AT&T Pouts, Pulls Home 5G Service From NY State Over Law Requiring It Provide $15 To Poor People
from the taking-my-ball-and-go-home dept
To be clear up front, AT&T is a predatory telecom monopolist. It works tirelessly to lobby (and sometimes bribe) government for favorable treatment as it works tirelessly to undermine competition and eliminate state and federal oversight. It then miraculously exploits that lack of competition and oversight in the form of shoddy, sluggish, and very expensive service,
Should anybody in government then attempt to do absolutely anything about this problem, they’re then framed as radical extremists looking to kill “free market innovation.”
Case in point: the telecommuting and home education booms during peak COVID lockdowns demonstrated to everybody (once again) that U.S. broadband is overpriced and generally shitty. In response, New York in 2021 passed a law requiring that big ISPs (with over 20k users) offer low-income residents 25 Mbps broadband for $15.
It’s not a big ask. That kind of bandwidth is incredibly inexpensive to provision. But big ISPs like AT&T immediately sued. Telecoms hoped the case would wind its way to the Supreme Court where a MAGA-heavy judgeship would reverse the law. But the Supreme Court (too busy making presidents kings) recently declined to hear the case, allowing the law to go into effect.
I’m not entirely sure New York State (which I’m sure is quite busy with all manner of chaos under Trump 2.0) will even bother to enforce it. Actually holding big telecom accountable historically hasn’t been the U.S.’ strong suit. But in response AT&T has decided to pout like a full diapered toddler, and pull the company’s home 5G service out of New York State entirely.
AT&T’s home 5G “Internet Air” service is generally more affordable than the company’s fiber or traditional wireless offerings, because AT&T is trying to leverage 5G to make inroads against traditional cable companies. Once they’ve grabbed a bigger market share, they’ll ultimately get back to steadily raising rates on that service as well. Worth noting: FCC broadband maps (which tend to overstate coverage) suggest AT&T’s home 5G service already isn’t available across the majority of New York State.
In a statement, AT&T falsely claims that being forced to make broadband affordable to a small segment of poor people makes doing business in the state impossible:
“While we are committed to providing reliable and affordable internet service to customers across the country, New York’s broadband law imposes harmful rate regulations that make it uneconomical for AT&T to invest in and expand our broadband infrastructure in the state.”
Again, providing 25 Mbps broadband in the multi-gigabit era costs telecoms very little to actually provide. And this is all assuming New York State actually enforces the law, which isn’t clear.
Since AT&T couldn’t get the MAGA Supreme Court to kill New York State’s law, they’re pulling this little stunt to try and scare other states away from following NY’s lead. Do anything about our predatory pricing, AT&T warns, and we’ll make your state even less competitive.
Its a threat that will probably work. This is a familiar pattern in the U.S. Big telecom works overtime to monopolize broadband access and kill government oversight, resulting in high prices and muted competition. Somebody (usually Democrats) comes along proposing a band aid fix, and it’s immediately portrayed as radical extremism in a bid to scuttle it. Usually, telecom wins these fights.
Ultimately, most of the efforts to fix U.S. telecom are somewhat performative band aids. Neither state nor federal policymakers have the spine to go after the heart of the problem: consolidated monopoly power.
It’s worth noting that telecoms are about to get a whopping $42.5 BILLION in taxpayer subsidies courtesy of the 2021 infrastructure bill. And despite the fact these networks are taxpayer subsidized, AT&T and friends are also fighting tooth and nail against requirements they make these services actually affordable. Republicans also recently killed a COVID-era law providing a $30 broadband discount to poor Americans.
There’s a sustained effort to ensure telecoms can rip you off without pesky regulatory intervention. This is, as they say, why we can’t have nice things.
Filed Under: 5g, affordability, broadband, low income, new york state, satellite, wireless
Companies: at&t


Comments on “AT&T Pouts, Pulls Home 5G Service From NY State Over Law Requiring It Provide $15 To Poor People”
Called it.
Re:
AT&T is probably thinking about the big picture. Why does the it matter how much income the customer earns? Has any price controlled system ever not expanded the program in an attempt to buy votes?
Re:
I actually disagree with most of your comment.
(My apologies. I didn’t actually mean to use that word in every sentence.)
“…we simply don’t want to provide
reliable andaffordable internet service to customers in this state.”Unsurprising. There’s also copyright monopolists pushing for site-blocking as well now: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/01/dont-make-copyright-law-smoke-filled-rooms
It took a massive protest to stop SOPA/PIPA last time, hopefully there’ll be a similairly effective response to this.
Re:
In hindsight this kind of overreach is probably unconstitutional anyway.
Re:
After which, people started throwing even more money at the people behind those laws (the MAFIAA) via subscriptions to streaming services. So those companies basically kept doing what they were doing, and the performers etc. kept dealing with them. It seems the only notable boycott was of GoDaddy, who were only peripherally involved. Nothing’s really changed regarding copyright policy, except that people push these laws elsewhere and more quietly.
What is it with big telecomm and deliberately being so fucking mean to people with less income?
Re:
Like other capitalist corporations, telcos want to maximize income while minimizing costs so they can reap profits that will go to the executives who do next-to-nothing to keep the business running on a day-to-day basis. That means telcos will treat a service meant to help poor people as a financial debt rather than a human investment.
Re: Re:
Well I hope they choke on those precious dollar bills of their’s.
Re: Re: Re:
You underestimate their gullet size.
Re: Re:
As you’ve noted, EVERY corporation does this – which is why being poor is expensive. And since Trump and his enablers absolutely hate poor people, it’s going to get worse. If they get their way, we’ll breeze right past indentured servitude and get back to slavery.
Think that’s hyperbole? It’s not. The greed and cruelty of these people are both unlimited.
Re: Re: Re:
Some people also say Trump is following project 2025 to a tee so far.
It’s definitely not going to be easy either way and the policies are widely unpopular, but it’s incredibly tiring, considering we could so easily have avoided this stupidity altogether.
Re: Re: Re:2
Grousing about “what ifs” won’t do anyone any good. The reality is that Donald Trump is president. Acknowledge it, accept it, and adapt to it.
Re:
That’s actually a combination of an unchecked capitalism made worse by the US stock market.
Capitalism encourages corporation to maximize profits at all costs.
And US stock market regulations prioritize short term profits over long term profits (and survival).
There need to be some regulatory boundaries to ensure that corporations don’t get too predatory. There do need to be some guardrails on our economic system.
Most corporations would probably recognize that giving poor people a little assistance in order to make them long term customers would be in their long term interest. But the stock market discounts corporate long term interests. Which sometimes results in corporations being even more predatory. Go figure.
$15 is uneconomical. I had the $30 deal that the government paid for. Once it ended, still $30. $30 is more like it.
Re:
Don’t defend the companies that want to rip you off.
Re:
It doesn’t cost them 50 cents. 15 spacebucks is fine.
Well, gee. How else is AT&T going to make back its costs … of fighting the law in court?
Let us call this for what it is.
This is capital flight.