India’s satellite communication market has gained momentum since 2020, when the space sector was opened up for private participation, and the Indian National Space Promotion and Authorisation Centre, or IN-SPACe, was created to oversee private-sector participation. By April 2025, close to ten satellite players had indicated plans to enter the market. Alongside growing interest, several leading players like Starlink, Jio Satellite, and Eutelsat also secured licences to provide mobile services using satellite technology.
Starlink’s latest re-application to IN-SPACe, seeking permission for nearly 30,000 of its signature low earth orbit satellites, brings strong commercial interest into focus again. But while the domestic satcom market is forecasted to triple in size to be valued at $14.8 billion by 2033, regulatory uncertainty has stymied meaningful commercial rollout.
The economics of the space race
Indian telcos acquire their spectrum through overpriced auctions, with very expensive floor prices. Therefore, policymakers may need to balance the interest of terrestrial operators, which provide connectivity primarily through land-based infrastructure, with those of satellite operators. To be clear, both face high capital expenditure, but offer differentiated services. Telco connectivity is generally available, while the promise of satellite connectivity is availability even in remote areas.
The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) recommends that spectrum for satellite communications be allocated administratively — which is a good move because it means the government can determine which operators receive access to spectrum and under what conditions. While this approach will allow several operators to share the same frequencies, it shifts the policy question from who wins the spectrum to what operators should pay for accessing it.
In May 2025, TRAI recommended that satellite operators pay an annual spectrum charge equivalent to four per cent of their adjusted gross revenue, compared to the three to five per cent that terrestrial operators pay on existing spectrum although no spectrum usage charge (SUC) is applicable on auctioned spectrum post-2022. It also proposed an additional Rs 500 per urban subscriber every year for operators using satellites that orbit much closer to the earth than their geostationary counterparts. These charges may amount to a prohibitive recurring cost. With the framework still unsettled, satellite operators face uncertainty over a key component of their long-term price structure.
Additionally, the arrangements that allow customers from one network to connect to customers on another, known as interconnection, could also emerge as another battleground since satellite networks also operate in an interplay with terrestrial and fixed line networks. The terms and costs governing this interplay could affect both the usability as well as the commercial terms on which satellite services will be offered. Debates over interconnection charges are not entirely new either to Indian telecom: the entry of Jio saw much sparring, with incumbent operators pushing back against the new entrant’s terms.
Obtaining licenses ≠ service becoming available
Beyond spectrum allocation and pricing, operators require an additional layer of technical and security clearances to unlock commercialisation. These include technical conditions related to usable spectrum and network operations, requirements for supporting infrastructure such as earth stations and gateways and their connectivity to other networks, as well as security requirements around lawful interception and monitoring.
Multiple security requirements are not unique to the Indian market. But while they serve legitimate objectives, the extent to which they add to the operating cost and complexity has not received requisite policy attention. In contrast, foreign regulators such as the UK’s Ofcom are circumspect about the resource-intensity of their licensing process and seek to reduce associated burdens in light of competitive pressures from America’s innovation engine.
India risks falling behind other developing economies. Brazil implemented a simplified authorisation framework for satcom in 2021, reducing licensing fees and removing the requirement of public bidding for the authorisation. Therefore, a final concern is not simply that local regulations are cumbersome, but that India’s institutional framework is uncaring for temporal realities and operators have a limited window for achieving commercial competitiveness.
The extant commercialisation situation is analogous to India’s 5G experience. While telecom operators rapidly rolled out 5G networks, monetising investments is difficult due to high spectrum costs on the supply-side and use-cases taking longer than anticipated on the demand-side. Meanwhile, the global industry is moving on to deploying 6G networks. The same risk could emerge in the satcom market: by the time institutions resolve open questions such as on pricing and security, technology may evolve. In this case, India will end up playing catch-up rather than riding the next wave of investments and innovation.
Samrridhi Kumar is an associate at Koan Advisory Group, a Delhi-based consultancy firm. Views are personal.
This article is part of ThePrint-Koan Advisory series that analyses emerging policies, laws and regulations in India’s technology sector. Read all the articles here.
(Edited by Aamaan Alam Khan)