Anthropic Removes Claude Code from Pro Plan, Developer Community Erupts, OpenAI Seizes the Opportunity to Strike

marsbitPublished on 2026-04-22Last updated on 2026-04-22

Abstract

Anthropic has removed its coding agent, Claude Code, from the $20/month Pro plan, triggering strong backlash from the developer community. The change was reflected in updated pricing pages and documentation, which now state that Claude Code is only available to Max plan subscribers, starting at $100/month. Anthropic’s growth lead, Amol Avasare, described the move as a "small-scale test" affecting only 2% of new users, but the broad updates to public documentation contradicted this claim. He later acknowledged that rising computational costs due to increased usage made the previous pricing structure unsustainable. Developers expressed frustration on platforms like Hacker News, Reddit, and GitHub, with some calling it a reason to switch to local or open-source models like Llama or Mistral. In response, OpenAI quickly emphasized that its competing product, Codex, remains available in both free and $20/month Plus plans, and reaffirmed its commitment to transparent communication with users. Google’s Gemini CLI remains free, adding further competitive pressure. The incident highlights growing tension between AI service affordability and the high compute costs of advanced coding assistants.

Author: Claude, Deep Tide TechFlow

Deep Tide Guide: On April 21, Anthropic quietly removed its programming agent Claude Code from the $20/month Pro plan, with related pricing pages and help documents updated simultaneously. Although Growth Lead Amol Avasare claimed this was only a "small-scale test" targeting about 2% of new users, the site-wide documentation has been completely rewritten to state "Max plan only," sparking a massive backlash in the developer community. OpenAI promptly publicly stated that Codex will remain in the free and Plus plans, while the local model camp called this incident "the best time to switch to self-hosting."

Anthropic is testing developers' price tolerance limits, at the possible cost of user trust.

On April 21, some developers noticed significant changes on Anthropic's official pricing page: Claude Code was marked as unavailable (with an "X") in the feature comparison table for the Pro plan ($20/month), whereas the day before the page still stated that the Pro plan "includes Claude Code." Almost simultaneously, the wording in Anthropic's help documentation quietly changed from "Use Claude Code with your Pro or Max plan" to "Use Claude Code with your Max plan."

AI industry observer Ed Zitron first sounded the alarm on the Bluesky platform, and the news quickly sparked discussions on Hacker News, Reddit r/LocalLLaMA, and X platform.

Official Statement Calls it a "Small-Scale Test," but Documentation is Fully Rewritten

Facing the developer community's intense reaction, Anthropic Growth Lead Amol Avasare responded that day on the X platform, stating this was only a small-scale test targeting about 2% of newly registered users, and existing Pro and Max subscribers would not be affected.

However, multiple media outlets pointed out that Avasare's statement contradicted the actual situation: the feature comparison matrix on the pricing page had been updated site-wide, and the help documentation had also been modified simultaneously. These changes were visible to all visitors and did not resemble a灰度 test for 2% of users. According to The Register, as of publication time, an Anthropic spokesperson had not responded further to this contradiction.

In subsequent tweets, Avasare explained the logic behind the adjustment: when the Max plan was launched a year ago, Claude Code was not bundled with it, Cowork did not exist, and asynchronous agents running for hours were not yet the norm. Since then, Claude Code usage has surged significantly post-Opus 4, and user usage patterns have fundamentally changed. He admitted, "Usage per subscriber has increased substantially, and our current plan structure was not designed for this."

This statement actually revealed a key point: providing Claude Code access for a $20 monthly fee has become unsustainable in terms of computing costs. According to industry analysis, each Claude Code programming session consumes far more tokens than regular chat, and the computational cost of long programming sessions could be several times the subscription fee.

From $20 to $100, Developers Pushed to a Decision Point

If this change is ultimately implemented permanently, Pro users who wish to continue using Claude Code would need to upgrade to the Max 5x plan starting at $100/month, or the Max 20x plan at $200/month. The price has increased fivefold.

Developers reacted quickly and strongly. A GitHub issue titled "Breaking Change: Claude Code CLI Removed from Pro Plan Without Notice" appeared within hours.

A related post on Hacker News received over 100 upvotes and more than 40 comments in less than an hour. One user's experience was representative: he started with the $20 Pro plan in January, upgraded to $200 due to frequently hitting usage limits, downgraded to $100 due to quality drops in Claude Opus 4.6, and recently downgraded back to $20 because he was satisfied with OpenAI Codex's performance on GPT-5.4. "I went from the most enthusiastic recommender to my current state," he wrote.

The reaction on the Reddit r/LocalLLaMA community was more direct. A post titled "Anthropic removes Claude Code from Pro plan, users call it 'the best time to switch to local models'" received extensive discussion, focusing on the progress made by open-source models like Meta's Llama series, Mistral, and DeepSeek in programming capabilities over the past year, as well as the maturity of local deployment tools like Ollama and LM Studio.

OpenAI Quickly Strikes, Codex Remains in Free and Plus Plans

Competitors did not miss this window.

From OpenAI's side, an employee responsible for Codex-related work posted on the X platform: "I don't know what they're doing over there, but Codex will continue to be available in the free and Plus ($20) plans. We have the compute and efficient models to support it. For important changes, we communicate with the community in advance."

The timing and wording of this statement were highly targeted.

OpenAI's Codex, as the main competitor to Claude Code, is currently offered in the ChatGPT Plus ($20/month) plan with a usage limit of 30 to 150 messages every 5 hours, and also has basic access in the free plan. Additionally, weeks ago, OpenAI released a Codex plugin specifically designed for Claude Code users, allowing developers to directly call Codex for code review or task delegation within the Claude Code workflow.

Google is also active; Gemini CLI is currently completely free. According to The New Stack, Anthropic has recently been under pressure regarding computing supply. Not only did it remove Pro access to Claude Code, but it also previously cut off third-party client OpenClaw's access to Claude via subscription accounts. Platform stability issues and frequent outages have also provided opportunities for competitors.

Related Questions

QWhat change did Anthropic make to its Pro plan regarding Claude Code, and when was it noticed?

AAnthropic removed Claude Code from its $20/month Pro plan on April 21, as noticed by developers who saw the pricing page updated to show Claude Code as unavailable for Pro users, whereas it was previously included.

QHow did Anthropic's growth head, Amol Avasare, explain the removal of Claude Code from the Pro plan?

AAmol Avasare claimed it was a 'small-scale test' affecting only about 2% of new sign-ups, stating that existing Pro and Max subscribers would not be impacted, and attributed the change to significantly increased usage and computational costs.

QWhat was the reaction from the developer community to Anthropic's change?

AThe developer community reacted strongly, with immediate backlash on platforms like Hacker News, Reddit, and X. Many expressed frustration, with some considering switching to local models or alternatives, and a GitHub issue was quickly created to highlight the abrupt change.

QHow did OpenAI respond to Anthropic's removal of Claude Code from the Pro plan?

AOpenAI swiftly responded by affirming that its Codex would remain available in both free and Plus ($20/month) plans, emphasizing their ability to support it with sufficient compute and efficient models, and criticizing Anthropic's lack of prior communication.

QWhat are the pricing implications for Pro users if they want to continue using Claude Code after this change?

AIf the change becomes permanent, Pro users would need to upgrade to the Max plan, which starts at $100/month for the 5x version or $200/month for the 20x version, effectively increasing the cost fivefold or more to access Claude Code.

Related Reads

The Value Distribution of Stablecoins

**Summary: The Value Distribution of Stablecoins** The article argues that stablecoins are evolving from mere trading tools into broader channels for dollar access. It divides the stablecoin ecosystem into four layers to analyze how value is distributed: 1. **Issuance Layer:** Mints stablecoins, holds reserve assets, and captures the spread between reserve yield and user costs (e.g., Tether, Circle). This layer currently earns the largest profit margin. 2. **Infrastructure Layer:** Connects stablecoins to the traditional financial system, handling fiat on/off-ramps, banking integration, compliance (KYC/AML), and asset management (e.g., Bridge, BVNK). This is the "unglamorous" but critical work, building the essential bridges between crypto and real-world finance. 3. **Acquiring/Distribution Layer:** Integrates stablecoins into merchant systems, manages payment flows, and provides enterprise financial software (e.g., Stripe, Coinbase). They act as the access point for businesses. 4. **Application Layer:** The end-users and businesses that ultimately use stablecoins for payments, settlements, or as a store of value. They benefit from convenience but have little pricing power. The core thesis is that while the issuance layer currently dominates profits, the often-overlooked **infrastructure layer holds significant long-term potential**. The real challenge and barrier to mass adoption is not the on-chain transfer of stablecoins (which is simple), but the complex "last mile" integration into existing business workflows, banking systems, and regulatory frameworks across different countries. Companies in this layer are currently in a "land grab" phase, investing heavily to build networks, secure bank partnerships, and establish compliance pathways. While their position is currently pressured by the profitable issuers above and distribution platforms below, the article suggests that if stablecoins become a default financial rail for businesses, the infrastructure providers who have done the hard work of integration will ultimately gain strong pricing power and become entrenched, essential players.

marsbit1h ago

The Value Distribution of Stablecoins

marsbit1h ago

The Value Distribution of Stablecoins

The Value Distribution of Stablecoins The article argues that stablecoins are evolving from a mere trading tool into a broad "dollar channel." It analyzes the industry's value chain through four layers: 1. **Issuance Layer (e.g., Tether, Circle):** The top layer that mints stablecoins, holds reserve assets, and captures the thickest interest rate spread. 2. **Infrastructure Layer (e.g., Bridge, BVNK):** Connects stablecoins to the traditional financial system, handling critical but complex "dirty work" like fiat on/off-ramps, banking integration, compliance (KYC/AML), and cross-border settlement. 3. **Acquiring/Distribution Layer (e.g., Stripe, Coinbase):** Embeds stablecoins into merchant systems, manages payment flows, and integrates with enterprise software. 4. **Application Layer:** End-users and businesses that ultimately use stablecoins for payments, settlement, or storing value. The author posits that while the issuance layer currently captures the most profit, the most overlooked and potentially critical layer is infrastructure. The core challenge for stablecoin adoption isn't the on-chain transfer (which is simple), but bridging the gap between blockchain and the real-world financial system. This involves solving practical problems for businesses: fiat conversion, reconciliation, tax handling, and user onboarding. Infrastructure companies are currently in a difficult "land-grab" phase—building networks, securing banking relationships, and achieving compliance country-by-country. They face pressure from both the profitable issuance layer above and distribution platforms below. However, the author suggests this layer is building a crucial moat. Once stablecoins become a default business rail, the infrastructure players who have done the hard work of integration may gain significant, durable value and pricing power.

链捕手1h ago

The Value Distribution of Stablecoins

链捕手1h ago

Why Is Nvidia Borrowing $20 Billion When It's Not Short of Cash?

Nvidia's recent announcement to issue at least $20 billion in senior notes, despite holding a strong cash position with over $48.6 billion in free cash flow last quarter, is not a sign of financial need. Instead, it represents a strategic move to leverage its high credit rating (recently upgraded to AA by S&P) to secure low-cost, long-term debt. This capital will support long-term AI infrastructure investments, data centers, R&D, supply chain prepayments, and strategic investments, while allowing the company to continue aggressive shareholder returns through stock buybacks and dividends. The decision reflects a mature capital management strategy: using debt to finance long-term growth assets is more efficient and less dilutive to shareholders than equity financing. It signals that Nvidia, like other tech giants (Alphabet, Meta, Amazon), is entering a new phase of heavy AI capital expenditure, shifting from a pure growth story to a story about capital allocation, credit strength, and long-term ecosystem positioning. The key question for investors is whether Nvidia can maintain its high cash flow generation and ensure that returns from these AI investments justify the cost of capital over the long term. The bond issuance amplifies its expansion capabilities but also ties its valuation more closely to the broader AI investment cycle's sustainability and profitability.

marsbit1h ago

Why Is Nvidia Borrowing $20 Billion When It's Not Short of Cash?

marsbit1h ago

Liberland Fires Tech Secretary After Alleged Blockchain And Website Takeover Attempt

Liberland's congress has voted to remove Technology Secretary Dorian Stern Vukotić, following a resolution accusing him of attempting to hijack the Liberland.org domain, removing administrative multisig protections, blocking the president from voting, and launching unauthorized tokens. The incident serves as a case study in blockchain governance, highlighting risks that go beyond smart contracts to include control over domains, admin keys, and off-chain authority. For the crypto industry, it underscores the need to scrutinize decentralization claims against operational realities, where a small group can still compromise governance. The story reflects a broader market shift where infrastructure security and governance are becoming as critical as price action. Editorial framing should treat the development as a verified information signal about governance risks, avoiding overstatement of Liberland's legal status and leaving room for follow-up evidence.

bitcoinist2h ago

Liberland Fires Tech Secretary After Alleged Blockchain And Website Takeover Attempt

bitcoinist2h ago

How to Do Research Well: Deliberately Practice the Real Skills That Matter

No one truly teaches you how to do research. You're often given a desk, a pre-selected problem, and vague instructions to "create something new." Consequently, many people reverse-engineer the job based on visible outputs—papers, posts, announcements—learning only how to *appear* like a researcher rather than how to *become* one. True research capability is built from stacking small, trainable skills, nearly all of which can be developed through deliberate practice. **Pick Your Own Problem:** Most researchers absorb problems from advisors or trends, lacking the underlying reasoning. Choosing a problem you genuinely care about, as John Schulman advises, leads to original work. Develop "taste" like a muscle: predict experiment outcomes, guess paper results from methods, and track which findings remain important over time. **Upgrade Your Inputs:** Relying on shared reading lists (arXiv hot lists, filtered group chats) leads to unoriginal conclusions. Undervalued old literature often holds crucial insights (e.g., MoE, LSTM, backpropagation). Richard Sutton's "The Bitter Lesson" or Claude Shannon's 1952 talk on creative thinking are more predictive than lengthy modern surveys. Breadth matters as much as depth: draw from neuroscience, mechanism design, hardware knowledge, and honest statistics. Read papers directly, especially appendices and limitations sections. **Write Everything Down:** As Paul Graham noted, writing exposes flaws in seemingly mature ideas. Writing is the cheapest defense against self-deception. Following Feynman's principle, Darwin programmatically wrote down facts contradicting his theory to combat memory bias. Maintain a detailed log of hypotheses, setups, predictions, results, and updated understandings. Reviewing past logs fosters essential humility.

marsbit3h ago

How to Do Research Well: Deliberately Practice the Real Skills That Matter

marsbit3h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片