From copper to fibre, passing through a single passport for services, satellite and radio spectrum, and the creation of a new Office for Digital Networks[1], the Digital Networks Act (DNA), formally adopted by the Commission on 21 January 2026, promises more than regulatory consolidation. At first glance, it seeks not only to reform and harmonise EU telecom rules, but also to “strengthen Europe’s leadership in innovation, competitiveness and digital sovereignty,” as Henna Virkkunen, the Commission’s Executive Vice-President for Tech Sovereignty, Security and Democracy, has framed it.[2]
While few dispute that digital infrastructure underpins innovation, the proposal has already drawn critical reactions, particularly regarding its approach to the relationship with Big Tech[3].
This article offers a first look at the regulation, outlining its key provisions and hinting at challenges that already surround this nascent proposal.
- Harmonize, Putting the Players Together
It is too early to predict the long-term impact of the Digital Networks Act. One intention, however, is unmistakable: if adopted, the DNA will restructure the EU Telecom Framework. It repeals the European Electronic Communications Code (EECC), a directive approved less than eight years ago, the, Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications, “BEREC” Regulation, and the Radio Spectrum Policy Programme, while amending adjacent frameworks, including elements of the ePrivacy regime and the Open Internet Regulation. That such a recent framework already requires revision speaks to the urgency and speed at which the telecom landscape is evolving.
The sector has had to adapt not only to technological shifts, but also to structural dependencies: the growing dominance of American cloud providers and Europe’s reliance on Asian suppliers for critical raw materials and technologies. These actors that are not merely producing equipment, but increasingly shaping standards and supply chains[4]. This geopolitical dimension is difficult to ignore, particularly as the Union contemplates restrictions on certain third-country telecom operators[5].
Whether these ambitions survive the ordinary legislative procedure remains uncertain. Yet, the direction of travel is clear: “maximum legal harmonisation across the Union.”[6]
The approach echoes Enrico Letta’s call, in “Much More Than a Market,[7]” where he argues that the telecom sector, along with energy and finance, was left fragmented[8].
- Key aspects of the Digital Networks Act.
In the spirit of harmonisation, the DNA aims to facilitate inter European operations and service provision. Telecom remains one of the most heavily regulated sectors in the Union. Today, an operator seeking to provide services across borders must obtain an authorisation in each Member State. The Digital Networks Act seeks to remove this fragmentation by introducing a “Single Passport Authorisation”. A single notification in one Member State would allow an operator to offer services across all 27.
If approved, the Single Passport Authorisation would be coherent with the now famous Draghi report, and the Commission’s Communication “A Competitiveness Compass for the EU” and White Paper “How to master Europe’s digital infrastructure needs?”[9], where harmonisation and simplification of the European legal framework are deemed paramount to the future competitiveness of Europe’s economy, security and social welfare. This move seems also to encounter the favour of the public and private stakeholders, that had lamented “fragmentation” that leads to barriers to enter the Telecom Market.[10]
In practical terms, the Single Passport would eliminate divergent national procedures and shift coordination to a new Office for Digital Networks. While the scope of regulated services would remain largely unchanged, the move promises a more uniform supervisory framework, a one-size-fits-all structure designed to facilitate cross-border expansion within the Single Market.
However, the Single Passport has already had BEREC reaction, the Body, int its early assessment of the DNA warned[11] that concentrating responsibilities in the Member State of first notification risks forum shopping and uneven supervision. More broadly, several provisions of the proposal may increase, rather than reduce, regulatory complexity.
A second pillar of the DNA is the acceleration of the transition from copper to fibre. As the Internet of Things and AI-driven services expand, high-capacity infrastructure becomes paramount. Hence, the proposal sets two cumulative objectives: achieving 95% fibre coverage and ensuring broadband offers comparable in price and quality to legacy copper-based services. While the 2030 timeline appears ambitious, several Member States have already scheduled the phase-out of copper networks. In this sense, the DNA formalises an industrial transition already underway, though the uniform approach may prove challenging in markets with distinct structural conditions. Member States are therefore tasked with safeguarding vulnerable consumers during the switch.
The Digital Networks Act also ventures into one of the most important, and sensitive, challenges for EU sovereignty: satellite connectivity. To this day, satellite spectrum is where Member State controls remain most entrenched. It is here that the proposal is likely to energise the institutional pas à trois between the Commission, Parliament and Council.
The Commission proposes to allow operators to obtain a single authorisation to provide satellite services across the Union and also extend the licensing framework, passing from 20 to a maximum of 40-year terms, to better accommodate 5G services via satellite, while preparing the ground for 6G deployment, with a view to shortening authorisation timelines for next-generation technologies.
Beyond technical reform, the objective is strategic: in a complex geopolitical setting, the underlying aim is to strengthen the Union’s collective leverage vis-à-vis third countries and bolster the competitiveness of the European satellite industry.
- What the DNA Leaves Unresolved: United Telecom Market and Fair Share.
Although as mentioned, the DNA’s main ambition is to create a harmonised telecom regulatory framework, at this stage it falls short of addressing two delicate issues.
First, creating a truly unified telecom market. The Single Passport simplifies authorisation procedures, but it does not eliminate the need for operators to comply with substantive national rules once active in other Member States. Regulatory fragmentation therefore persists at the substantive level, with key segments, including aspects of 5G deployment and Wi-Fi governance, still shaped by domestic legislation. In that sense, the DNA advances procedural integration without fully achieving market unification.
The second point concerns the so-called “network fees”, or fair share debate. The idea, previously considered by the Commission, was to require large online platforms to contribute financially to the rollout and maintenance of telecom infrastructure, reflecting the volume of data traffic they generate.
The issue is not merely theoretical. In Germany[12], litigation has already emerged over whether companies such as Meta should compensate telecom operators like Deutsche Telekom for the heavy traffic generated by platforms such as Facebook and Instagram. By abandoning the fair share mechanism in the DNA and instead proposing a voluntary negotiation framework between platforms and telecom operators (Articles 191 and 192), the Commission appears to have stepped back from regulatory intervention.
The risk is that, absent a legislative solution, disputes may increasingly shift to national courts producing precisely the fragmentation the DNA seeks to reduce.
- The Road Ahead
The proposal now enters the ordinary legislative procedure, where the European Parliament and the Council will scrutinise, amend and inevitably recalibrate the Commission’s ambitions. Sensitive issues, from the scope of harmonisation to satellite spectrum governance and the role of large platforms, are likely to test the balance between market integration and national prerogatives. Whether the Digital Networks Act ultimately delivers on the promise of “one passport”, and moves meaningfully closer to “one market”, will depend less on its stated objectives than on the political compromises that shape its final text.
[1] Whereas 24 of the Proposal for a Regulation for the Digital Networks Act (DNA)
[2] EU supports digital connectivity with simpler and harmonised rules in Digital Networks Act
[3] EU’s Digital Networks Act Leaves Big Tech Untouched, Sparks Net Neutrality Concerns | TechPolicy.Press
[4] Seventeen EU countries not ready to cut China 5G dependence | Euractiv China curbs use of Nokia and Ericsson in telecoms networks
[5] Eyeing China, EU moves to ban ‘high-risk’ foreign suppliers from telecoms networks
[6] Remarks by Executive Vice-President Virkkunen on the Digital Networks Act
[7] Enrico Letta – Much more than a market (April 2024)
[8] Enrico Letta – Much more than a market (April 2024)
[9] Texts adopted – European technological sovereignty and digital infrastructure – Thursday, 22 January 2026
[10] Please see: Feedback from: Ericsson Feedback from: Squire Patton Boggs on behalf of Twilio, Vonage and Zoom on the DNA. Feedback from: AT&T
[11] BEREC Provides Early Assessment of the Digital Networks Act, Welcoming Ambition While Highlighting Areas for Improvement | BEREC
[12] Meta unit must pay Deutsche Telekom $36 million over network services, German court say | Reuters
