techtelecomregulationbroadband

T-Mobile Caught Throttling Affordable Broadband Plans in New York

New York's attorney general found T-Mobile violated the Affordable Broadband Act by capping data and limiting service availability to low-income residents.

T-Mobile Caught Throttling Affordable Broadband Plans in New York

T-Mobile has agreed to stop throttling speeds on its affordable broadband plans after New York’s attorney general launched an investigation into the company’s compliance with state law.

Under New York’s Affordable Broadband Act, internet service providers must offer low-cost options to eligible households: at least 25 Mbps for $15 per month, or 200 Mbps for $20 per month. These prices cannot include hidden taxes or equipment fees. The law also requires providers to make genuine efforts to promote these plans to those who need them most.

How T-Mobile Sidestepped the Law

What New York’s Office of the Attorney General discovered was troubling. T-Mobile had imposed monthly data caps on its ABA-compliant plans, then throttled speeds down to a crawl at 650 kilobits per second once customers exceeded 50GB of data. In typical broadband usage, that threshold could be reached in about four days. This essentially rendered the service unusable for anyone actually trying to use broadband for legitimate purposes like video streaming, remote work, or online education.

The company also restricted availability. T-Mobile only offered these plans in areas where it had deployed 5G wireless coverage, artificially limiting access. Perhaps worst of all, the company actively prevented search engines from indexing information about these affordable plans on its website, effectively hiding them from people searching for low-cost internet options.

What Changes Now

Following the investigation, T-Mobile has committed to significant changes. The company will remove data caps entirely from its ABA plans. It will expand availability to all areas of New York where it currently offers home internet service, not just 5G zones. And it will allow search engines to properly index plan information, making these options discoverable to people who need them.

“Reliable and affordable internet service is a basic need for all New Yorkers, but T-Mobile flouted the law designed to help vulnerable New Yorkers access it,” said Attorney General Letitia James. “My office is committed to seeing the Affordable Broadband Act realize its goal of ensuring that New Yorkers in need are not denied access to affordable home internet.”

The Bigger Picture

This case reveals how even when laws exist to protect consumers, enforcement remains crucial. T-Mobile’s maneuvers were technically sneaky but not subtle: data caps, geographic restrictions, and hiding information from search engines. These weren’t accidental compliance failures; they were deliberate limitations designed to make an affordable product effectively unaffordable or inaccessible.

The company’s statement to Engadget emphasizes its “long history of helping customers” and frames the agreement as simply providing “greater clarity.” That’s corporate-speak for acknowledging they got caught breaking the rules.

For low-income New Yorkers, this settlement represents a genuine victory. Broadband access has become essential infrastructure, not a luxury. Remote work, telehealth, online education, and job searching all require reliable internet. When companies like T-Mobile erect artificial barriers to affordable service, they’re not just violating regulations, they’re deepening inequality.

Other states should be watching closely. If your state has similar affordable broadband requirements, now’s the time to scrutinize whether providers are actually following them. Attorney General James’ office did the investigative work here, but consumers shouldn’t have to rely on government enforcement to get what they legally paid for.

T-Mobile’s forced compliance proves that companies will push boundaries whenever possible, making aggressive regulatory oversight a necessity rather than an option. The question now is whether other providers are running similar schemes in states with less vigilant attorneys general.

Source: Engadget

Filed under
techtelecomregulationbroadband