Is There Really a Mid-Band Spectrum Shortage in the United States?

January 27, 2025

The debate over mid-band spectrum availability in the United States has been a contentious issue, with various stakeholders presenting conflicting views. The CTIA, a prominent industry association, claims that the US is lagging behind other countries in mid-band spectrum, which could potentially hinder the development of 5G and future 6G networks. However, a closer examination of these claims reveals significant discrepancies and raises questions about the accuracy of CTIA’s assertions.

Defining Mid-Band Spectrum: A Matter of Perspective

One of the primary issues in the debate is the definition of “mid-band” spectrum. CTIA adopts an unconventional definition, categorizing mid-band as frequencies starting from 3GHz and upwards. This contrasts with the broader industry consensus, which includes organizations like GSMA, 5G Americas, Nokia, and Ericsson, that define mid-band as starting at 1GHz. CTIA’s definition includes low-band (0.3 – 3GHz), lower mid-band (3 – 8.4GHz), upper mid-band (8.4 – 24GHz), and high-band (above 24GHz).

This redefinition by CTIA strategically excludes significant US spectrum holdings in the 1-3GHz range, which are considered mid-band by most of the industry. For instance, the 2.5GHz spectrum range, heavily utilized by T-Mobile, is ignored in CTIA’s analysis. This inconsistency suggests that CTIA’s representation of mid-band spectrum availability in the US is inflated compared to other countries. By ignoring frequencies below 3GHz, CTIA presents a skewed view that could mislead stakeholders into believing there’s a dire shortage of mid-band spectrum in the country.

The Role of Unlicensed Spectrum and Supplementary Technologies

CTIA’s analysis also overlooks the potential of unlicensed spectrum bands, such as the 5GHz band, which can provide supplementary capacity. Technologies like 4G LTE-U, MuLTEfire, and 5G NR-U can utilize these bands to offer additional resources for localized and indoor coverage. By not acknowledging the role of these technologies, CTIA’s narrative fails to present a complete picture of the spectrum landscape. The availability of unlicensed spectrum and the advancements in technology that can utilize it are crucial factors that can enhance network capacity and performance.

Operators leveraging unlicensed bands and supplementary technologies can significantly alleviate spectrum constraints and improve overall network efficiency. Ignoring these capabilities downplays how U.S. operators have effectively maximized available resources to mitigate potential shortages. Understanding the full spectrum landscape, including licensed and unlicensed bands, provides a more accurate assessment of mid-band spectrum availability. This broader perspective can inform more effective spectrum management and policy decisions to support the ongoing evolution of 5G and future 6G networks.

Misleading International Comparisons

Another significant critique of CTIA’s claims is the misleading international comparisons. CTIA’s research often amalgamates low-power, shared spectrum allocations as though they are equivalent to high-power, exclusive-use bands. For instance, in China, the 3.3-3.4GHz band is allocated for low-power indoor usage, shared among several network operators, rather than being solely available for exclusive high-power use. Such distinctions are critical, as they undermine the authenticity of CTIA’s comparative assessments.

Similarly, CTIA’s studies misinterpret various countries’ spectrum allocations and fail to differentiate between exclusive nationwide licenses and localized, shared spectrum frameworks. For example, in the UK, the 3.4-3.8GHz spectrum is allocated for national mobile network operator usage, while the 3.8-4.2GHz range is intended for shared deployment on a local basis. France and Australia have similar distinctions, which CTIA’s reports do not adequately capture. Consequently, the advocacy by CTIA and its members, such as AT&T, draws flawed conclusions by assuming all mid-band spectrum allocations globally are comparable to exclusive national assignments in the US.

The Reality of US Mid-Band Spectrum Holdings

When proper definitions are applied, the US actually holds a considerable amount of true mid-band spectrum. Collectively, major US operators including AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, and Dish/EchoStar control about 870 megahertz of mid-band spectrum. This amount aligns more closely with other leading global markets and contradicts CTIA’s narrative of a critical spectrum shortage. The perceived gap in mid-band spectrum availability may be far less severe or entirely non-existent.

These findings suggest that the supposed mid-band spectrum deficit in the US is largely a matter of perspective and selective definitions. Accurate comparisons and standardized definitions reveal that the US has sufficient mid-band spectrum, albeit unevenly distributed among operators. Recognizing the true state of spectrum holdings can dispel misconceptions and better guide regulatory and strategic decisions. It highlights the need for a more balanced and accurate portrayal of spectrum availability to ensure informed policymaking and efficient resource utilization in the telecommunications sector.

The Need for Accurate Definitions and Transparent Methodologies

The debate over the availability of mid-band spectrum in the United States has become quite heated, with various interested parties expressing differing opinions. The CTIA, a significant industry group, argues that the U.S. is falling behind other nations in terms of mid-band spectrum allocation. This shortage, they claim, could potentially slow the progress of 5G and the development of future 6G networks. They emphasize that ensuring ample mid-band spectrum is crucial for keeping up with global advancements in telecommunications technology.

Yet, when examining these assertions more closely, discrepancies emerge, casting doubt on the accuracy of CTIA’s claims. Critics argue that the situation might not be as dire as the CTIA suggests and that the U.S. might not be as far behind as purported. They call for a more detailed and thorough analysis to truly understand the state of mid-band spectrum availability and its implications for future technological development. This debate underscores the complex nature of spectrum allocation and its critical role in the evolution of communication networks.

Subscribe to our weekly news digest.

Join now and become a part of our fast-growing community.

Invalid Email Address
Thanks for Subscribing!
We'll be sending you our best soon!
Something went wrong, please try again later