Research and analysis

Stakeholder Forum Papers: DTT - Freeview TV 2034 to 2044

Published 23 June 2026

Introduction and context

The Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) convened the Future of Television Distribution Forum to examine how UK audiences will continue to access television as distribution technologies evolve. The Forum’s purpose is practical: to bring together broadcasters, platforms, network operators, consumer electronics manufacturers, rights holders, regulators and consumer groups to consider options that safeguard universality, resilience and accessibility while supporting investment and innovation.

Over the course of its work the Forum has taken evidence from across the value chain and explored scenarios for distribution over Digital Terrestrial Television (DTT) and Internet Protocol (IP) delivery. Discussions have focused on audience needs, coverage and capacity, spectrum use, platform economics, environmental impact and readiness of the device base – alongside the regulatory, commercial and operational dependencies any change would entail. The Forum’s role is advisory and analytical; it does not set policy, but it aims to inform government and industry decisions with clear analysis and a shared evidence base.

The paper is one of two final outputs from the Forum. Its companion, the IP Transition Paper, considers the migration of viewing to IP networks and the steps required to make IP distribution robust, inclusive and sustainable at scale. The two papers are designed to be read together: this DTT paper focuses on the terrestrial platform’s future role, while the IP Transition Paper addresses the conditions and milestones for an orderly transition to IP. Read side by side, they set out complementary choices for government and industry, highlight interdependencies between platforms, and map areas where further coordinated action will be required. This paper should be read in conjunction with Annex A - International DTT and IP transition context, and Annex B - Technology Explainer.

Summary

This paper sets out how a possible DTT platform for 2035 to 2044 might be delivered. It is centred on a single proposal from Arqiva for a switch to a ^{[footnote 1]}refreshed, ^{[footnote 2]}hybrid Freeview service using second-generation technology with similar channel capacity and range as today, with the ability to release spectrum for auction to mobile network operators. The paper also considers the potential future cost of such a platform, and the likely roles of Arqiva, PSBs, local television, and commercial multiplex operators.

The paper considers the implications of these costs on key stakeholders including audiences, broadcasters, consumer electronics manufacturers, government and Arqiva.

The benefit of this proposal centres on the importance some viewers will continue to place on the availability of a familiar, simple, reliable and near-universal Freeview experience, particularly in households that either entirely or largely rely on DTT. It ensures households that cannot afford or do not want high-speed fixed broadband are not required to pay for it.

As there is no reliable data on how many ^{[footnote 3]}DVB-T-only sets remain in use, future DVB-T use cannot be forecast with confidence. As such there are clear differences in opinion between PSBs and Arqiva/manufacturer views on the level of any potential viewer support that may or may not be needed for a DVB-T to DVB-T2 transition.

The paper acknowledges the growing tension between these viewer expectations and the economic challenge faced by broadcasters of sustaining a national utility platform used by fewer homes, and the significant implications this may have for the historic PSB compact.

The Ofcom Public Service Media Review^{[footnote 4]} identified that “Within the next few years delivering TV universally on DTT will go from being a significant benefit to the PSBs, to a substantial obligation they will need to finance. This would mean more investment being diverted into distribution, rather than commissioning content that benefits all audiences and the creative industries.”

PSB analysis underlines a hard reality: extending DTT beyond 2034 is not risk-free, and the economics are shifting rapidly; there are risks to PSB sustainability, channel choice and the attractiveness of the platform. Sustaining a universal, free-to-air DTT service comparable to today from 2035, as viewing shifts to IP and broadcast economics weaken, is challenging and requires difficult choices on channel line-up, investment, public funding and risk-sharing.

techUK Consumer Electronics Strategy & Technology Group (techUK-CE-S\&T) and audience stakeholders expressed disappointment that other DTT options have not been considered in this paper, including more ambitious, but achievable migrations to a full HD/^{[footnote 5]}UHD service, similar to those that have already been delivered in other European Markets today.

Key points

Importance to audiences: Audiences value a simple TV experience, regardless of the delivery technology. The simplicity and familiarity of the terrestrial experience remain important for many older, disabled, lower-income and rural viewers. It provides continuity of service in DTT-only homes and choice in hybrid homes, compared with a full switch to IPTV in 2034.

Consumer sensitivity risk (with switch off or reduced channel proposition)

In 2025, 13 million households have access to DTT in part (some of whom have cable/satellite as well), 11.7 million households have DTT available on their primary TV set (many are likely to be in hybrid homes), and 2.9 million households have DTT only (making up 9% of UK homes)with no other service, platform or internet connection to their TVs. ^{[footnote 6]} The proportion of UK households with DTT varies across the nations DTT-only homes making up 8.6% of homes in Northern Ireland, 6.9% of homes in Scotland and 6.9% of homes in Wales. ^{[footnote 7][footnote 8]} DTT and satellite remain the only platforms capable of guaranteeing access to television services entirely free at the point of use, independent of broadband or subscription. As set out in the Audience WG’s ‘Audience Impacts’ paper, DTT upgrade has the benefit of retaining continuity for audiences who would not need to change their established ways of accessing TV. DTT is currently essential for digitally excluded audiences. In 2023, among DTT/Freesat homes without broadband – whether through lack of access or take-up – 93% of viewers were aged 55 or over, 42% had a disability and 81% were on lower incomes (C2DE socioeconomic groups)^{[footnote 9]}. For these citizens, broadcast TV remains the most dependable route to news, information, programmes from the nations and regions and shared cultural moments. DTT upgrade provides continued access for those most vulnerable in society who are unable to afford, or are without the skills to access, broadband and IPTV. It ensures choice and universal access for all.

However, there are risks to audiences from the DTT upgrade option. ^{[footnote 10]}DTT currently makes up 42% total viewing and 49% commercial impacts.

However, DTT-only viewing and ‘unconnected TV’ households are declining. The number of ‘unconnected TV’ homes (households without IPTV) is forecast to fall to 2.3 million in 2030, 1.9 million (7% decrease) in 2035 and 1.5 million (5% decrease) by 2040 making the economics of DTT more challenging^{[footnote 11]}. If broadcasters rationalise their DTT offering in favour of IP-only delivery, DTT-only households might, without adequate policy intervention, experience a diminished offering of channels and content. Increased distribution costs for PSBs could, without intervention, reduce spend on PSB content/services, which is not in the interests of audiences.

Evidence on viewer attitudes and prior work by the audience group underline that given some viewers may still rely on DTT even in the early 2030s, a reduced channel proposition or migration to full IPTV may disadvantage and impose unaffordable costs. A poorly managed switch-off would be consumer sensitive, reinforcing the case to consider a more cautious, hybrid approach rather than a simple ‘runway’ to IPTV. The Arqiva-funded Broadcast 2040+ campaign selected 100 constituencies to take part in an online poll, reported that 73% of respondents wanted terrestrial TV to remain. The questionnaire emphasised terrestrial TV’s public service and safety net role, these findings are best read as an indication of the strength of feeling among respondents rather than a neutral measure of UK-wide opinion.

Universality under pressure: Audience stakeholders reject any dilution of universality as a principle: audiences expect simple, reliable access that requires no payment for broadband, not necessarily the largest channel line-up. Extending DTT protects this compact for now, but only if government, Arqiva and PSBs can agree how the costs and risks are shared in the future.

Economics of continuity are challenging: While Arqiva’s modelling suggests lower overall transmission charges post-2034, PSBs argue that even the reduced costs of a universal multiplex look unmanageable as DTT audiences decline and IP costs rise^{[footnote 12]}; the commercial case for two non-PSB multiplexes is uncertain, creating real risks to PSB sustainability, content investment, channel choice and the perceived quality of the platform. Analysis in this paper amortises capital investment over ten years, it should not be interpreted as suggesting that DTT ends in 2044.

Risk of inferior DTT experience: Whilst some European countries have mandated a DTT transition to full HD (and UHD) this proposal leaves the mix of HD and SD channels to market forces, leaving the risk of an inferior viewing proposition. techUK-CE-S\&T stress that DVB-T2/HEVC would deliver a more modernised HD-led offering, aligned with consumer expectations for large screens, and is the prevailing specification in many EU markets. It is important to consider the market contexts across Europe may or may not apply in the UK, and scope to release radio spectrum is unlikely to be possible if more than three multiplexes are offered.

Regulation, funding and timing are pivotal: Delivering any extended hybrid DTT platform will depend on government decisions about spectrum use and, where needed, changes to the statutory framework, alongside Ofcom’s subsequent use of its existing powers (for example, to plan spectrum, license multiplexes and vary licence conditions). It will also require developing the new DTT frequency plan and agreeing it with neighbouring countries (around five years), and Arqiva’s engineering work (2 to 3 years for a migration plus c.4 years for planning, procurement and pre-works). Other dependencies include multiplex licensing, a revised PSB compact, updated transmission pricing and ‘no detriment’ PSB safeguards, plus funded viewer support, all against a compressed timetable and in parallel with an IPTV roadmap that must present risks and consumer impacts just as clearly.

These activities can run in parallel but planning and preparation work and implementation by Ofcom would need to commence in 2027, or sooner.

Critical national infrastructure: While out of scope for this paper, Arqiva notes that the DTT network currently shares some infrastructure with other national communications services e.g. AM/FM/DAB, emergency services, mobile, government services, transport, utilities, and a range of third sector functions.  

Only one platform modelled: The paper evaluates one option of one DVB-T2 multiplex with 98.5% (PSB) coverage and two with 90% (Commercial) coverage and clearance of the 600MHz band, not a range of DTT futures or higher-ambition models seen in some European countries. techUK-CE-S\&T considers that further analysis of modernised models (e.g. HEVC with higher HD propositions) could help DCMS assess the relative costs and benefits.

The DTT option explored here is delivered using second generation terrestrial television technology (DVBT2/MPEG4 AVC multiplexes – see technology explainer Annex B) that would sit alongside continued growth in IP distribution. The analysis is based on a specific proposal from Arqiva and does not examine alternatives. Whilst recognising that alternative configurations – including higher-HD or UHD capable models – exist in other markets, these are not part of the modelling provided (see international Annex A).

Audience stakeholders and techUK-CE-S\&T expressed disappointment that other DTT options have not been considered in this paper, including more ambitious, but achievable migrations to a full HD/UHD service, and reduced options such as single mux night-light. Examples from other European Markets, such as France and Spain demonstrate that modernised DTT platforms can deliver a high-quality, primarily-HD experience today, although these models operate in a different market context and may not release spectrum.

It is intended as advisory input to the DCMS Future of TV Distribution Forum, not as government policy or a full options appraisal.

Strategic, audience and market context

Today, public service broadcasting (PSB) DTT coverage is about 98.5% of UK homes, broadly matching historical analogue coverage. In 2025 11.7 million households have DTT available on their primary TV set and the primary broadcast platform for about 2.6m households that rely on DTT alone, a group that has been declining at roughly 10% a year since 2023 ^{[footnote 13]}. The number of ‘unconnected TV’ homes (households without any IP TV platform) is forecast to fall to about 2.3 million in 2030, 1.9 million (about 7%) in 2035 and 1.5 million (about 5%) by 2040 ^{[footnote 14]}. Arqiva commissioned an alternative view from Horsman which projects a higher figure of about 2.9 million (2045) households that would use a DTT tuner as the primary means of watching linear on the main TV^{[footnote 15]}.

Within this landscape, DTT continues to provide free-to-air access to public service and commercial channels for both broadcast-only and hybrid homes. High-power TV and radio networks contribute to national resilience during some emergencies, for example when fixed broadband is disrupted, although this role is increasingly shared with ^{[footnote 16]}mobile alerts and IP-based- services as DTT reach declines.

Evidence to the Forum shows that today DTT remains particularly important for older, lower-income and rural viewers, and for those who reduce or forgo broadband for cost or need reasons. It also continues to play a central role in hybrid homes, offering choice, ease of use and flexibility alongside internet services, particularly for second and third sets that are not internet-enabled and for households that value home recording via PVRs (noting the uncertainty over how many will be DVB-T2 enabled and therefore the scale of any need to replace devices). If DTT is switched off DTT audiences would have no alternative to IPTV in the event of a service interruption. Universality, simplicity, familiarity and resilience remain the defining attributes of the platform.

International Comparisons

As set out in Annex A – International experience suggests DTT remains a core part of free-to-air TV across Europe and beyond, reaching 80 to 90 million EU households (around 35 to 40%), and most free-to-air households still rely on DTT networks.

Some countries are actively modernising DTT rather than moving rapidly to switch-off, with a managed evolution focused on universality, resilience and technical upgrades through DVB-T2 and hybrid broadcast–broadband delivery.

Larger markets are demonstrating two credible pro-DTT pathways, upgrading DTT to support HD and UHD (France and Spain) or using DVB-I to integrate broadcast and IP services (Germany and Italy), both of which are an opportunity for the UK to learn from in building a hybrid future while sustaining a strong terrestrial core.

Cautions include rising IPTV adoption, pressure on spectrum and the economics of DTT carriage has seen commercial broadcasters in some markets (Sweden) exit creating a financial shortfall for governments or PSBs to shoulder.

At the same time, DCMS-commissioned work notes there are ‘no directly comparable territories to the UK’. International comparisons should therefore be used to inform and strengthen UK choices. Issues to be noted are that in all countries that have switched off DTT, the DTT platform was the minority platform in the first place and that IPTV adoption is both an enabler to switch off or a companion to the continuing broadcast offer.

DTT today

The UK’s national DTT platform comprises seven national multiplexes - for further detail see channel list and multiplex licensees. Comux UK currently operates the Local (MuxL). Co-owned by 34 local TV channels (run by Local TV L-DTPS licensees), it has capacity for six SD video streams on the UK’s DTT network: one for the 34 L-DTPS licensee channels and five for National Video Service (NVS) streams (sold on the DTT market to broadcasters on a commercial basis). The multiplex feeds 48 transmitters. The local TV channels appear at LCN 7 or 8 on Freeview (and Freely). The multiplex licence has recently been renewed by Ofcom for a further 8 years from 2026 to 2034.

A Northern Ireland Multiplex, DVB-T2 NIMux, is operated by RTÉ and TG4 carrying RTÉ One, RTÉ2, TG4 and RTÉ Raidió na Gaeltachta on Freeview HD.

For clarity, multiplex licences are held by multiplex operators and do not themselves determine the commercial contract sums payable by those operators to Arqiva. Those costs are determined by the regulatory framework and the contracts agreed between Arqiva and the multiplex operators.

Public purpose

DTT supports the UK’s wider public purposes by ensuring universal access, maintaining inclusion and sustaining the social, cultural and democratic value of public service broadcasting.

Broadcast TV has long been the UK’s primary, efficient means of delivering high quality audiovisual content to citizens and consumers, in line with public service goals and serving diverse interests and tastes. DTT, alongside Freesat, provides universal TV platform coverage, supporting equitable access regardless of geography, income or age and reaching over 98.5% of UK households. This universal access has underpinned national democracy, cultural identity, regional and local content and creative equity. It has been a bedrock of shared national experience and a conduit for community identity. The hybrid DTT platform carries all PSB and commercial multiplexes and offers secure, resilient^{[footnote 17]} access to trusted, impartial information, local, regional and national news and UK originated programming, including children’s content, documentaries and minority language services. The content delivered via DTT supports the UK’s globally-competitive creative sector, a sector valued at ^{[footnote 18]}£124 billion in gross value added in 2023. Within that total, the ‘film, TV, radio and photography’ sub-sector alone contributed around £21.2 billion in 2023.

DTT and satellite have played a key role in the universality, inclusion and accessibility the UK’s universal free-to-air television platforms. Small relay transmitters extend coverage to rural and hard to serve communities, providing universal, reliable, free-to-air access to a wide range of PSB and commercial services.

DTT is currently essential for digitally excluded audiences, who are more likely to be older, living with a disability and/or on lower incomes. For these citizens, broadcast TV remains the most dependable route to news, information, programmes from the nations and regions and shared cultural moments. A DTT upgrade would ensure that DTT-only households without internet access neither incur recurring broadband nor data costs nor require new digital skills to watch TV and access PSM content, provided they already have DVB T2 compatible TVs. Maintaining DTT would provide a continuing safety net if the costs or skills needed to use IPTV become too high for some households ^{[footnote 19]}. An accelerated IPTV transition risks eroding this platform, potentially weakening public service delivery, potentially reducing visibility for PSB content. DTT therefore supports wider public policy objectives of inclusion, social cohesion and democratic accountability. Maintaining a universal, free-to-air broadcast ecosystem is one way of ensuring cultural equity and ensuring that PSBs continues to serve every part of society.

At the same time, the PSB compact must evolve for the digital age to secure prominence, fair carriage and sustainable funding, and to address structural challenges facing PSM in a digital first world.^{[footnote 20]} A key disadvantages of maintaining DTT in the long terms include the fact that a DTT upgrade would require PSBs to continue to fund two parallel distribution routes the costs of which are currently escalating; in the Public Service Media Review, Ofcom state that this money could otherwise be used to both create PSM content and experiment with strategies for engaging all audiences in a rapidly evolving sector. For commercial PSBs in particular there is a real risk that these dual distribution costs make PSB status unviable.^{[footnote 21]}

DTT offers secure, resilient distribution because Arqiva is held to service levels that do not apply to IPTV. This is particularly important during national events and emergencies, when IP networks may be congested or unavailable. In the event of a widespread broadband network outage^{[footnote 22]}, DTT and radio provide fallback alternatives which can continue to serve audiences, ensuring a baseline of access to trusted information. These outcomes align with the PSB remit. However, the declining commercial attractiveness of DTT as audiences move to IPTV risks a reduced channel offering. Research suggests that in 2021 UK adults typically used ten TV channels and/or VoD services, implying that a DTT lineup limited to the main PSB channels would not be sufficient for many viewers. Analysis of DTT-only viewers (that have neither satellite nor cable and have not watched any internet-distributed TV) reveals that the top 7 channels viewed have remained consistent in October 2023 and October 2025. While BBC1 and ITV1 are far and away the most-watched channels (making up 19% and 13% of individual viewing in October 2025 respectively), Channel 4, 5, BBC2, ITV3, and U\&Drama received between 3 to 5% of total viewing in the same month^{[footnote 23]}. This suggests that DTT-only homes largely watch the main PSB channels, but do regularly view channels from other commercial broadcasters.

The continued sociocultural value of DTT therefore depends on a sufficient channel offer to ensure DTT-reliant audiences can access the full range of TV content and services needed to meet PSM remits and that this continues to be economically sustainable.

In summary, DTT alongside Freesat^{[footnote 24]}, remains a critical public good and, provides the UK’s universal, resilient, free-to-air safety net that enables PSBs to meet their public remits at scale. But the case for continuation is not cost-free or static. It depends on levels of viewer reliance, the economic sustainability of the channel offer and the relative costs and benefits compared other potential ways of delivering universal access. Preserving this capability while planning an orderly, equitable transition path to IPTV would protect audiences, licence fee payers and sustain the cultural and democratic benefits that only a truly universal platform can deliver. However, shifts in viewing behaviour and platform economics mean that a DTT upgrade could still lead to a reduced channel offering and a two-tier system in which DTT-reliant households receive a limited service that does not fully meet PSB remits. The BBC considers it inappropriate for the corporation and licence fee payers to bear the shortfall risk between what it is financially responsible for and what it actually needs for BBC services. Commercial PSBs make a similar point, noting that any additional investment in distribution reduces the funds available for investment in UK content.

A future three mux DVB-T2 DTT platform

Arqiva has highlighted the need for investment in the DTT platform if it is to continue beyond 2034, including an upgrade from DVB-T to DVB-T2. The proposed transition from DVB-T to DVB-T2 could therefore leave a unknown minority of existing TVs and set top boxes unable to receive DTT and this will require support for some vulnerable viewers^{[footnote 25]}. A communications campaign would also be required to inform all DTT homes of the platform refresh and spectrum clearance programme.

Looking ahead to the modelled DTT platform from 2035, all legacy DVB-T capacity would be retired and replaced by three DVB-T2 multiplexes, one PSB multiplex at about 98.5% coverage and two commercial multiplexes both at about 90% coverage. Total capacity of about 120 Mbit/s, but by using MPEG-4 AVC could accommodate all that’s carried by the current six muxes today, though the precise channel line-up in the 2030s cannot be predicted and will depend on PSB obligations, commercial demand and capacity pricing.

techUK-CE-S&T believe that audiences will expect HD services as screen sizes grow, and that the UK should avoid creating an inferior DTT experience. Others note that one HD channel takes the capacity of three SD channels and so a move to HD would reduce the number of channels potentially supported by the platform and increase the cost per channel slot to unaffordable levels. techUK-CE-S\&T notes that replacing AVC with HEVC at the same time will allow a very similar number of channels to be broadcast in HD instead of SD and that adoption of a DVB-I based solution in harmony with a similar solution being developed by RTE in Ireland may eliminate the need to provide a separate NI Mux.

For modelling purposes, local TV and the Northern Ireland multiplexes are assumed to continue providing services – although, as with the wider DTT sector, consideration needs to be given to the changing technical, funding, commercial and regulatory issues relating to those multiplex operations. Comux argues that the local TV multiplex must be taken into account in policy decisions relating to spectrum and DTT planning. Delivering the 34 local TV services is a relatively complex process, and it needs careful thought about how this is to be maintained. Given the challenges facing the linear DTT market, Comux also says there needs to be discussions about how any upgrade to T2 is funded and how to achieve viable commercial terms and/or funding for local TV DTT transmission and other technical services.

This move to three T2 multiplexes and frequency changes at some transmitters would enable clearance of the 600MHz band (notionally UHF channels 39 to 48, approximately 614 to 694MHz) by the end of 2034, creating options for enhanced mobile coverage and potential auction receipts while sustaining near-universal broadcast coverage. Integrated with transmitter renewal, Arqiva models this rationalisation, based on the current regulatory regime, as reducing total DTT transmission charges from about £231 million a year today to about £139 million a year from 2035, or based on Arqiva estimates roughly £123 million if the DVB-T2 refresh is funded from spectrum proceeds. The PSB share of these Arqiva charges would fall from about £156 million currently to about £87 million a year (£78 million if refresh funded by clearance). These figures are indicative, expressed in today’s prices (using the RPI index under the current regulatory regime) and exclude broadcasters’ own distribution, coding and multiplexing costs, as well as wider implementation costs.

The economics and commercial sustainability of DTT

If the market cannot sustain the assumed £56 million a year cost of two commercial multiplexes, some or all of that cost could, in practice, fall back on PSBs through their commercial arrangements with Arqiva.

As a channel provider rather than a multiplex operator or licensee, Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD) does not carry the risks associated with operating or licensing a multiplex^{[footnote 26]}, but currently considers DTT a robust platform and a valuable part of its UK distribution strategy. But it is too early to judge whether the optimistic ‘Arqiva’ case for DTT or the ‘PSB’ case is more likely to prevail. The differing forecasts provided by both Arqiva and the PSBs as to the likely shape of/demand for DTT in 2034 are helpful but not conclusive. WBD recently ^{[footnote 27]}renewed on DTT until 2030, so clearly, is confident in the platform’s viability until then. Their renewal negotiations will be based on how they see the ‘distribution mix’ at that date, i.e., also including satellite and IPTV. They will also be guided by experience in other territories, notably Sweden, Finland and France. Media service providers such as WBD take their decisions on a purely commercial basis (though those decisions will in part be shaped by regulation). Regardless of the eventual decision taken by WBD, they state that Ofcom could play a crucial role in ensuring that pricing for slots (both for PSBs and commercial operators) is a fair reflection of the value of the demographic watching the platform and are sustainable costs for such operators. Much will also depend on fast-evolving market conditions as well future regulatory reform.

ITV/SDN and other stakeholders report insufficient demand now, that is unlikely to improve to sustain two commercial multiplexes beyond 2034 and that DTT capacity prices are under pressure. Arqiva takes a more optimistic view, pointing to the fact that about half of the modelled commercial capacity is already pre-sold by them into the 2030s and expressing confidence in principle that it can carry this commercial risk through to 2044.

As previously stated, if the market cannot sustain the assumed £56 million-a-year cost of two commercial multiplexes, some or all that cost could fall back on PSBs. In the resultant PSB-only scenario (‘nightlight^{[footnote 28]}’), PSB annual transmission costs could rise from about £87 million to roughly £129 million. This would not only be a commercial concern but also a real risk that households still relying on DTT after 2034 could face a shrinking choice of TV services as the platform could no longer support the range of channels they receive today.

In practice, PSBs already view the modelled £87 million Arqiva charge (£78 million if elements of the network refresh are funded through a spectrum clearance programme) as unmanageably high post 2034. Although this represents a reduction of about 44% on current shared PSB transmission costs, it is still more than double the present cost of a single multiplex, reflecting the expense of maintaining a universal service that reaches all parts of the UK. PSBs argue that this burden will be increasingly hard to bear as DTT audiences decline and the platform becomes less commercially attractive and as IP distribution costs rise. Their assessment is that the cost of maintaining a universal PSB multiplex, particularly for commercial PSBs, would exceed their ability to operate it economically while continuing to deliver PSB content to all audiences, implying the need for some form of subsidy or alternative cost-sharing mechanism.

These financial pressures sit alongside broader questions about universality and the PSB compact. Universality underpins PSB in the UK, ensuring widespread access to high quality media that meets civic needs and benefits democracy, culture, identity and learning. Retaining DTT ensures that PSB remains available to 98.5% of homes in the UK on devices that they are comfortable using and in a way that is reliable and affordable ^{[footnote 29]}. It enables households to retain choice over how to watch with minimal disruption and provides a valuable safety net for those lacking the skills, finances or confidence to use IPTV ^{[footnote 30]}. Historically, DTT spectrum has been a benefit of PSB status, enabling investment in other PSB obligations like news and current affairs.

With universal DTT provision likely to move from being a benefit to being a cost, a new PSB compact will be needed.

Audience attitudes to DTT

Viewer attitudes suggest that extending a hybrid DTT offer would be acceptable, and in some cases strongly preferred. The Arqiva-funded Broadcast 2040+ campaign selected 100 constituencies to take part in an online poll. Of more than 26,000 adults 73% of respondents wanted terrestrial TV to remain available beyond 2034, and 75% of those who use streaming services saw it as a critical safety net. Because the questionnaire emphasised terrestrial TV’s public service and safety-net role, these findings are best read as an indication of the strength of feeling among respondents rather than a neutral measure of UK-wide opinion. Within that context, retaining a hybrid DTT platform would help sustain competition between PSBs and commercial broadcasters and preserve choice for households that continue to use and value the platform. DCMS is encouraged to commission nationally representative independent research. techUK-CE-S\&T also noted that consumers in retail environments prioritise picture quality as delivered by HD (and increasingly UHD) capability as a determinant of perceived platform quality

Experience in other countries underlines both the risks and opportunities. In some markets, depending on transmission ownership, broadband rollout and regulation, commercial players have scaled back or exited DTT altogether, leaving PSBs to carry most or all remaining platform costs and effectively becoming the last operators on a legacy platform. At the same time, many European countries, including Spain, Italy, Greece and France, still rely heavily on DTT while investing in modernisation. techUK-CE-S\&T manufacturer members support programmes across the EU to upgrade DTT networks using DVB-T2 and HEVC for HD and UHD services and to integrate broadcast and IP delivery through DVB-I, and they encourage the UK to draw on this experience. techUK-CE-S\&T views this specific DTT single limited 3-mux option including SD channels as inferior and does not support it. And note that in the UK, the D-Book remains the definitive technical specification for receiver requirements.

A modernised DVB-T2 platform would be ^{[footnote 31]} 40% more energy/carbon efficient than the current DTT platform. Separate work by the forum on environmental impact suggested little difference between an upgraded DTT platform and an IP-switch. The upgraded platform would support more efficient codecs such as HEVC, making HD and potentially UHD services possible on DTT. Targeted or addressable advertising would be enabled in more homes – although by IP connectivity rather than by DVB-T2 itself. A refreshed platform would also keep open the prospect of future 5G broadcast services, subject to viable use cases and device support.

The policy and regulatory framework for DTT

All of this points to a need for regulation, pricing and risk sharing arrangements that are suitable for future conditions. Transmission pricing is currently regulated under Undertakings accepted by the Competition Commission in 2008, as part of merger conditions for Arqiva’s acquisition of National Grid Wireless, and is now overseen by the Competition and Markets Authority. Arqiva must comply with these Undertakings and guidance issued by the Office of Adjudicator, which ensures charges are fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory. Ofcom, as the UK’s communications regulator, can review the broadcast transmission market when necessary. Under the Communications Act 2003, Ofcom has powers to impose conditions on providers of electronic communications networks in certain circumstances, including where it determines that a provider has significant market power. The framework is intended to balance between the monopoly provider and its customers, giving multiplex operators certainty over default pricing, service delivery and availability while allowing Arqiva to recover costs and earn a commercial return. The commercial sums payable for transmission are set through contracts between Arqiva and multiplex operators, rather than by the multiplex licences themselves.

PSBs and Comux have identified areas where amendments might improve cost effectiveness or reduce risk for them, while Arqiva notes that changes to protect broadcasters may need to be balanced by modifications that recognise the risks it assumes when investing in the platform, and enable it to continue to earn a commercial return. These are issues which the relevant regulatory authorities have the expertise to evaluate.

The PSBs therefore have expressed the need for a revised regulatory and contractual framework to maximise value for money and audience benefits from any future DTT network.

Key principles discussed include cost reflective, open book regulation of the monopoly transmission operator; total expenditure based (totex) controls that treat capital and operating expenditure together; revised indexation and efficiency targets; and clearer allocation of risk so that the economics of commercial multiplexes are not implicitly underwritten by PSBs.

A PSB “no detriment” mechanism is seen as essential by the PSBs if the BBC is to manage a PSB multiplex without exposing licence fee payers to commercial shortfalls.

Arqiva notes that the charges put forward in this paper are based on today’s regulatory regime and any changes considered must allow Arqiva to continue to invest, make an acceptable return and fund itself.

Delivering such a mechanism would require government-led decisions on any legislative change (for example, to the Broadcasting Act 1996) and, separately, Ofcom’s use of its existing statutory powers to set or vary multiplex licence conditions (including under sections 3 and 12 of the Broadcasting Act 1996 and section 316 of the Communications Act 2003). It should be noted that decisions about whether to change the statutory framework for DTT are a matter for government and Parliament. Ofcom’s role is to exercise the powers given to it under existing legislation, including the Broadcasting Acts and the Communications Act 2003, for example by setting and amending multiplex licence conditions where appropriate. Any approach described in this paper that involves ‘legislation plus Ofcom licence conditions’ should therefore be understood as involving two distinct steps: (i) government-led legislative change (for example, amendments to the Broadcasting Act 1996), and (ii) Ofcom’s subsequent exercise of its existing statutory powers. Ofcom’s role would be to implement any such framework within its statutory remit; it does not have the power to amend primary legislation. cannot itself legislate.

Conclusion

Taken together, these considerations suggest that extending a hybrid DTT platform to 2044 is one possible way of maintaining a free-to-air broadcast route to content for a significant minority of households that may not adopt broadband by the mid-2030s, as well as for many others who continue to use DTT within a hybrid environment. Such an approach would preserve free-to-air access for a group forecast at about ^{[footnote 32]}1.5 to 2 million households in the late 2030s, with potentially millions more continuing to use DTT as part of a mix.

It would reduce the immediate scale and cost of any compulsory shift to IP-only- distribution and might enable a more organic migration over a longer period, though experience from digital switchover suggests there will always be a set of consumers who do not prepare for such a change at any point in time. It would also allow more time for improvements in ^{[footnote 33]}broadband availability, reliability and affordability before considering a full switch to IPTV. However, it would not remove the need for a later transition away from broadcast for remaining DTT-only- homes if a full transition takes place in the future, and the net impact on broadcaster costs is uncertain. At some point beyond 2044 there may still be a need to retire DTT and carry out a full IP transition given the unsustainability of maintaining a DTT network for an ever-declining number of homes.

PSBs argue that the modelled DTT charges would require some form of financial support. The successful implementation of this scenario would therefore depend on government decisions on funding, spectrum and multiplex licensing, a new PSB Compact, on a review and if necessary, reform of the regulatory regime to ensure fair and proportionate risk sharing, and on funded viewer communications and potential support. These measures would need to sit alongside broader digital inclusion initiatives to support a long-term transition to IP-based television.

Chair’s closing assessment

As Chair of the DTT drafting group and lead author of this paper, my view is that the DTT option described here is credible, but stakeholder interests are legitimately not aligned. PSBs regard the costs and risks as unsustainable, Arqiva sees a route to continued investment, manufacturers argue for a more ambitious HD-led platform, and audience representatives prioritise universality and a safety-net role for broadcast.

The time and effort that it has taken to even to bring a single, collectively owned paper to the Forum, reconciling evidence, assumptions and language across organisations with quite different incentives, is itself a fair indication of the structural challenges and trade-offs that government must address if it chooses to pursue this pathway. An early evidence-based decision is critical.

1. The ‘refreshed DVB-T2 MPEG4 AVC platform’ proposed in this paper is not a platform that is operated today and as such would need to be established, funding, to become a registered Electronic Programme Guide (EPG) operator and operate the associated service information. ↩

2. The ongoing provision of the services currently provided by both DTVSL and ETV for the hybrid-DTT platform in 2034 as set out in this paper cannot be assumed and would need to be agreed, established and funded. ↩

3. The UK’s DTT platform has used DVB-T for standard-definition services since its launch in 1998, while DVB-T2 - required for Freeview HD - was introduced in 2009 with full HD multiplex operation from 2010. As a result, older televisions are typically DVB-T only and cannot receive DVB-T2 services without an external set top box pr PVR. ↩

4. Public Service Media Review ↩

5. The PSBs note that techUK-CE-S\&T’s additional DTT options, while valid from a distribution-only perspective, do not consider the wider production and economic implications. Many of the international examples cited rely heavily on upconverted content — an approach that is economically unjustifiable when modern TVs already upscale effectively — and the significant cost uncertainties associated with a wholesale shift to HEVC are not addressed. Björn Lundell/Jonas Gamalielsson/Andrew Katz/University of Skövde/Moorcrofts LLP ↩

6. Barb Establishment Survey Q3 2025 ↩

7. Media Nations 2025 - Wales ↩

8. Media Nations: Scotland 2024 ↩

9. Vernon et al., 2024 ↩

10. Barb Q3 2025 ↩

11. Ofcom, Future of TV Distribution: Early market report to government, 9 May 2024, Section 3.31 and Figure 7 “Forecast of number of UK homes by primary TV UI type, millions, 2023–2040”, p.18 (3 Reasons, MTM analysis). “Unconnected” refers to a TV set that has no connection to IP-delivered video and relies entirely on linear broadcast delivery, mainly from DTT or Freesat. ↩

12. Ofcom, Report: Future of TV Distribution, 2023; MTM, Broadcast Distribution Costs, report for Ofcom, 9 May 2024, p.5; Future TV Taskforce, Response to Ofcom’s Call for Evidence on the Future of TV Distribution, Dec 2023, pp.8, 16; VLV, Response to Ofcom Call for Input – The Future of TV Distribution, Dec 2023, p.1. ↩

13. Ofcom, 2024, Sections 3.24–3.28, using Barb Establishment Survey Q3 2023 ↩

14. Vernon et al., 2024 ↩

15. Horsman, 2025 ↩

16. The reach of mobile phones is far higher and that mobile alerts are the UK’s primary emergency broadcast mechanism. 97% of UK population have a mobile phone (Ofcom CMR 2025) vs 46% of HHs having DTT (Barb 2025 Q3) ↩

17. Though noting that serious issues with DTT such as was seen at Bilsdale can take DTT out at a particular transmitter for a considerable period because of the scale of the infrastructure involved. ↩

18. House of Lords Library ↩

19. Audiences WG paper 4, p.9-10 ↩

20. Audiences WG paper 4 ↩

21. Audiences WG paper 4, p.12 ↩

22. Noting the point about the DTT outage at Bilsdale above. ↩

23. FN Based on analysis of Barb data in October 2023 and October 2025. ↩

24. Though it’s important to note that there is no obligation to provide Freesat and also that its continuation depends in turn on Sky’s satellite platform continuing a decision that is out of the hands of the PSBs ↩

25. Further research is needed to establish the number of DVB-T1 primary and secondary devices in use. ↩

26. ITV (SDN) note that in recent years, channel prices have been declining while multiplex operator costs have been rising. ↩

27. As a channel provider rather than a multiplex operator or licensee, Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD) does not carry the risks associated with operating or licensing a multiplex, but currently considers DTT a robust platform and a valuable part of its UK distribution strategy. ↩

28. Infrastructure WG Paper 1 ↩

29. Audiences WG paper 1 ↩

30. Audiences WG paper 4 ↩

31. Note: the 40% reduction dose not account for the carbon footprint of manufacturing and installing new transmitters vs continuing with the older less efficient ones. The energy cost for the PSB mux in the future is estimated at £1.5M p.a. with new efficient transmitters which suggests a saving of £1M p.a. compared with now i.e. about 1.2% of the proposed Arqiva charge for the PSB mux. ↩

32. Vernon et al., 2024,p. 7: “by 2040, 5% of homes (1.5 million) will still rely on digital terrestrial television.” ↩

33. Building Digital UK, 2025: Gigabit broadband expected to be available in 99% of premises by 2032. Not much to be improved beyond. ↩