A problem inherent to the Broadband, Equity, Access, and Deployment Program and any similar infrastructure subsidy program: Winners’ incentive to come back to the government later to ask for more subsidies and the inability to credibly claim they won’t. The post-award incentive to return to the trough does not have an easy solution. Consider, for example, the almost inevitable cost overruns on other large infrastructure projects that taxpayers invariably cover. While eliminating this problem is likely impossible, understanding may help National Telecommunications and Information Administration and the states design their bidding processes to reduce the problem. Nearly 50 years ago, Nobel prize winner Oliver Williamson wrote a seminal paper on the problems involved in soliciting bids for monopoly service in the context of early cable TV franchises. His key point was that the winner becomes a monopolist with strong incentives to renegotiate terms or seek additional government support after winning the contract, particularly if initial bid commitments prove unsustainable. Because providers can optimize across the BEAD subsidy, expected Universal Service Fund (USF) payments, and expected consumer revenues, they may submit unrealistically low bids while planning to seek future USF support, exactly the kind of post-award renegotiation that concerned Williamson. We already see evidence of this problem. Nobody has yet figured out a bulletproof solution to Williamson’s post-award renegotiation problem, even in theory. It’s not reasonable to expect NTIA or the states to figure out a solution now. States can reduce the reasons a winner might come back later and the federal government can try to make it more difficult to violate promises. But the solution to the problem BEAD aims to solve—broadband access—will come from competition.

A group representing big railroads in Virginia has regained its right to sue the commonwealth over a recent law that attempted to streamline broadband internet access. But it apparently does not want to do so, for now at least. Virginia's General Assembly unanimously passed a bill in 2023 to streamline railroad approval processes in response to complaints from internet service providers that railroads were charging them high fees to cross their lines and causing long delays to completion. The Association of American Railroads, which represents Norfolk Southern and CSX, soon responded with a lawsuit against the State Corporation Commission, which would be arbiter in disputes under the law. The suit contended that federal law on the subject renders the recent state law “void and unenforceable,” and that the state law violates the U.S. Constitution’s “takings clause” by failing to provide the railroads with just compensation based on market value. Richmond-based U.S. District Judge David Novak ruled in April 2024 that the industry group did not have standing to file such a claim—the railroads themselves should have to do it. A federal appeals court disagreed in a ruling last month and sent the case back to be heard again. But a recent Virginia Supreme Court ruling about lawsuits on a parallel track appears to have done what the railroad association had hoped to do in federal court, so its lawyers asked Novak earlier this month to close the case without prejudice, meaning it could file again. 

As SpaceX lobbies for more federal funding for Starlink, the company is facing a new setback in Colorado, which is awarding a major portion of its broadband projects to a rival satellite provider.  Colorado recently announced the winners of its $400 million US Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment program. Its proposal stands out for picking satellite services to deliver high-speed internet to about half of the underserved locations. Other states, such as Virginia and Louisiana, have decided to mostly lean on faster, but more expensive fiber installations.  Colorado selected satellite internet providers for over 47,000 of the 96,000 underserved and unserved locations that will get BEAD funding. The rest will receive mostly fiber. The news may sound like a win for SpaceX. But Colorado awarded the vast majority of the locations, over 42,000, to Amazon’s upcoming Project Kuiper satellite service, which is slated to receive $25.35 million in BEAD funding. In contrast, SpaceX was only selected for 5,400 locations and $9.16 million in federal subsidies. 

Oklahoma plans to return $225 million in federal broadband funds after shifting to lower-cost wireless solutions under a new federal directive, a move officials say will cut costs while critics warn it will leave many rural residents with inferior service and send Oklahoma tax dollars to other states. The Oklahoma Broadband Office says it can expand internet service using cheaper wireless options and doesn’t need all of the money. But some worry Oklahoma tax dollars will now benefit other states, while leaving many rural residents with subpar internet options. Former State Rep Logan Phillips (R-24) says that opting for cheaper wireless options over gold-standard fiber is not only a missed opportunity, but a mistake. 

Inside a small house in the Parkchester neighborhood of the Bronx, seven Bangladeshi women sat around a large table earlier this month, trying to figure out how to mute themselves on Zoom. It was the first time many were using the video conferencing software. “ We should always stay mute until our turn to talk,” instructor Sakib Shikder told the class. He switched between Bengali and English as he went through the lesson. Sapna NYC, a nonprofit aimed at empowering South Asian immigrant women, offers classes on how to use Zoom, set up a Gmail account, attach a document to an email and use calendar reminders. Some students say they’re using spreadsheet formulas to organize their catering business. Others are using Zoom to communicate with their families. Advocates say learning digital skills can help immigrants find higher paid and safer work, apply for benefits online such as low-cost Metro Cards or better communicate with their kids’ schools. But they say despite demand, there are few programs in the city that teach digital literacy to immigrant communities, where residents face language barriers and often work in the informal economy. 

First, UScellular fell. And now, so has EchoStar/Dish with the sale of key spectrum licenses to AT&T. Does that mean wireless competition in the U.S. is dead? Was it ever really alive? It really depends on who you ask. UScellular was the largest regional operator before selling its wireless assets—spectrum, retail stores, and customer roster—to T-Mobile. EchoStar’s Boost Mobile, meanwhile, was intended to become a fourth facilities-based operator capable of competing with the likes of AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile in the wake of the latter’s Sprint acquisition. Though EchoStar did build out a network, its success as a wireless competitor is debatable, and the company is now selling its spectrum to AT&T. EchoStar said Boost will operate as a “hybrid MNO” using its own core network and AT&T’s cell sites. But where does this all leave the state of competition the market? Michael Calabrese, director of the Wireless Future Project at the Open Technology Institute, believes AT&T/EchoStar deal is a blow to consumer choice. Wave7 Research’s Jeff Moore similarly observed that the deal will effectively “freeze” the number of facilities-based operators in the country at three. Even so, he argued not much will change for consumers.

EchoStar's path as the nation's fourth facilities-based wireless carrier is vanishing after the struggling Colorado-based company agreed to sell a swath of low-band and mid-band spectrum to AT&T for a tidy sum of $23 billion. However, it's not immediately clear if the agreement will fully satisfy the Federal Communications Commission's investigation into EchoStar's federal 5G obligations and spectrum license rights. Under the agreement, which is expected to close in mid-2026, AT&T and EchoStar also agreed to "enhance" their wholesale network services agreement. That, they said, will enable EchoStar to operate as a "hybrid mobile network operator" providing services under its existing Boost Mobile brand. In turn, AT&T said it will serve as "the primary network services partner to EchoStar as it continues to serve wireless customers." EchoStar said Boost Mobile will continue as a wireless competitor under the hybrid MNO model, noting that subs will connect through Boost Mobile's cloud-native 5G core and AT&T's cell sites. "Customers will experience no interruptions to service. As a result of this transaction, elements of Boost Mobile's radio access network will be decommissioned over time," EchoStar said. Under that scenario, "[t]he likelihood of EchoStar remaining a facilities-based wireless carrier are dwindling," MoffettNathanson analyst Craig Moffett said in a research note. 

President Donald Trump recently threatened to raise tariffs on countries that have a digital services tax, accusing such nations of discriminating against major U.S. tech firms by trying to collect a percentage of their local earnings to make up for tax revenue lost in the digital era. “Digital Taxes, Digital Services Legislation, and Digital Markets Regulations are all designed to harm, or discriminate against, American Technology,” President Trump said in a social media post, which appeared to also take aim at European Union antitrust regulations on tech firms. Most countries that have enacted a digital services tax, or DST, have levied them against any tech company—American or otherwise—that earns above a certain threshold in their jurisdiction. The government of the United States has long opposed such taxes. A digital services tax is generally levied on the gross revenue that multinational tech firms earn in a particular country once they earn above a certain threshold from users in that jurisdiction. It’s a relatively new idea intended to make up for decreases in tax revenue from purchases in brick-and-mortar stores and traditional advertising, as consumers and advertisers moved online.