reason to use GHCP after June 1st if this structure goes through as planned.

@OotTheMonk Everything is going to go this way at some point. Subscriptions are heavily subsidized at the moment, which is a major reason why neither OpenAI nor Anthropic are profitable. It works while they're growing and investors are throwing money at them, but it isn't sustainable. The API pricing is closer to what it actually costs them to provide the service, but as far as I know even the API prices aren't profitable at the moment.

I think Github Copilot moving towards being more like a PAYG plan is probably the beginning of an industry-wide movement over the next year or two.

[science64]

how much would be the cost of the tokens? now premium request is 0.04 USD, is it going to be same or 1 million token will be around 10-20 USD and will we have any information how much token agents are using?

[ShepAlderson]

I expect that there will be granularity down to the penny for billing. So, let’s say Pro at $10/mo gets 1000 AI credits. You ask a question that uses $3 of API billing, so it charges down your AI credits by 300, so you’re left with 700.

For some context, a single session with something like Opus or GPT-5.5 while doing a plan and implement can easily run into the realm of $30-40. For context, I did a plan of a pretty substantial feature today using API billing and Opus and it cost about $35 for that single chat session. (This was in Claude Code, not Copilot.)

With the pricing change, unless you use a ton of autocomplete suggestion stuff in your editor and that’s your main surface for interacting with Copilot, or if you have no other option at your work but to use Copilot, you’re better off with almost any other plan. If you like GPT models, that means going to OpenAI directly, or if you like Claude models, Anthropic.

I’m sad this change is happening, but I am not surprised in the slightest. I can only imagine that agentic workflows have GitHub hemorrhaging money, and while Microsoft did invest a lot in OpenAI, they are still apparently dealing with API pricing for the models GitHub serves? I think the only way a company can be competitive and offer a substantial value to compete against “Just to pay for the API yourself” is to train and serve their own models. We’ve seen that happen with Cursor, and I expect we’ll see more. (I thought that was the intention of Raptor Mini, but who knows what happens with that now.)

Also, the fact that the “AI Credits” expire at the end of the month means you’re almost certainly better off just going to the API providers directly and just paying there. If you use less than $10 or $39 in inference with your AI Credits in a month, you’d bet better off just paying à la carte API prices.

Now is a good time to start experimenting with agentic harnesses that aren’t connected to a specific provider’s service. (Things like opencode, for example.) Luckily the open weight models are getting better and better with each release, and hopefully we’ll continue to see reasonably priced API access for those continue.

[eric-rolph]

I installed Claude Code and Codex VS Code extensions. Much better experience consumer wise.

[ceelian]

But if someone is already invested in the vscode/github copilot ecosystem, they could always use bring-your-own-model-key (BYOK) and have API pricing of the model provider directly. So even if it is a price increase, it is still quite flexible.

[snakex64]

But if someone is already invested in the vscode/github copilot ecosystem, they could always use bring-your-own-model-key (BYOK) and have API pricing of the model provider directly. So even if it is a price increase, it is still quite flexible.

You have the flexibility of paying more in every single other scenario, congrats

[PanAchy]

@science64 I made github.com/PanAchy/copilot-arewecooked as a way to get a sense of what your cost will be starting June based on your historical usage.

[Omar5962]

tengo una suscripción Copilot Pro o Pro+ y organizacionalmente cuento con todos los servicios Microsoft Copilot 365, como aplica esto para mi.

Machine translation:

I have a Copilot Pro or Pro+ subscription and organizationally I have all the Microsoft Copilot 365 services, how does this apply to me.

@Omar5962, these changes aply to GitHub Copilot and not to Microsoft Copilot 365 services.

Machine translation:

estos cambios se aplican a GitHub Copilot y no a los servicios de Microsoft Copilot 365.

[sudo-js-py-c]

u forgot an p there in reality it is "apply"

[scbritton]

I'm a bit confused by this. I currently have CoPilot Pro which gets me a set number of Premium Requests. Under the new system, that gives me US$39 a month in AI Credits.

How is this different? Is this a shift to some kind of time-based system where requests that take longer cost more? What does this mean in plain language?

[scbritton]

I'm starting to notice that - because the amount charged will be based on token usage rather than requests as it is right now. Fortunately, the project I have been working on is nearly complete, so I was starting to consider downgrading to a lower (or free) tier anyway.

I'm not very happy about the change, but since this is part of Microsoft, I can't really say I'm that surprised by it.

[ramezio]

The difference could sober up an alcoholic from mere shock. You will get less, but pay the same price.

Usage-based = each request is dynamically priced depending on 1. amount of input (prompt, mcp tools, files, etc.) provided to the model, 2. the model used, and 3. the amount of output produced by the model (intermediary steps like tool calls, thinking, response, etc.). In other words: end-to-end token consumption for a given request.

Previously, one request (prompt) was calculated as one - regardless of the details involved in producing the result.

In essence, the irony is that your "Usage-based billing" will make it significantly harder for you to predict your.. usage. How much you will need or use is dynamic, heavily context-dependent, and non-deterministic.

[MarkBellaCoreCEO]

Wow, what a bunch of greedy Fuc*ers

[MarkBellaCoreCEO]

Good Ole Claude just recommended this for me lol.
My Honest Recommendation
Install Roo Code (free VS Code extension, search "Roo Code" or "Cline" in extensions)
Configure it to hit LM Studio at localhost:1234 — I'll write the config file for you! Free for 95% of sessions
For sessions that need Claude-level intelligence (hard bugs, architecture decisions): load OpenRouter credits, ~$20 tops for a month of heavy use Keep Continue for autocomplete while you type Total monthly cost: $0 to $20 depending on how much you lean on cloud models.

Roo Code (VS Code extension — already in your VS Code marketplace)
Closest match to what you do now. Full agent mode.

Reads files, writes files, runs terminal, chains tasks — identical to Copilot agent
Backend is your choice: LM Studio local (free), OpenRouter, Anthropic direct
Point it at http://localhost:1234/v1 + whatever model LM Studio has loaded → $0/month
If local model isn't smart enough for hard tasks: add OpenRouter credits ($20-40/month actual usage, pay-as-you-go, not subscription)
OpenRouter has Claude Sonnet 4.5 at ~$3/million tokens — a heavy session costs $0.50, not $50
This is your answer. It's Copilot agent but you control the backend.

Cursor ($20/month flat)
VS Code fork — separate app, not an extension
Drag your workspace folder in, imports your extensions
Has full agent mode, multi-file edits, "composer" for autonomous tasks
$20/month hard cap, no overages
Uses their own Claude/GPT-4o access in the subscription
Downside: different app, small migration friction, still $20/month forever

Windsurf ($15/month flat)
VS Code fork by Codeium, separate app
"Cascade" mode is their agent — legitimately good, autonomous multi-file
$15/month hard cap
Better than Cursor for pure autonomous coding tasks in my read
Same downside: separate app, still a subscription

[azimaro]

Mark, we should trust your free gift aftyer you called us greedy fuc*ers? lol (jk)

[fastupmedia]

I have a pro+ plan, I used 4.6 opus before it got removed, now trying out gpt codex 5.3. If I use let's say 90% current premium request during a month, how much would this cost me extra? Anyone know any estimates or will premium request still be included so I still get my 1500 request ?

[rayrite]

Opus 4.6 will soon cost 27x after June 1. So you'll get roughly about 140 or so requests a month of opus if my math is correct (3900 AI credits/mo. ÷ 27)?

[fastupmedia]

But if we pay as we go, with a large project will that not cost shit load of $$. I can use gpt 5.3 codex aswell but worried that pay as you go will cost thousands of $ vs 1500 premium request

[lmf-git]

But if we pay as we go, with a large project will that not cost shit load of $$. I can use gpt 5.3 codex aswell but worried that pay as you go will cost thousands of $ vs 1500 premium request

Yes.

[ShepAlderson]

But if we pay as we go, with a large project will that not cost shit load of $$. I can use gpt 5.3 codex aswell but worried that pay as you go will cost thousands of $ vs 1500 premium request

Yeah… I think folks are going to be in for a shock when the “usage cost preview” lands in May. If you’re doing agentic coding, where you set an agent on a task with a checklist or plan and then let it run for 10-15 minutes, something like 5.3-codex can easily burn through $10-15 in API credit costs, or if using 5.5 or Opus, think $30-40. Literally a single prompt could eat your entire allotment of “AI Credits”. I’m curious to see how they will handle it if a task isn’t complete. Will they do like Anthropic and stop the agent cold, just failing halfway through, or will they allow the agent to at least finish?

[rglidden]

Will there be changes to allow a single GitHub account to have both an Individual Pro/Pro+ subscription as well as a seat assigned by one or more Businesses or Enterprises? Or do individuals still need to create a separate GitHub account for each to prevent the wrong Business being charged, or being charged for personal use?

Hi there 👋

Copilot Pro or Pro+ cannot currently be used on the same GitHub account that also has a Copilot Business or Copilot Enterprise seat assigned.

For now we recommend using separate GitHub accounts to keep personal and work usage clearly separated and to help avoid any unintended billing confusion.

[rglidden]

That's not what the documentation recommends.

GitHub recommends that you use one personal account for all your work on GitHub.com. With a single personal account, you can contribute to a combination of personal, open source, or professional projects using one identity. Other people can invite the account to contribute to both individual repositories and repositories owned by an organization, and the account can be a member of multiple organizations or enterprises.

The whole way Copilot is billed and managed goes counter to that recommendation.

[lipemat]

Will unused AI Credits roll over into future months or are the first $10 or $39 in AI Credits a "use it or loose it" scenario?

[Tpeterson37]

The fact they openly just agreed that "Yes, it's usage-based but.. if you don't use it, we're going to take your money anyway" is such a POS move.

[liuyxpp]

Hi there,

It should have been mentioned in the FAQ right away.

Valid point, we've added this question into the discussion announcement.

Your unused AI credits will not roll over from month to month. They will reset at the start of each monthly billing cycle.

It is like you expect someone with brain-defect to accept this deal. Bullshit!

[iroach]

@nardobarbosa Are unused AI credits at least applied to other users usage? The answer to that question should be added to the FAQ.

[GiuseppePiscopoHypex]

@nardobarbosa Are unused AI credits at least applied to other users usage? The answer to that question should be added to the FAQ.

The linked blog post speaks about "pooling" in the context of business plans, not individual plans. The way I get that is - during the month - there's a pool of credits that can be used by many users, whether high-usage ones or low-usage ones. Not sure if that's what you're referring to.

[GiuseppePiscopoHypex]

believe me 10 USD credit, you may even finish in a day and with one request. this is truelly so bad.

I was also thinking that it has been mentioned that a new billing tool will be available at the beginning of May. That should show your hypothetical spending in past months, would the usage-based billing already have been in place.

[Domush]

Removing the free models destroys any value in the individual plans

[cyberjob001]

I might just unsubscribe because of this very reason! Copilot was the only sensible package provider, but seems they want to follow in others footsteps! Maybe the change might be better, but removing free models. I am out!
Why pay for multiple different subscriptions, if only advantage present is removed.

[disi]

I was always saying that the problem with other AI is that in the middle of a project you run out of credits and don’t even get code completion.
I have the free tier at work and can say that coding assistant still works if you run out of credits. But no chat.
Will it be similar with my personal pro account? Just more credits?

[omar-alsaheb]

I might just unsubscribe because of this very reason! Copilot was the only sensible package provider, but seems they want to follow in others footsteps! Maybe the change might be better, but removing free models. I am out! Why pay for multiple different subscriptions, if only advantage present is removed.

So what are you using today?

[cyberjob001]

I was relying on gpt-5 mini after the requests were depleted. I already have codex and claude subscriptions. Only kept copilot because of free models. Now I wont need copilot and will move to some other provider which provides fixed number of calls rather than token based usage.
If anyone even provides a basic model which can be used as fallback when premium requests are depleted i would lean towards it.

[movy]

You can enable budgets on your account and keep working even after your premium requests have depleted (until you hit budget quota you set for yourself). This is how I figured that Pro+ will be more cost efficient for me based on budget I burned beyond normal Pro subscription request allowance.
https://github.com/settings/billing/budgets?utm_source=vscode

This is actually GREAT experience and I always felt sorry for users of other coding agents, who got overcharged beyond what they planned to spend on a single beefy prompt.

[AvinoamSebbah]

What are you doing to do for GitHub student account ? About GitHub Ai Credits
Thanks

[Himpq]

They have suspended the registration of Education Benefits, and I also want to know the next steps

[shyeyian]

• Request-based billing is user oriented.

  • Users do not care about how the AI works, they only care about the input and the output.
    • (Just like users do not care about the implementation of an function, but only care about the declaration int func(int value)).

• Token-based billing is not user oriented.

  • It exposes internal parameters (which is so-called 'tokens') to users.
  • This is a bad design in software engineering, and will be especially bad in GitHub.

Please, move back into request-based billing. Thanks.

[cyberjob001]

You provided a valuable insight and used very clear wordings so its easily understood!
I have exact same opinion!

[brandon-fryslie]

Request based billing is awesome because if you do it correctly you can get Claude to write an entire application in a single request.

Clearly that isn't sustainable for MS, who is paying the bills for this functionality. I wondered how long it would last, bummer it's over. Github was the cheapest tokens by far.

[czinczaar]

Yes, this is a big problem. And we know LLMs have a tendency to produce much useless stuff that was not asked for by the user and was not mentioned in the prompt. Now they want us to pay for that.

[lusp75]

Request based billing is awesome because if you do it correctly you can get Claude to write an entire application in a single request.

Clearly that isn't sustainable for MS, who is paying the bills for this functionality. I wondered how long it would last, bummer it's over. Github was the cheapest tokens by far.

Actually, there was Trae, which was cheaper (600 monthly requests for $7). The problem is that even those crafty lot have switched to a token-based system. Damn them

[DreamFulFil]

It's impossible for them to move back. They used "Request-based billing" to bait you to subscribe and moved to "Token-based billing" with all the excuses their AI comes up with.

[matteocacciola]

I am really sorry but I am not understanding very well the "convoluted language" you are using. I have simple questions:

1. what will happen if I will not do anything with my individual Copilot Pro plan?
2. why should I move to a monthly based plan before the expiration of my subscription?
3. why don't you provide a yearly based subscription, even if on an usage-based policy?

[M4XEURS]

You will face very very very high multipliers like 27x, and you will not get your opus back.
But if you move to monthly, opus is also not for you, only for pro plus.
lol

[matteocacciola]

bye bye Github Copilot Pro

If you're currently on a monthly subscription, you will be automatically be moved to usage based billing on June 1st.

[sudo-js-py-c]

Why isnt there a Middle Finger Emoji? "Github Community Admin"
It would be a great feature i believe

[ariajanke]

"AI credits"?! More number games. Is there just no where for me to have anything approximating a professional coding environment now? I'm done!

[ariajanke]

I hate github.

[cyberjob001]

What happens next month, are they rolling up the unused credits?
They are just throwing us away!

[bseptember]

This feels like a step in the wrong direction. Developers don’t mind paying for value, but they do mind uncertainty. A subscription with non-rolling, per-token limits removes the one thing teams actually want: predictability.

Usage-based pricing isn’t new, OpenAI and Anthropic already do it, but combining it with “use it or lose it” credits makes this feel worse, not better. Add model removals and higher costs, and it starts to look like reduced value at a higher price.

I get that there’s a real cost problem to solve. But this approach risks pushing away the exact people who influence adoption. Many of us here decide what tools our companies use and changes like this make that decision harder to justify.

[AlbertoPa]

I agree. If credits rolled over, it would be a more acceptable change. Also, it is not clear why they don't. It would seem a simple and rational choice if the idea is moving to a consumption-based system.

[snakex64]

I agree. If credits rolled over, it would be a more acceptable change. Also, it is not clear why they don't. It would seem a simple and rational choice if the idea is moving to a consumption-based system.

If the idea is to move to a consumption-based system, why even have the base price... It could literally just be Pay As You Go and there would be no need to forward anything

[CodeCrafty-OTC]

Bump my post and image comment below please - we are on the same page 8 )

[Roboto-SAI-LLC]

I agree

I don't think I will have my company use GitHub anymore.

• Most of the times GitHub copilot breaks my apps when they were functional.
• Every time fails no matter what model you use.
• I recommend just paying for Claude & Codex subscriptions from the actual models themselves
• GitHub co-pilot is not a real AI model
• Compared to the real models it doesn't hold token count or memory like the real models.
  I was about to integrate copilot to my main app as a special model, but I guess that idea is dead.
• I can't even use my 2M context window Grok models cause GitHub copilot treats grok bad and instead somehow gives GPT more context tokens?

If anyone knows any other coding platforms, that I can use my api keys on a hp laptop let me know! I'm cutting off GitHub, copilot. & VS Code completely moving all my repos to GitLab!

[Kris-I]

I believe I read that we were supposed to have access to a simulator to compare the current pricing with the new pricing taking effect on June 1st. Is it available somewhere?

[Tpeterson37]

Only usage % i found and calculated usage is on Github.com go to your profile, and go under "Copilot Settings" and then under Billing and Licensing on the Left pane, there is a "Usage" tab that shows the $ amount you've used in usage costs.

edit; This doesn't reflect the new billing I don't believe

[Tpeterson37]

Did they release the token calculator for usage-based billing yet? Want to see what I'm going to get charged for based off what I used so I can determine to switch me and my colleagues to something else.

Hi @Tpeterson37, please see our docs on Preparing for your move to usage-based billing for the tools that will be available soon.

[CodeCrafty-OTC]

Bump my reply and post image below please - we are on the same page 8 )

[maxisam]

Hi @Tpeterson37, please see our docs on Preparing for your move to usage-based billing for the tools that will be available soon.

That is only for Copilot Pro or Copilot Pro+, how about business account?

[CodeCrafty-OTC]

BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD.... SUPERBAD!

This is a serious problem combined with the random increases in the token multipliers. I just looked and Opus 4.7 went from 7.5x (too high already if we are going to be paying based on usage anyway???) - They took it to TWICE that MUCH!! 15x ... and I don't see Opus 4.6 even in my list now.

[CodeCrafty-OTC]

I want to connect with other devs and dev management to promote fair and predictable pricing.

Like how about if the prompt doesn't work - i get no value out of it and I shouldn't have to pay premium for it.
The way it is going they will have an interest in stringing us along the way they trained Bing Copilot for engagement instead of quick results that are useful. See this for what it is.. they are BREAKING the AI benefits for the developers. I will have to go local model if this keeps up.
My brother has already paved the way with his local music generation models and I won't mind training my own dev models on my own code.
Listen up GitHub - We love ya but we do have options.

[jzombie]

https://api-docs.deepseek.com/quick_start/pricing/

DeepSeek obviously distills from American models, but the pricing is fantastic and the quality is just as good, if not better.

Copilot can continue to serve enterprise contracts and sell them Azure subscriptions.

For anything else, there is always China, and the answer is DeepSeek.

[rally5]

For me the old $10/month was a no need to think about it price. "Why not?" Now their new model is a think about it price. Especially since our credits expire every month. That's the worst part of all this.

So if I really start to understand AI model's capabilities and use my local gemma via ollama for the simple things. And use github agentic models for the hard stuff I'm not saving anything since I lose unused credits. Not good.

[Roboto-SAI-LLC]

How do I use local models code in my code spaces I haven't figured it out yet but since this move, I am now going to use my Local model I created trained on my code space I wasn't trusting it at first and thought it was a pain setting it up but now It's better than dealing with this BS policy.
Whoever came up with that Idea needs to get fired asap.

[rally5]

Start with downloading Ollama. There's a ton of headaches with it though. Right now it won't run on my VRAM and there's a bunch of technical stuff to try and resolve that.

[azimaro]

Welp, I already used my $39 after 2 days of work. This is not going to work for me.
I thought May was a trial month to see your usage and the real changes weren't coming in until June 1? Like wtf?

Any suggestions on the best 'low cost' model to use? (I was using Haiku and it was frustrating AF, then was using Opus 4.7, which is ridiculously costly AF. I use a lot of chats, what might be a more affordable (lol, ok 'slightly more economical') model?

[Roboto-SAI-LLC]

Nah this is recent I use to use sonnet and grok with zero rate limits now even the free models get your rate limit to spike.

[azimaro]

I decided to use Sonnet. It's ok so far. Not as good as Opus, but way cheaper.

[azimaro]

Still used $2.48 cents today, in about 6-7 hours. FFS Not all my days will be as Copilot intensive, but I am in the middle of refactoring project that copilot is making go so much faster (a lot of repetitive tasks.)

[Roboto-SAI-LLC]

At least the free models should be un rate limited

[rally5]

I agree. That and non expiring credits and I think their plan would be more acceptable.

[Passpot]

Actively looking to completely stop using GitHub now . This is only going to get worse. They are now way over priced.

[Roboto-SAI-LLC]

I don't think I will have my company use GitHub anymore.

• Free models count towards rate limits 🫩
• Most of the times GitHub copilot breaks my apps when they were functional.
• Every time fails no matter what model you use.
• I recommend just paying for Claude & Codex subscriptions from the actual models themselves
• GitHub co-pilot is not a real AI model
• Compared to the real models it doesn't hold token count or memory like the real models.
• I can't even use my 2M context window Grok models cause GitHub copilot treats grok bad and instead somehow gives GPT more context tokens?

I was about to integrate copilot to my main app as a special model, but I guess that idea is dead.

If anyone knows any other coding platforms, that I can use my api keys on a hp laptop let me know! I'm cutting off GitHub, copilot. & VS Code completely moving all my repos to GitLab!

[tobylaifun]

session rate, weekly rate, and now what?

[42sol-eu]

Dear Github,
I am not sure if this is really the best place to put my question between all those really unhappy people.
I am kind of unhappy to, especially because I am owning a yearly plan that was updated last month!

My question would be if you would be so kind to revert that payment and give me the free choice of monthly payment with the new rules.

Alternatively I would say, that I am entitled to keep my current conditions NOT changing the contract as you say.

Would be nice to hear from you and maybe a person that is a bit into contract management, because I believe changing a contract on the go is hard to do.

Do not get me wrong, your product is great and evolving greatly BUT please try to keep your early adopters in the boat.

I am not sure if I will stay after this crisis, but we will see how you are react on this question.

Sincerly
Felix

[CalvinRodo]

Will there be methods to disable pooling, we have concerns of some super users consuming credits faster then others, our procurements are highly regulated and we cannot just arbitrarily buy more credits so for us pooling is somewhat of a negative situation to this new pricing model as it could result in some folks who we are paying licenses for not getting access to any tokens for agentic work.

[azimaro]

A friend said he switched to Claude Code. Says it's way cheaper, works with vscode, and you can choose whichever model. I haven't tried it yet, but I am sure going to look into it. Anyone else have 2 cents to add?

[JLanders96]

I think GitHub’s product team is making a category mistake with this Copilot usage-model shift.

Copilot’s value is not that GitHub can resell AI tokens.

Copilot’s value is that GitHub sits on top of the repo, the issue tracker, Actions, Codespaces, Packages, Releases, Projects, environments, secrets, permissions, code review, security, deployment workflows, and the operating system around software delivery.

That is the moat.

The usage model seems to price Copilot as if routed model access is the main product. It is not. GitHub’s real advantage is not inference. It is orchestration.

That distinction matters because the current experience still asks users to manually assemble too much of the value themselves. CLI, VS Code, GitHub web, cloud agents, repo settings, org settings, account settings, MCP configuration, custom instructions, prompts, agents, Actions, secrets, environments, permissions, and billing controls all behave like pieces of a system the user is expected to understand before Copilot becomes reliably useful.

That may be manageable for sophisticated engineering organizations. It is brutal for new builders, solo founders, hobbyists, SMB teams, and even mid-market teams without mature platform engineering.

So, when GitHub moves Copilot toward usage pricing, users are not just paying for successful work. They are also paying for discovery, misconfiguration, bad context, retry loops, wrong model choices, missing MCPs, weak repo instructions, fragmented settings, and failed agent assumptions.

That is not more value. That is charging for friction.

The MCP example is especially revealing. The value is not simply that Copilot can use MCPs. The value is knowing which MCPs should be added, which ones are relevant to the repo’s stack, which ones overlap, which ones are secure, which ones should be removed, which instructions still matter, which agents should exist, and how all of that should be maintained over time.

Today, too much of that work is still pushed onto the user.

Under usage pricing, the user may pay Copilot to slowly and incorrectly figure out the setup that Copilot should have been able to recommend, validate, and maintain as part of the GitHub platform experience.

That is the strategic problem.

GitHub’s product team appears to be confusing marginal inference cost with platform value. Usage-based pricing can make sense for infrastructure, but Copilot is not yet invisible infrastructure. It is still a fragmented developer experience across multiple surfaces, policies, settings, contexts, and billing systems.

The result is a bad value exchange: GitHub is adding a meter before GitHub has fully removed the complexity that causes wasted usage.

This is especially dangerous because GitHub’s own BYOK direction already proves where the durable value is. If customers can bring their own model keys and still use Copilot workflows, then the defensible product is not token resale. The defensible product is GitHub-native workflow automation, governance, context, security, and delivery improvement.

That should be the center of the business model.

The better model is not “charge developers more accurately for model consumption.”

The better model is “help users create more successful GitHub-native projects, then monetize the platform activity that success creates.”

For a solo founder or new developer, Copilot should be the product that turns a rough repo into something real. It should inspect the README, package files, framework, deployment target, open issues, workflows, secrets, branch rules, security posture, release process, Actions usage, Codespaces setup, LFS usage, Packages, environments, and project structure. Then it should propose and implement the right GitHub setup inside a user-defined budget.

The experience should feel more like this:

“Welcome back. While you were away, I reviewed this TypeScript project, found missing CI/CD coverage, added a test workflow, checked for exposed secrets, recommended environment variables, suggested the right MCP setup, added repo instructions, created issues for failing areas, configured milestones, and prepared a pull request. I also estimated the monthly cost of Actions, storage, Codespaces, and model usage under your budget.”

That would be value.

That would make GitHub feel like the place where ideas become real software businesses.

That would turn Copilot into a concierge for the GitHub ecosystem, not just a metered chat box attached to a repo.

The same issue shows up differently across market segments.

For individual builders, the problem is unpredictability. They need Copilot to reduce wasted money, not create another bill they do not understand.

For SMBs, the problem is operational leverage. Small teams usually do not have dedicated platform engineering, DevOps, security, and release-management staff for every repo. Copilot should help them get professional-grade testing, documentation, deployment workflows, release discipline, and security hygiene without requiring a specialized team.

For mid-market companies, the problem is consistency. These teams often know what good looks like, but they do not have unlimited capacity to enforce it across every repo, product team, workflow, environment, package, and release process. Copilot should find variance, propose standardization, open PRs, create issues, and keep teams moving toward stable delivery.

For enterprise customers, the problem is governance at scale. They need policy alignment, auditability, release discipline, dependency management, secrets management, environment controls, measurable productivity improvement, and security hygiene across many teams. Copilot should not merely generate code. It should help the organization continuously improve engineering outcomes inside GitHub.

The better analogy is Google Ads.

In Google Ads, the customer sets a budget, defines an outcome, and expects the platform to learn how to get the most valuable clicks, conversions, and revenue within that budget.

GitHub Copilot should work similarly for software delivery.

A customer should be able to set a repo or organization budget and define the outcome: more stable releases, fewer broken builds, better test coverage, faster PR review, safer secrets handling, cleaner dependencies, better documentation, clearer code comments, lower Actions waste, better issue hygiene, or higher deployment confidence.

Then Copilot should learn how to maximize those outcomes across the repo or organization.

That is where GitHub’s value is:

• Not in more generated code.
• Not in more token usage.
• Not in making users think like FinOps analysts before they can use an AI coding tool.

The value is in learning how to get the most stable releases with the most product value from the work already inside GitHub. The value is charging for stability at autonomous scale.

That is a stronger business than token resale.

And frankly, token resale is a weak strategic position. Users with serious token budgets already know how to use API keys. They can compare OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Cursor, Windsurf, Antigravity, CLI wrappers, and other agentic IDEs. If GitHub’s bill looks mostly like model-provider economics plus a GitHub seat fee, then GitHub is inviting users to ask why they should not buy model access directly and use another tool for the agentic layer.

Then the harder question follows: why stay?

Local git plus a strong agentic CLI becomes good enough for many users if GitHub feels like a confusing meter instead of the place where software gets safer, cleaner, and closer to production.

GitHub’s advantage is not that it can route model calls.

GitHub’s advantage is that it has long been the place where it made the most sense to track vulnerable packages, respond to public issues, collaborate in the open, manage releases, automate delivery, and bring software to market without forcing every builder to buy an entire platform team.

GitHub’s advantage is that it can make the repo better, safer, more deployable, more maintainable, more automated, and more likely to become a real product.

That is what pricing should reflect.

A better packaging model would be:

• Access to Copilot should be inexpensive enough that users keep it attached to every repo.
• Model usage should support BYOK, transparent pass-through economics, or a clearly differentiated GitHub-managed inference premium.
• GitHub should make money when Copilot increases adoption of GitHub-native products: Actions, Codespaces, Packages, Releases, Advanced Security, Projects, storage, compute, deployment workflows, and team collaboration.
• Copilot should understand repo maturity. An idea stub, a messy hobby repo, a pre-release product, and a production revenue-generating system should not be treated as the same billing opportunity.
• Charge less while a user is trying to get from concept to working software.
• Charge more when Copilot is helping maintain production-level systems that can actually make or save money.
• Charge for making GitHub more valuable, not for making confusion more expensive.

Right now, the incentive feels backwards. Users are being asked to pay more while still doing too much of the configuration, context management, integration, and cost-control work themselves.

Copilot risks becoming more expensive before it becomes more useful.

That is the missed opportunity.

GitHub should be using Copilot to turn dormant repos, messy repos, beginner repos, and under-managed team repos into stable, shipping, GitHub-native projects. That would increase trust, retention, Actions usage, Codespaces usage, Packages usage, security adoption, project-management adoption, and enterprise governance value.

Instead, this usage shift risks turning Copilot into an additional tax on GitHub participation.

The biggest strategic error is thinking GitHub can win by reselling AI usage.

The second biggest error is presenting this as a value increase when much of the practical value still depends on a complex arrangement of repo setup, settings, MCPs, prompts, agents, instructions, workflows, permissions, budgets, and product knowledge that users must manually discover and maintain.

GitHub should not be charging users primarily for the tokens consumed while they struggle through that complexity.

GitHub should be charging for making that complexity disappear.

That is the opportunity: take someone from a README, a broken repo, or a vague idea to a production-ready GitHub-native project moving at 1200 mph.

If Copilot did that, the usage model would not need to be defended so hard.

The value would be obvious.

Right now, this feels like the software version of shrinkflation: a package labeled “Now 20% more” after the box got emptier and the price went up.

That is why the reaction is so sharp. People are tired of paying more for less certainty, more friction, and more fine print.

GitHub is the home of open source and the default place where many people first learn how software becomes real. Not every user has the budget to make mistakes faster. Some users are trying to go to market without feeling like they cannot trust their own code. Some teams are trying to stabilize delivery without hiring a full platform department. Many users simply want the complexity to go away so they can turn ideas into products.

This is the part that should worry GitHub’s product team: this pricing direction may recover pennies on compute while weakening the ecosystem that makes Copilot strategically valuable.

That is not leverage. That is self-harm dressed up as monetization.

GitHub should not hurt the platform for a penny.

[DiegoZumarragaLS]

Hi.
I need to activate GitHub Copilot in a new Enterprise account. Now you have to create a support ticket to activate Copilot Enterprise so I created ticket # 4319082 but I haven't received a response in 2 weeks. How much longer should I wait?