India's telecom regulator, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (Trai), has defended its proposal to impose a 4% spectrum usage charge on satellite communication providers such as Starlink. Addressing concerns raised by terrestrial operators like Reliance Jio and Bharti Airtel, Trai emphasized that satellite networks are not in direct competition with traditional telecom infrastructure due to significant differences in capacity and coverage. The regulator argued that the satellite spectrum is a shared resource, unlike the exclusive allocations made to terrestrial operators, and thus merits a differentiated pricing model. Trai also recommended an additional Rs. 500 per urban subscriber for satcom firms, with rural users exempted.
Satcom vs. Terrestrial: Trai Dispels Competition Concerns
Amid growing discourse over a level playing field in India’s evolving digital infrastructure landscape, Trai Chairman Anil Kumar Lahoti addressed speculation that satellite internet services could distort the telecom market. He dismissed the notion that satellite providers are poised to rival terrestrial giants in the near future, citing stark disparities in network capacity.
According to Lahoti, the capacity of terrestrial networks surpasses that of satellite networks by a factor ranging from 60:1 to 250:1. For instance, while Delhi’s broadband demand stands at roughly 5 million connections, a single satellite constellation could serve only 10,000 to 20,000 users in the region. Given these limitations, Trai maintains that satellite and terrestrial services remain complementary, not competitive.
Rationale Behind Spectrum Pricing for Satcom
Trai’s recommendation that satellite communication companies contribute 4% of their adjusted gross revenue (AGR) as spectrum charges marks a pivotal regulatory move. Although the satcom industry had advocated for lower levies, the regulator defended its stance as balanced and rooted in global precedents.
Lahoti clarified that spectrum allocation for satellite providers is inherently different. Unlike the exclusive allocation model followed for terrestrial operators, satellite spectrum is pooled and shared. “Hence, pricing cannot be equated,” he stated. Moreover, in many international markets, spectrum fees for satellite services are either minimal or waived entirely to encourage digital inclusion, especially in hard-to-reach areas.
Additional Financial Obligations for Satcom Players
In addition to the spectrum usage charge, satcom operators will also be subject to an 8% license fee, aligned with the existing framework for terrestrial services. Trai further recommended a subscriber-specific levy—Rs. 500 per urban user annually—while rural consumers are exempt, reinforcing the government’s focus on rural connectivity and digital parity.
This layered pricing model aims to reflect the unique operational models and infrastructural constraints of satcom firms while maintaining regulatory consistency.
No Link to Bilateral Trade Negotiations
Responding to speculation that international trade discussions may have influenced Trai's recommendations—particularly with regard to foreign satellite players like Starlink—Lahoti was unequivocal. He emphasized that Trai's remit was confined to policy suggestions based on references from the Department of Telecommunications (DoT), and that issues pertaining to international agreements fall under the government’s jurisdiction.
This clarification sought to pre-empt allegations of external influence and underscore the technical and economic rationale behind Trai’s decisions.
Direct-to-Mobile Satellite Services Not Imminent
On the potential of satellite networks offering direct-to-mobile (D2M) services, Lahoti highlighted a key technical constraint: the Ku and Ka bands—where Starlink seeks spectrum—are incompatible with existing mobile devices. Globally, such services typically operate in the same bands as terrestrial networks, and in those scenarios, satcom firms lease spectrum from mobile carriers rather than acquire it independently.
This further dilutes fears that satellite internet could soon encroach upon mobile broadband’s domain in India.
Conclusion: Balancing Innovation and Equity in Digital Policy
Trai’s latest recommendations reflect a nuanced attempt to balance emerging technologies with existing infrastructure. By differentiating between the capabilities and business models of satellite and terrestrial service providers, the regulator aims to encourage satcom deployment in underserved areas without jeopardizing the commercial viability of traditional telecom operators.
As India marches toward a more digitally inclusive future, regulatory clarity, fiscal pragmatism, and technological foresight will remain essential to harmonizing growth across diverse communication platforms.
Comments