FCC Drops Gigabit Broadband Speed Goal, Keeps 100 Mbps Benchmark

The Federal Communications Commission has eliminated its long-term goal of bringing 1 gigabit-per-second download and 500 Mbps upload broadband to Americans, reversing a target adopted just two years ago.

The FCC’s 2026 Section 706 Report keeps 100 Mbps download and 20 Mbps upload as the current benchmark for fixed broadband, but removes the separate 1,000/500 Mbps goal that had been intended as a guide for future network deployment.

The agency argues that maintaining a long-term gigabit target could favour technologies capable of reaching those speeds, particularly fibre, over alternatives such as satellite and fixed wireless.

The change does not prohibit gigabit Internet service, reduce the speed of existing connections or prevent providers from building faster networks. It changes how the FCC measures long-term broadband progress and the goals it sets for the industry.

The FCC adopted the report on Aug. 13 and released it Aug. 14.

The FCC Is Keeping 100/20 Mbps as Its Current Broadband Benchmark

The most important distinction is between the FCC’s current benchmark and its former long-term goal.

In 2024, the commission raised its definition of advanced fixed broadband from 25 Mbps download and 3 Mbps upload to 100/20 Mbps.

At the same time, it established a separate aspirational target of 1,000 Mbps download and 500 Mbps upload for the future.

The 100/20 Mbps benchmark remains in place.

The gigabit target does not.

The FCC’s official 2024 Section 706 Report explained that 100/20 Mbps had become necessary because consumer usage, broadband applications and available service tiers had moved well beyond the old 25/3 Mbps standard.

That report described 1,000/500 Mbps as an aspirational guidepost rather than the speed required for a broadband connection to qualify as advanced telecommunications capability.

The distinction matters because some headlines about the new decision can make it sound as though the FCC lowered its broadband definition from 1 Gbps to 100 Mbps.

It did not.

The official benchmark was already 100/20 Mbps. What disappeared is the faster target the FCC had established for future deployment.

Why the FCC Removed the Gigabit Goal

The current FCC began laying out its case against the 1,000/500 Mbps goal in its 2025 broadband inquiry.

In the FCC’s official Nineteenth Section 706 Notice of Inquiry, the commission proposed abolishing the goal without replacing it.

The FCC argued that Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act does not specifically instruct the agency to establish a long-term broadband speed target.

It also raised a broader policy concern: technological neutrality.

According to the FCC, setting 1,000/500 Mbps as the target for broadband deployment could favour technologies already capable of delivering those speeds while putting slower technologies at a disadvantage.

The commission specifically identified satellite and fixed wireless as technologies that may not currently support 1,000/500 Mbps service as broadly as fibre networks.

The FCC said it would instead continue to monitor technology and consumer demand and adjust its current benchmark as necessary.

That approach became policy in the 2026 report.

What “Technology Neutral” Means in This Debate

The FCC’s reasoning rests on the idea that government policy should not decide which broadband technology wins.

Fibre-to-the-home networks can commonly offer symmetrical gigabit connections and, in some markets, speeds substantially above 1 Gbps.

Cable networks can also deliver gigabit-class download speeds, although upload performance can vary substantially depending on the network.

Fixed wireless uses radio connections between network equipment and customer locations.

Satellite broadband relies on spacecraft rather than terrestrial cables and towers.

Each has different performance characteristics, economics and deployment advantages.

Satellite, for example, can reach remote locations where installing fibre might be extremely expensive. Fibre can provide much higher capacity and lower latency but requires physical infrastructure to reach individual homes and businesses.

The FCC’s position is that its long-term standard should not implicitly favour one of those architectures simply because that technology can more easily meet a particular speed target

Critics argue that this reasoning approaches technological neutrality from the wrong direction.

Instead of setting the same performance target and allowing technologies to compete to meet it, they argue, eliminating the target risks defining success around what slower technologies can already provide.

Commissioner Anna Gomez Criticised the Decision

FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez concurred with the overall report but sharply criticised several parts of its analysis.

Her official statement accompanying the 2026 Section 706 Report argues that eliminating the 1,000/500 Mbps benchmark, because some technologies cannot meet it, is the opposite of technological neutrality.

Gomez wrote that technologies should be evaluated against common performance standards rather than having the standards reduced or removed to accommodate their limitations.

She also pointed to the FCC’s Rural Digital Opportunity Fund, where 1,000/500 Mbps is already used as the performance standard for the Gigabit tier.

According to Gomez, more than 85% of RDOF winners have committed to providing gigabit-level service.

Her concern goes beyond raw download speeds.

Gomez argued that future artificial intelligence applications and other emerging technologies will increasingly require lower latency and stronger upload capacity.

The disagreement therefore reflects two different views of broadband policy.

One side favours periodically adjusting current standards based on real-world demand and the capabilities of competing technologies.

The other argues that government should establish ambitious future performance targets to encourage infrastructure investment before those higher speeds become essential.

FCC Says Broadband Deployment Is Now Reasonable and Timely

The gigabit decision was only one part of the 2026 report.

The commission also concluded that advanced telecommunications capability is being deployed to Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion, reversing the FCC’s conclusion in its 2024 report.

FCC Chairman Brendan Carr highlighted several statistics in his official statement on the 2026 broadband report.

According to the FCC, 96.9% of Americans now have access to fixed terrestrial broadband advertised at speeds of at least 100/20 Mbps.

The commission also said the percentage of rural Americans without access to 100/20 Mbps fixed terrestrial broadband fell by more than 44% over two years.

Competition has increased as well.

As of June 2025, the FCC reported that 77% of Americans had access to at least three fixed broadband services offering 100/20 Mbps speeds.

The report also found that almost 95% of American homes and businesses were covered by 5G service at speeds of at least 35/3 Mbps.

Those numbers supported the commission’s conclusion that broadband deployment is progressing quickly enough to satisfy the requirements of Section 706.

Satellite Broadband Plays a Bigger Role in the FCC’s Analysis

Satellite service is particularly important to the commission’s updated assessment.

Modern low Earth orbit satellite networks can provide broadband to locations where terrestrial service may be difficult or expensive to build.

When satellite service is included, the FCC’s estimates suggest that broadband access advertised at 100/20 Mbps is close to universal.

That conclusion is also controversial.

Commissioner Gomez argued that advertised satellite availability does not necessarily mean customers will consistently experience those speeds.

In her official statement, she pointed to issues including network congestion, physical obstructions, capacity limits and latency.

She noted that satellite customers can experience different speeds depending on location, time of day and network demand.

That creates an important distinction between availability on a broadband map and the actual performance a customer experiences.

The FCC’s majority nevertheless considers satellite an important part of the competitive broadband market and argues that a technology-neutral analysis should account for it.

The FCC Is Also Narrowing What Its Broadband Review Measures

The policy shift goes beyond speed targets.

The FCC has moved toward a narrower interpretation of what Section 706 requires the agency to examine.

The commission’s position is that the statute primarily asks whether advanced telecommunications infrastructure is being deployed to Americans.

That puts physical network availability at the centre of the analysis.

The previous approach considered a broader collection of factors, including affordability, adoption and equitable access.

Commissioner Gomez objected to the exclusion of affordability and usability from the central analysis.

Her argument is straightforward: broadband infrastructure may technically exist at a location but still fail to connect a household if the service is unaffordable or does not perform reliably enough for its intended use.

The FCC majority has taken the position that those issues may be important policy questions but are not necessarily part of the specific deployment determination Congress required under Section 706.

The Change Does Not Mean Gigabit Internet Is Going Away

Consumers with gigabit Internet connections should not expect their service to change as a result of the FCC decision.

Internet providers remain free to offer 1 Gbps, 2 Gbps, 5 Gbps and faster plans.

The FCC has not placed a ceiling on broadband speed.

Nor does eliminating the federal long-term goal mean fibre providers will suddenly stop building gigabit networks.

For many fibre providers, gigabit service is already a normal commercial product rather than a future technical objective.

The change instead affects federal policy.

The FCC will no longer use 1,000/500 Mbps as its official long-term guidepost when evaluating broadband deployment.

Future commissions could still raise the current 100/20 Mbps benchmark if consumer requirements and network capabilities justify a change.

Is 100 Mbps Enough Today?

For many households, a 100 Mbps download connection can comfortably support common activities such as video streaming, web browsing, cloud applications and video calls.

Upload speed can be more important for people who regularly send large files, produce video, manage cloud backups, or work with data-heavy professional applications.

That makes the FCC’s 20 Mbps upload benchmark an increasingly important part of the discussion.

The long-term question is not whether 100/20 Mbps works for most people today.

It is whether federal broadband policy should focus on what is adequate now or encourage networks to be built for needs that could emerge several years from now.

The 2024 FCC favoured the second approach by pairing its current benchmark with a much faster long-term target.

The 2026 FCC has rejected that model.

It will retain the 100/20 Mbps benchmark, evaluate different network technologies under the same current standard and reconsider speeds as technology and consumer demand evolve.

For fibre operators and advocates of more aggressive broadband targets, that removes an important federal signal encouraging gigabit deployment.

The current commission is removing a goal it believes could unfairly favour one technology over another.

The argument over 1 Gbps is therefore less about whether faster Internet is useful and more about what role the FCC should play in defining how fast the country’s broadband networks should eventually become.