When the European Commission presented its long-awaited Digital Networks Act, expectations were high. After years of political rhetoric about a true digital single market, many in the telecom industry hoped this would be the moment Brussels finally tackled the EU’s deeply fragmented connectivity landscape head-on. Digital Networks Act EU

Instead, the DNA feels more like a careful recalibration than a revolution. It pushes harmonisation in key technical and regulatory areas but avoids the most politically sensitive question of all: whether Europe is ready to treat telecoms as a genuinely pan-European market rather than 27 national ones loosely stitched together.

That tension runs through the entire proposal.

Fragmentation remains the elephant in the room

Despite sustained pressure from industry and repeated political signals, including from Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, Europe’s telecoms market remains structurally national. Spectrum, licensing, wholesale pricing and infrastructure access are still largely managed at the member state level, with widely different rules, timelines and economic logic.

The DNA does not fundamentally challenge that model. There is no attempt to remove de facto barriers between national mobile markets. Wholesale roaming caps, which continue to shape how operators price and plan cross-border services, are left untouched. For mobile operators dreaming of truly pan-European offerings, that omission is significant.

In practical terms, this means Europe will continue to look very different from markets like the US or China, where scale, consistency and predictable regulation underpin nationwide network strategies.

4G and 5G: harmonising the plumbing, not the market

Where the DNA does make a meaningful move is spectrum governance. Today, spectrum rules across the EU vary dramatically. Licence durations differ, assignment methods vary, and obligations attached to licences can change from one border to the next. For any operator trying to design cross-border services, this is a logistical nightmare.

The Commission’s proposal aims to align spectrum allocation rules at EU level. The focus is on reducing disparities in licence length, harmonising assignment procedures and creating more consistency in the obligations placed on spectrum holders.

This matters because spectrum costs in Europe are notoriously high. National auctions are often designed to maximise public revenue rather than support long-term network investment. That has direct consequences for 5G rollout speed, rural coverage and service quality. By pushing coordination at EU level, the Commission is trying to address the problem without stripping member states of control entirely.

Whether this survives the legislative process is another question. Spectrum remains one of the most politically sensitive levers in telecom policy, and several capitals are already signalling resistance.

Why pan-European mobile services are still out of reach

Even with better spectrum alignment, the DNA stops short of making pan-European mobile services workable in practice. Without changes to wholesale roaming economics or a unified licensing regime, operators still face structural disincentives to treat Europe as a single operational space.

This is where the gap between political ambition and regulatory reality becomes obvious. Europe talks about digital sovereignty and global competitiveness, but continues to regulate connectivity through national lenses. The DNA improves the plumbing, but leaves the walls intact.

For consumers, this likely means incremental improvements rather than transformative change. Coverage may improve, investment conditions may stabilise, but the idea of seamless, borderless mobile services remains elusive.

Wi-fi and fixed networks: convergence by stealth

On fixed-line and wi-fi infrastructure, the DNA again opts for convergence rather than overhaul. There is no bold move toward a pan-European wi-fi market, no wholesale roaming regime for cable networks, and no EU-wide access obligation for infrastructure owners.

Instead, the proposal introduces a harmonised framework for remedies that national regulators can impose on fixed network owners in specific geographic areas. These remedies are structured in a graduated way, and crucially, national regulators will be required to follow the framework.

If they do not, the Commission gains a new veto power.

This is a subtle but important shift. Rather than rewriting market structures in law, Brussels is tightening its grip on how national regulators intervene. Over time, this could lead to greater alignment across the 27 fixed-line markets, even if the legal architecture remains national.

Satellites: where Europe finally thinks at EU scale

The most genuinely pan-European element of the DNA is its approach to satellite communications. Here, the Commission explicitly acknowledges reality: low-Earth orbit satellite networks do not respect national borders.

Requiring satellite operators to obtain 27 separate national spectrum authorisations is increasingly impractical. The DNA proposes a single EU spectrum authorisation framework for satellite communications, a move widely welcomed by the space and connectivity sectors.

This aligns with broader European ambitions around space, resilience and strategic autonomy, and mirrors approaches already seen in other regions. In this area at least, Europe appears ready to regulate at the scale the technology demands.

EU numbering and business connectivity

Another notable addition is the proposal for an EU-wide numbering scheme to support pan-European business-to-business services. This is not consumer-facing in the traditional sense, but it matters enormously for emerging use cases.

Connected vehicles, Internet of Things deployments, logistics platforms and machine-to-machine communications all struggle with fragmented numbering and authorisation regimes. An EU-level numbering resource could significantly reduce complexity and accelerate deployment across borders.

The DNA also proposes a single EU-level general authorisation that would allow infrastructure operators and telecom providers to offer services across the bloc without navigating 27 separate approval processes.

For multinational enterprises and industrial connectivity providers, this could be one of the most impactful elements of the package.

A quiet but important legal shift

One of the least discussed but most consequential changes in the DNA is its proposal to convert the European Electronic Communications Code from a directive into a regulation.

This may sound technical, but the implications are substantial. Directives allow member states to adapt EU rules into national law. Regulations apply directly, with no room for domestic reinterpretation.

If adopted, this change would significantly strengthen the single-market dimension of EU telecom law and limit national deviations that currently contribute to fragmentation.

Where this leaves Europe

The Digital Networks Act reflects Europe’s ongoing struggle with scale. Compared to markets like the United States, where nationwide operators plan networks under a single regulatory regime, or China, where state coordination drives rapid deployment, the EU continues to prioritise national sovereignty over market unity.

At the same time, the DNA shows that Brussels is learning to pick its battles. Instead of forcing full consolidation, it targets areas where fragmentation is most damaging or least defensible, such as satellites, spectrum coordination and B2B connectivity.

Industry reactions so far echo this mixed picture. Operators welcome greater predictability and lower spectrum costs but warn that without deeper market integration, Europe risks falling further behind in 5G standalone, edge computing and future 6G development.

Reliable analysis from sources such as the European Court of Auditors, BEREC, and industry groups like GSMA and ETNO consistently point to the same conclusion: investment follows scale, certainty and simplicity. Digital Networks Act EU

Conclusion: evolution, not the big bang

The Digital Networks Act is not the single market breakthrough some hoped for, but it is not a missed opportunity either. It represents an evolutionary step in a market that has long resisted radical change.

By focusing on harmonisation where it is most achievable, the Commission is laying the groundwork that future reforms can build on. Whether Europe eventually matches the scale and coherence of global connectivity leaders will depend less on this single act and more on political willingness to confront national fragmentation head-on.

For now, the DNA sends a clear signal: Europe wants to move together, but it is still negotiating how far and how fast it is willing to go.