USTR criticises Korea’s network usage fee policy in X post

The Office of the United States Trade Representative said Monday (local time) in a post on X that “no country in the world imposes network usage fees on the transmission of internet traffic by its internet Service providers. Except Korea.”

Lee Sun-young

Lee Sun-young

The Korea Herald

AFP__20260218__97Z86T4__v1__MidRes__SkoreaEconomyTrade.jpg

This general view shows containers stacked up at a terminal in the southeastern port of Busan on February 18, 2026. PHOTO: AFP

April 28, 2026

SEOUL – The US government has renewed its criticism of South Korea’s network usage fee policy, underscoring a persistent friction point in bilateral trade relations.

The Office of the United States Trade Representative said Monday (local time) in a post on X that “no country in the world imposes network usage fees on the transmission of internet traffic by its internet Service providers. Except Korea.”

Washington has long regarded this particular Korean policy as a representative non-tariff barrier. The issue has repeatedly surfaced in the USTR’s annual National Trade Estimate Report, which catalogs obstacles faced by American firms overseas.

In this year’s report, released March 31, the USTR again identified it as a barrier in the services sector, alongside Korea’s proposed platform regulations, restrictions on cross-border transfers of location-based data, and stringent certification and security requirements tied to payment services.

Monday’s remarks came as part of a series of posts highlighting what the agency described as “Craziest Foreign Trade Barriers Facing American Exporters” confronting US exporters. In an introductory message, the USTR wrote that “you wouldn’t believe the lengths some countries go to stop American exports!,” inviting readers to review a list of 10 cases. South Korea’s network usage fee policy was featured fourth.

The network fee issue remains sharply contested.

South Korean telecom operators, including SK Telecom and KT Corp., argue that charging large content providers is a matter of fairness, as surging data traffic — driven largely by global platforms — has significantly increased network maintenance costs.

US technology companies such as Netflix and YouTube counter that such fees would amount to double charging, noting that end users already pay for internet access. They further contend that differential charges based on traffic volume run counter to the principle of net neutrality, which calls for equal treatment of online data flows.

scroll to top