RELATED ARTICLES |
"We haven't started working on it (termination charges) yet. Right now we are examining on various methodologies, global practices to calculate fresh termination charges. Once we have zeroed in on methods, then we would see what kind of information we need from operators," Trai chairman Nripendra Misra told PTI.
He said once data flows in, then Trai would issue a consultation paper, followed by public discussions and then the recommendation would come out.
Although he did not give a time-frame, going by the exercise it would not be less than at least two-three months. Misra said charges were fixed in 2003 when Interconnect Usage Charges (IUC) were decided. That time Trai had written there was a need to review the IUC after 2-3 years. So it is a normal review process, he added.
The termination charges in 2003 were fixed at 30 paise a minute and considered too high. Since then the cost of network and services has come down by more than 50 per cent.
Sensing this, the department of telecom, in June this year had asked the telecom regulator to cut mobile termination charges for lower tariffs. Higher termination charges might stifle competition, DoT had warned. In its letter to Trai, DoT said the termination charge, paid by an operator from whose network a call originates to a service provider on whose network the call ends, is a function of traffic and such increase in volume must translate into reduction in termination charges.
It further said, "One of the major component of tariff is the termination charge, which is not under forbearance (not decided by market forces). The high termination charges might stifle competition and disturb the level playing field."
Mobile operators are opposing any cut in termination charges as in a declining tariff scenario, they feel lower termination charges would make them unviable. "The argument that if mobile termination charges are reduced, the viability and the sustainability of existing tariff plans may not be possible and may retard growth of mobile subscribers, should not be the reason for not reviewing it.




















Post new comment