What government contracts have Microsoft subsidiaries (like GitHub) held with immigration agencies since 2018?
Executive summary
Microsoft and its subsidiaries have been documented holding multiple contracts and cloud-hosting relationships with U.S. immigration agencies since 2018, most prominently multi‑million‑dollar cloud and software support arrangements cited in contemporaneous reporting; the exact scope, renewal status, and whether some relationships were later wound down is contested across sources [1] [2] [3]. Public records and reporting show Azure cloud hosting and support payments in the millions, a commonly cited ~$19–20 million Microsoft contract, and smaller GitHub‑related transactions referenced by employees and media — but gaps in public disclosure mean some specifics remain unclear [4] [1] [5].
1. Direct cloud and software support contracts flagged since 2018
Reporting since 2018 repeatedly identifies Microsoft providing cloud and software support to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), with contemporaneous accounts citing a roughly $19.4–$20 million contract for data processing, AI and cloud services that became a flashpoint for employee protests in 2018 and afterward [4] [1] [6]. Federal‑year reporting and contract databases used by Bloomberg and FedScoop place Microsoft‑related spending on ICE in the multi‑million‑dollar range during the FY2020 period, with roughly $20 million in Microsoft products and services reported for that year and about $9.9 million attributed to Azure services in that period [2].
2. Azure Government, FedRAMP High, and the technical foothold
Microsoft executives publicly noted that ICE approved an Authority to Operate (ATO) for Microsoft’s Azure Government platform with a FedRAMP High designation in January 2018, a certification that enables vendors to host highly sensitive unclassified government data and which underpinned Microsoft’s ability to provide cloud services to ICE [7]. Federal solicitations later sought to host ICE infrastructure in AWS and Microsoft Azure environments, signaling continued interest by the agency in using both major clouds for immigration‑related systems [1] [2].
3. GitHub: subsidiary mentions, employee claims and limited figures
Employee accounts and internal correspondence cited GitHub‑related transactions in 2018–2019, with employees and internal memos referencing GitHub’s parent Microsoft holding contracts with ICE and a request from employees to cancel “more than $8 million” in GitHub‑related contracts; company statements about the financial materiality of some GitHub transactions also appear in reporting [1] [5]. Media summaries note GitHub’s parentage and employee protests but also record Microsoft leadership saying some GitHub revenues from such deals were not financially material, and that GitHub pledged donations to immigrant‑support nonprofits following the controversy [5].
4. Aggregated totals cited and divergent accounting
Investigations and compilations have produced different totals: a Sludge/Truthout aggregation cited Microsoft earning at least $14.6 million from ICE since 2010, while other outlets round to a $19–20 million contract figure in the late 2010s or document about $20 million in Microsoft spending by ICE in FY2020 alone [3] [2] [1]. Bloomberg Government’s reporting also separates Azure spending inside the broader Microsoft total, showing roughly half of the FY2020 Microsoft figure as Azure transactions for ICE [2]. These differing tallies reflect different time windows, whether they count obligations versus outlays, and whether they include subsidiary lines or marketplace/partner transactions.
5. Transparency pressure, staff protests and corporate responses
Microsoft staff and external activists pushed for disclosure and contract termination after the family‑separation policy escalations in 2018; open letters and protests focused on the cited $19.4–$20 million figure and urged an ethical stand, prompting company statements that criticized the policy while declining to simply cancel contracts or fully disclose all contractual details [4] [8] [9]. Subsequent reporting and NGO tracking efforts cataloged contractors across ICE, showing Microsoft among many tech and services vendors; some reporting suggests Microsoft gradually shifted how it engaged with ICE, but sources disagree on whether direct contracts were fully ended [7] [10].
6. What the public record does and does not show
Public reporting and contract‑database reconstructions reliably show Microsoft/Azure involvement with ICE and multi‑million dollar spending since 2018, GitHub‑adjacent transactions referenced by employees, and an Azure Government ATO enabling sensitive workloads [2] [5] [7]. What remains unclear in the sources provided is a definitive, line‑by‑line contract list since 2018 showing award numbers, exact contract titles, current status, and whether specified agreements were formally terminated or restructured; those details would require primary contract records (USAspending/FPDS entries) or corporate disclosure beyond the cited reporting [10] [11].