ComCom’s recommendation to the Government reflects a much-changed market structure and a pragmatic withdrawal of redundant regulation
The country’s three mobile operators have all divested their tower assets
On 27 October 2026, the Commerce Commission (ComCom) published its recommendation to remove “outdated” mobile tower sharing rules in New Zealand. Mobile co-location allows operators to install their own network (transmission and reception) equipment on a shared tower. It reduces the need to build separate towers, helping lower the cost of expanding mobile networks. The Telecommunications Act 2001 mandated mobile co-location to support competition by giving operators access to their competitors’ towers, which they might have otherwise been inclined to withhold. The regulation supported 2degrees’ entry into the mobile market and the expansion of existing networks. However, the country’s three mobile operators – Spark, One NZ and 2degrees – have all now sold their tower infrastructure to specialist tower companies, Connexa and Fortysouth. These firms do not operate mobile networks and therefore fall outside the existing regulation, with their business model relying on attracting multiple tenants onto their towers.
With towercos incentivised to maximise infrastructure sharing, current rules perform no meaningful function
In February 2026, ComCom found that there were reasonable grounds to open an investigation into whether mobile co-location should be omitted from Schedule 1 of the act. Its review has since found that tower companies (or towercos) and mobile operators are negotiating access without regulatory intervention, and that regulation is no longer needed to support competition. One NZ agreed with ComCom’s July 2026 draft recommendation to deregulate mobile co-location, stating that the mechanism is no longer “fit for purpose or necessary”. The Technology Users Association of New Zealand Inc (TUANZ) was more cautious by comparison, urging ComCom not to hastily or completely roll back “hard-won” regulation without considering suitable safeguards. However, according to Tristan Gilbertson (Telecommunications Commissioner, ComCom), the industry has “fundamentally changed” since the rules were introduced in 2001. At that time, operators had little incentive to provide competitors access to their towers, with regulation therefore designed to address that risk and to reduce the duplication of network capex and deployment. In contrast, towercos have strong commercial incentives to attract existing operators and prospective new entrants, presenting no significant barriers to infrastructure access. As current rules only apply to mobile operators, and not the firms that own the towers, ComCom’s view is that they now provide “no effective regulatory backstop”.
Competition will be maintained through commercial arrangements, with ComCom closely monitoring developments
According to ComCom’s final report, removing the “redundant” rules on mobile co-location would better reflect how the market has operated since operators sold their towers three years ago, while ensuring that the benefits of competitive access continue flowing through to consumers. The regulator also pointed to the expansion of “alternative technologies and arrangements, including roaming, co-siting and radio access networks (RAN) sharing – particularly in rural areas. Absent ex-ante regulation, ComCom would continue to monitor industry developments. If new competition concerns were to emerge in the future, it is able to investigate and recommend appropriate regulatory intervention. ComCom has outlined its recommendation in a letter to Paul Goldsmith (Minister for Media and Communications, New Zealand), who will decide whether to remove the rules. The regulation will remain in place unless the Minister removes it from the act.
