# CUSTOMER MIGRATION RISK PLANNER Migration Decision Package | 23 October 2026 ## 1. Migration Assessment BLOCKED — CRITICAL RISK Production migration The proposed migration moves active SaaS subscriptions from a legacy payment processor to Stripe while preserving recurring revenue, existing billing commitments, and uninterrupted customer access. | Assessment | Finding | | --------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | Source | Legacy payment processor (unnamed) | | Destination | Stripe Billing | | Customers | Monthly and annual subscribers | | Critical dependencies | Stored payment methods, subscriptions, invoices, discounts, and failed-payment recovery | | Available evidence | Legacy processor export | | Critical unknowns | Payment-method portability and rollback feasibility | | Mandatory constraint | No duplicate customer charges | | Recommended approach | Reconciled, cohort-based migration with controlled billing ownership | The scenario establishes that processor export is available, but does not establish that payment credentials can be transferred, subscriptions recreated safely, or billing reversed after cutover.  Teks yang ditempel (1).txt ### Three material migration risks | Priority | Risk | Consequence | Required control | | -------- | ---------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | | P0 | Two processors collect the same renewal | Duplicate charges, disputes, refunds, reputational damage | Single authoritative billing owner per subscription and renewal obligation | | P0 | Payment methods cannot be transferred or reused | Failed renewals, involuntary churn, interrupted revenue | Processor-approved payment-data migration or verified customer reauthorization | | P0 | Cutover or rollback leaves inconsistent subscription state | Lost payments, duplicate invoices, incorrect access | Transaction-level reconciliation and tested recovery procedures | Stripe documents an assisted payment-data migration process involving the previous processor, a migration mapping file, and customer/payment-method remapping. This is a supported migration route, not proof that the unnamed legacy processor can supply portable credentials.  [image](https://www.google.com/s2/favicons?domain=https://docs.stripe.com\&sz=32) docs.stripe.com +1 The recommended target architecture is to keep the SaaS application’s subscription entitlement record independent of processor-specific identifiers, while enforcing one active collection authority for each customer subscription at any moment. Production charging and cancellation of existing billing arrangements should remain on hold until the blockers have been resolved. Read-only export analysis, mapping design, and non-charging migration rehearsals can proceed. ## 2. Customer Dependency & Risk Map | Customer Group | Critical Dependency | Migration Failure | Customer Impact | Control / Mitigation | Evidence Status | | -------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------ | ------------------------------------------ | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------- | | Monthly subscribers | Renewal date and active processor | Both systems bill the same period | Duplicate charges | Renewal-level ownership lock and cross-processor reconciliation | UNVERIFIED | | Annual subscribers | Prepaid term, discounts, next renewal | Incorrect billing-cycle reconstruction | Early charges or lost prepaid service | Preserve paid-through date and original commercial terms | UNVERIFIED | | Subscribers with saved payment methods | Transferable payment credentials | Imported reference is unusable | Renewal failure | Stripe-assisted import or verified payment-method update | UNKNOWN | | Subscribers in failed-payment recovery | Outstanding invoices, retry schedules | Old retry runs after Stripe activation | Duplicate collection or lost debt recovery | Quarantine unresolved invoices and transfer ownership only after settlement review | UNVERIFIED | | All subscribers | Identity, entitlements, invoice history | Mapping mismatch or premature cancellation | Incorrect access, missing invoices | Stable internal IDs, reconciliation, preserved historical records | UNVERIFIED | The highest shared-risk dependency is the recurring billing scheduler. A duplicate-collection defect could affect multiple cohorts even when their underlying customer data is correct. Proposed accountability: Billing Engineering owns collection controls; Data Engineering owns mappings; Finance owns financial reconciliation; Customer Success owns customer impact; the Migration Lead owns authorization. Named owners were not supplied. ## 3. Data Continuity Plan | Data / State | Continuity Requirement | Migration Hazard | Verification | Exception Response | | ------------------ | --------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------- | | Customer identity | Preserve stable internal customer IDs and account ownership | Wrong Stripe Customer mapping | Unique source-to-target mapping, ownership checks | Quarantine affected account | | Payment methods | Preserve legitimate ability to collect future renewals | Missing credentials or invalid authorization | Stripe import mapping, default payment method, eligible usage | Keep legacy billing or request secure update | | Subscriptions | Preserve plan, interval, currency, quantity, renewal date, and status | Incorrect subscription reconstruction | Field-level comparison and test-clock simulation | Prevent activation | | Discounts | Preserve value, duration, eligibility, and remaining uses | Missing or extended discount | Compare effective future invoice amounts | Correct pricing before activation | | Financial balances | Preserve outstanding, paid, credited, and refunded amounts | Recharging settled invoices | Invoice- and transaction-level reconciliation | Hold collection and investigate | | Entitlements | Preserve customer access through paid-through date | Billing cutover revokes access | Login and subscription-access tests | Restore access independently of payment migration | | Invoice history | Preserve accessible historical records and references | Duplicated invoices or missing receipts | Original invoice manifest and retrieval tests | Restore history access without issuing new payable invoices | | Pending operations | Preserve retry, dispute, refund, and payment-processing state | Delayed asynchronous updates | Cross-processor event and transaction review | Isolate unresolved operations | ### Required preservation rules - Identical business meaning: subscriber identity, contracted prices, already-paid periods, entitlement dates, and outstanding financial obligations. - Permitted transformations: processor-specific IDs, product/price object representations, and payment-method references, provided mappings retain correct semantics. - Zero-tolerance mismatches: wrong account ownership, unauthorized access, duplicate collection for one obligation, and missing confirmed customer entitlements. - Other acceptance tolerances: require explicit approval rather than inventing thresholds. Stripe's subscription-import guidance requires mapping customer IDs and prices and aligning subscription schedules with existing terms. It also supports sandbox testing and recommends Subscription Schedules where future activation is appropriate.  [image](https://www.google.com/s2/favicons?domain=https://docs.stripe.com\&sz=32) docs.stripe.com +1 All checks above are proposed, not executed. The supplied information contains no target-system inspection, reconciliation report, or test results. ## 4. Cohort Migration & Recovery Playbook ### Migration sequence Stage 0 — Non-charging rehearsal Import representative customer and subscription data into an isolated test environment. Test monthly and annual renewals, payment failures, discounts, webhooks, and mapping corrections. No production collection changes. Cohort 1 — Standard monthly subscribers Select a controlled set with valid payment methods, simple pricing, settled invoices, no pending retries, and sufficient time before renewal. Owner: Billing Engineering. Promote only after reconciliation, safe source deactivation, entitlement verification, and observed billing outcomes. Cohort 2 — Annual and discounted subscribers Include prepaid annual contracts and special pricing only after testing their remaining service periods, discounts, and future charges. Owner: Billing Engineering + Finance. Promote when contractual terms and projected invoices reconcile. Cohort 3 — Exception accounts Handle missing payment methods, outstanding invoices, active retries, disputes, and unresolved mappings individually. Owner: Finance + Migration Lead. Do not promote unresolved accounts through the standard procedure. The first production cohort must be representative enough to expose meaningful billing failures without unnecessarily increasing the customer impact. No cohort sizes or percentages are approved at this stage. ### Cutover execution 1 Before migration Capture authoritative subscription and financial snapshots; complete Stripe payment-method mapping; validate renewal dates; demonstrate controls for legacy automatic billing and retries; approve a cutover manifest. Test safe activation behavior in sandbox. 2 During migration Lock each subscription's billing ownership transition. Reconcile in-flight charges, stop new legacy collection for obligations being transferred, confirm the source action succeeded, and activate the corresponding Stripe schedule only when double collection is prevented. Persist checkpoints and unique operation identifiers. 3 After migration Reconcile Stripe invoices against the legacy ledger, verify charges, inspect subscription state, validate customer access, and confirm that no source-side retries remain scheduled for transferred obligations. 4 On failure Stop further cohort activation, quarantine the affected subscriptions, establish the actual settlement state in both processors, and choose rollback or forward recovery based on verified feasibility. Stripe explicitly warns that legacy subscriptions must be canceled when Stripe subscriptions become active to avoid double billing. Therefore, the exact cancellation/activation sequence requires testing against the legacy processor's behavior, including pending payments and scheduled retries.  [image](https://www.google.com/s2/favicons?domain=https://docs.stripe.com\&sz=32) docs.stripe.com +1 ### Recovery scenarios | Failure | Recovery Method | Status | | ------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------- | | Data mapping fails before activation | Repair mapping and rerun reconciliation | PROPOSED | | Payment method unavailable | Retain legacy billing where viable; securely recollect credentials | PROPOSED | | Stripe activation fails after legacy collection is disabled | Hold further actions; establish subscription state and restore verified collection route | UNKNOWN | | Two processors attempt the same renewal | Contain collection, reconcile settled/pending transactions, resolve duplicate financial effects | PROPOSED | | Migration succeeds but customer loses access | Restore entitlements from authoritative paid-through records | PROPOSED | | Legacy subscriptions canceled and Stripe payments already collected | Prefer forward recovery; avoid blind restoration and recharging | PROPOSED | No recovery scenario is classified CONFIRMED because no execution evidence was supplied. ### Irreversible transition boundary The critical no-return point is not simply the Stripe import. It occurs when legacy billing has been terminated or materially changed and new financial side effects have occurred that cannot be reversed by restoring a database snapshot. After this boundary, forward recovery may be required. Reinstating legacy subscriptions without accounting for successful Stripe charges can create new financial liabilities. Idempotent Stripe API requests help control retries, but do not by themselves prevent duplicate billing across two independent processors. Stripe also notes that webhook events can arrive more than once or out of order. A durable application-side collection ledger, event deduplication, and authoritative state reconciliation are therefore necessary.  [image](https://www.google.com/s2/favicons?domain=https://docs.stripe.com\&sz=32) Stripe API Reference +2 ## 5. Readiness Gates & Next Actions ### Readiness decision table | Gate | Status | Supporting Evidence / Gap | Required Action | | ------------------------- | ---------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------- | | A — Customer Dependencies | UNVERIFIED | Affected groups identified; actual processor capabilities unknown | Validate dependency inventory | | B — Data Continuity | UNVERIFIED | Export available; payment credentials and mappings not validated | Perform data and financial reconciliation | | C — Operational Readiness | UNVERIFIED | No evidence of monitoring, ownership approval, or tested cutover | Establish operational runbook | | D — Recovery Capability | UNVERIFIED | Rollback feasibility explicitly unknown | Test failure and recovery scenarios | | E — Cohort Acceptance | UNVERIFIED | No pilot or representative migration evidence | Complete rehearsal and authorize initial cohort | ### Final Decision ## BLOCKED — CRITICAL RISK Scope: Existing paying subscribers moving from the legacy processor to Stripe. The project is eligible for discovery, integration development, and non-charging migration rehearsals. It is not ready to transfer live recurring collection responsibility. The inability to demonstrate safe payment-method migration, prevention of duplicate charges, and workable recovery creates unacceptable exposure. ### Three priority actions | Priority | Required Action | Owner | Observable Completion Evidence | | -------- | ---------------------------------------------------- | ------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | P0 | Verify payment-data portability with both processors | Payments Lead | Confirmed export/import route, accepted migration manifest, and validated mapping | | P0 | Build and test single-owner billing cutover | Billing Engineering | Passing renewal, duplicate-prevention, retry, concurrency, and failure-injection tests | | P0 | Validate recovery and financial reconciliation | Finance + SRE | Reconciled test ledger, successful recovery exercises, and approved cutover runbook | ### Decision-changing unknowns 1. Which legacy processor is being replaced, and can it export reusable payment credentials with valid recurring-payment authorization? 2. Can legacy renewals, retries, and pending collections be reliably stopped without sacrificing existing customer access? 3. How are outstanding balances, discounts, prepaid terms, and refunds represented in the source system, and can they be reconciled in Stripe? 4. Can the previous collection route be safely restored, or is forward recovery the only viable option after activation? ### Next Execution Boundary | May proceed now | Must remain on hold | | ------------------------------------------ | ----------------------------------------------------- | | Export inspection and data profiling | Production subscription activation | | Stripe sandbox integration | Transfer of live billing ownership | | Customer and subscription mapping | Legacy subscription cancellation | | Payment migration coordination | Production automatic collection for migrated accounts | | Non-charging rehearsal and failure testing | Broad customer rollout | The next decision milestone is approval of a tested billing-ownership cutover and recovery procedure. Completing an import alone does not satisfy this requirement. Reference documentation: [Stripe Payment Data Migration](https://docs.stripe.com/get-started/data-migrations/pan-import.md?utm_source=chatgpt.com) · [Stripe Subscription Import](https://docs.stripe.com/billing/subscriptions/import-subscriptions?utm_source=chatgpt.com) · [Stripe Webhook Reliability](https://docs.stripe.com/webhooks?utm_source=chatgpt.com) Assessment basis: supplied migration scenario and publicly documented Stripe capabilities. No actual processor export, source system, Stripe account, production configuration, or migration test results were independently inspected.