Belgian Telecom Giants Appeal IBPT Price Transparency Rules

Belgium’s three largest telecom operators — Proximus, Orange, and Telenet — have filed individual appeals against the Belgian Institute for Postal Services and Telecommunications (IBPT) over its proposed price transparency policy, according to RTBF. The operators argue the regulator’s requirements go beyond what is necessary and may conflict with European regulatory frameworks.

The appeals, first reported by La Libre, will be examined by the Market Court (Cour des marchés), with a decision not expected before the last quarter of 2026.

The Dispute

At the heart of the conflict is the IBPT’s decision of January 28, 2026, published on February 13, which sets out specific modalities for how operators must communicate the most advantageous tariff plan to their customers. The IBPT decision specifies the period for calculating consumption profiles, when annual communication must occur, and the calculation method for identifying the best plan.

The regulator found that the existing obligation under Article 109 of the Law of June 13, 2005 on Electronic Communications was not working properly — operators were not fully complying, for example by burying the information in invoices. According to the IBPT press release, the main objective is to strengthen transparency and enable everyone to make informed choices.

The new requirements include comparing offers across all brands within an operator’s group (not just same-brand offers), greater uniformity in communication, and a QR code on invoices linking directly to the IBPT’s official comparator at meilleurtarif.be. Operators have nine months from publication to adapt their practices.

Operators’ Concerns

Telenet, Orange, and Proximus argue that the IBPT is going too far. “This decision raises various concerns, particularly regarding its proportionality and compatibility with the European regulatory framework,” an Orange spokesperson told L’Echo, as reported by DH Net.

The QR code measure is particularly contentious, with operators viewing it as an inappropriate “marketing intermediary” that exceeds the regulator’s mandate.

Background: The Dormant Contracts Problem

The issue of “dormant contracts” has long plagued the Belgian telecom market. Many customers remain on outdated tariff plans that are more expensive than newer equivalents. As L’Avenir documented in 2021, customers of old packs like Proximus Familus were paying more for inferior services compared to newer plans.

An earlier legislative attempt to address this problem — which would have required automatic migration of customers to better plans — was rejected by the Council of State in September 2021 for incompatibility with the European Electronic Communications Code. The proposal was revised to focus on information obligations only.

Consumer Impact

The stakes are significant for Belgian consumers. A study published by the IBPT in July 2026 found that consumer passivity — the “status quo bias” — in mobile telephony can cost consumers hundreds of euros per year.

Political Support for Transparency

The operators’ appeals come as the Belgian government pushes forward with its own transparency measures. On July 18, the Council of Ministers approved in first reading a proposal to strengthen telecom price transparency, including a visible button for customers to signal interest in better offers and QR codes on invoices, as reported by DH Net.

What’s Next

The Market Court’s decision on the appeals is not expected before the last quarter of 2026, coinciding with the government’s legislative process. If the operators win, the IBPT may need to revise its approach, potentially weakening consumer protection measures. If the IBPT prevails, it could set a precedent for stronger regulatory oversight of telecom pricing transparency in Belgium — and potentially influence other EU member states facing similar challenges.

For Belgian consumers, the outcome will determine whether they gain easier access to information about cheaper telecom plans, or whether operators retain greater control over how pricing information is communicated. The parallel government initiative suggests political support for stronger transparency measures, which could strengthen the IBPT’s position as the legal battle unfolds.