FCC Grants Verizon’s Request for Unlocking Waiver

WASHINGTON, Jan. 12, 2025 – The Federal Communications Commission granted Verizon’s request to waive a rule that required the company to unlock phones after 60 days.

The company asked for the waiver in May, arguing the unlocking rule distorted the marketplace and incentivized theft of its phones. The FCC agreed. 

“By waiving a regulation that incentivized bad actors to target one particular carrier’s handsets for theft, we now have a uniform industry standard that can help stem the flow of handsets into the black market,” FCC Chairman Brendan Carr said in a statement.

Verizon had to unlock all of its phones after 60 days as a condition on its 2007 purchase of 700 MegaHertz (MHz) spectrum. AT&T and T-Mobile are not subject to the requirement and largely require customers to fully pay off their devices before unlocking them and making them usable on other companies’ networks.

“The FCC's action will end bad actors' ability to exploit the FCC's unlocking rules to profit from easier access to expensive, heavily-subsidized devices in the U.S. that they traffic and sell to other parts of the world,” Kathy Grillo, Verizon’s SVP of public policy and government affairs, said in a statement. “We commend the FCC's bold leadership in waiving this outdated rule to meet today's complex security needs and to create a level playing field with all providers following the same industry standards.”

Consumer advocacy and device repair groups had opposed the waiver request, arguing to the FCC that carriers can use device locking to prevent customers from switching even if they want to.

“This is a profoundly anti-consumer decision that will do nothing but raise prices for smartphone consumers,” Michael Calabrese, director of the Wireless Future Project at New America's Open Technology Institute, said in an email. “Both Canada and the UK require unlocking and a consumer’s choice to more easily switch among mobile providers, and neither has reported a surge in smartphone theft.”

OTI led the coalition of groups that opposed the waiver request.

Law enforcement groups and seven Republican attorneys general were supportive of Verizon’s arguments about unlocked phones being easier to steal and sell on the black market or be used for other crimes.

The FCC found that convincing. Carr added in his statement that “Sophisticated criminal networks have exploited the FCC’s handset unlocking policies to carry out criminal acts – including transnational handset trafficking schemes and facilitating broader criminal enterprises like drug running and human smuggling.”

The opponents of the waiver disputed that Verizon’s unlocking mandate made its newly sold phones significantly more likely to be stolen.

“Carriers with much longer‬ ‭locking periods, such as AT&T and T-Mobile, also report high rates of device fraud and‬‭ trafficking,” the groups wrote. “This suggests that the issue is endemic to the business model, not the unlocking‬ period.”

The agency countered in its order that “While fraud is not unique to Verizon, Verizon is unique in being the only nationwide operator required to unlock its handsets in 60 days,” and said it was “prudent to allow Verizon to exercise its judgment to balance concerns about fraud to its business and its incentive to attract and retain customers.”

Verizon, the largest wireless carrier in the U.S., is looking to reverse customer losses under new CEO Dan Schulman, who took over in October.

The FCC has a separate pending rulemaking dealing with its phone unlocking rules. The agency sought comment in 2024 under Democratic Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel on expanding the 60-day unlocking requirement to all providers.

NCTA, which represents the cable industry and had supported an unlocking requirement, asked FCC staff last month to resolve that docket before acting on Verizon’s petition.

In a statement Monday, the group urged the agency to act on that rulemaking and said that “Mobile phone unlocking delivers clear pro-consumer benefits, saving billions of dollars across the mobile marketplace by expanding choice, competition, and affordability. Today’s decision delays these benefits, underscoring the need for a clear, uniform framework so all wireless providers operate under the same rules.”

Update: This story was update to add additional commentary.