Old contract data is sufficient, effectively sidestepping the verification infrastructure it had mandated.
CRT approved a general interpretation allowing telecom firms to link existing postpaid customers to the new registry without requiring new verification processes. The ruling responds to Televisa and Movistar inquiries and applies to all mobile operators, potentially accelerating registry growth toward the 144 million target.
- CRT ruled existing postpaid customer data satisfies new mobile registry requirements
- 58.3 million phone numbers enrolled as of June 10, 2026; 144 million target total
- Three largest carriers have 26.2 million combined postpaid subscribers, now auto-registered
- June 30, 2026 deadline for voluntary enrollment
- Original platform requirement estimated at 220 million dollars in operator costs
Mexico's CRT ruled that existing customer data from postpaid contracts can satisfy new mobile registration requirements, creating industry-wide implications and potential contradictions with original guidelines.
Mexico's telecommunications regulator has quietly reinterpreted the rules governing a sweeping new mobile phone registry, and the shift could reshape how millions of Mexicans are enrolled in the system without their active consent.
The Comisión Reguladora de Telecomunicaciones (CRT) issued a ruling in late May that allows mobile carriers to automatically link existing postpaid customers to the new national registry using information already collected during their original service contracts. The decision came in response to separate inquiries from Telefónica Movistar and three subsidiaries of Grupo Televisa, both asking whether they could bypass the standard verification process for customers whose identities were already on file. The CRT said yes—and then declared the answer a binding interpretation applicable to every telecom operator in the country.
On the surface, the logic seems reasonable. If a customer provided identification to sign up for postpaid service years ago, why require them to do it again? The carriers argued the streamlined approach would accelerate the registry's growth, reduce bureaucratic friction, and spare users from redundant paperwork. The CRT agreed, framing the decision as an efficiency measure. By mid-June, the registry had enrolled 58.3 million phone numbers—roughly 40 percent of the 144 million mobile lines the regulator considers eligible for registration. The June 30 deadline for voluntary enrollment was approaching fast.
But the ruling contains a tension that regulators and industry observers are beginning to notice. When the CRT first established guidelines for the new mobile registry, it explicitly required carriers to verify identities through specific procedures and a dedicated platform—a system the operators estimated would cost 220 million dollars to build and maintain. Now, the same regulator is saying that old contract data is sufficient, effectively sidestepping the verification infrastructure it had mandated. Some users have already begun reporting unsolicited text messages informing them their phone lines had been automatically linked to their identity.
The decision is also notable for how it was made. Under the previous federal telecom regulator, the Instituto Federal de Telecomunicaciones (IFT), rulings on specific company inquiries typically remained narrow and case-specific. Some of those narrow interpretations eventually triggered international arbitration disputes. The CRT, which replaced the IFT, took a different approach here: it answered two companies' questions and immediately declared the answer a general principle binding on the entire industry. The move compressed what might have been a months-long regulatory process into a single interpretation released just one month before the enrollment deadline.
The three largest mobile carriers in Mexico—Telcel, AT&T, and Movistar—reported a combined 26.2 million postpaid subscribers as of March 2026. Under the new interpretation, all of those lines are now considered registered, since postpaid contracts inherently require identity verification at signup. That alone accounts for a significant portion of the registry's growth. But the ruling also opens the door for smaller carriers and resellers to enroll their existing customer bases using the same logic, potentially accelerating the path toward the 144 million target.
What remains unclear is whether the CRT's interpretation aligns with the original intent of the registry law, or whether it represents a quiet retreat from the verification standards the regulator had previously established. The ruling does stipulate that carriers must comply with data protection regulations, but it does not specify how those protections will be enforced when customers are enrolled without explicit new consent. Industry sources have suggested the CRT may announce a last-minute extension to the June 30 deadline once enrollments approach 90 million lines, a move that would give the regulator more time to clarify the rules—or more time for the current interpretation to take hold.
Notable Quotes
The criterion of interpretation is applicable to all concessionaires and resellers providing mobile telephone service.— CRT statement
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why did the CRT suddenly change course on how customers get registered?
It didn't frame it as a change. Two major carriers asked if they could use existing customer data instead of running everyone through a new verification process, and the regulator said that was fine. But the original rules explicitly required a specific platform and procedure. So it's a reinterpretation, not a formal amendment.
Who benefits most from this?
The carriers, clearly. They avoid the cost and complexity of a new verification system. Telcel, AT&T, and Movistar can now claim 26 million postpaid customers are already registered without lifting a finger. The regulator also benefits—the registry grows faster, which makes the deadline look achievable.
What about the customers?
That's where it gets murky. Some are finding out their phone numbers have been linked to their identity through an SMS notification they didn't request. The regulator says carriers must follow data protection law, but there's no clarity on how that's being monitored or what recourse customers have.
Is this legally sound?
That's the real question. The CRT has the authority to interpret regulations for administrative purposes. But the original guidelines were explicit about requiring specific verification procedures. Declaring old contract data sufficient seems to contradict that, even if it's technically within the regulator's power.
What happens if the deadline passes and they're still short of 144 million?
Industry sources expect the CRT to extend the deadline at the last minute. By then, the auto-enrollment interpretation will likely be entrenched, and the regulator will have bought time without having to defend the original rules.