New Anti-Spam Rules Impact Calling Apps in India
The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) has recently taken significant steps to tackle spam calls by mandating that caller-ID and call-management applications, such as Truecaller, share user-reported spam data with telecom operators. This move has stirred controversy, prompting Truecaller to label the requirement as “anti-competitive.”
Key Updates from TRAI’s Latest Amendments
On Friday, TRAI enacted amendments to its rules regarding commercial communications. The new regulations require apps that allow users to flag spam calls to transmit those reports to a blockchain-based platform operated by telecom providers. This initiative aims to enhance the tools available for combating spam.
TRAI explained that this change is designed to create a more robust mechanism for addressing spam by connecting user reports from various applications to the enforcement efforts of telecom companies. Truecaller, however, argues that this creates an imbalanced relationship, effectively transferring proprietary data to telecom operators without reciprocal benefits.
The Context of Spam Calls in India
India holds the distinction of being Truecaller’s largest market, with over 350 million of its 500 million monthly active users residing there. Unfortunately, the country is grappling with an epidemic of spam calls, which Truecaller reports reached around 42 billion instances in 2025. These figures include calls that were blocked, labeled, or ignored, and the company also indicated it blocked nearly 12 billion spam calls last year alone.
Truecaller’s Concerns and Historical Friction with TRAI
This is not the first instance of friction between Truecaller and Indian regulators. The company has previously criticized restrictions that prevent apps from automatically labeling calls from certain government-designated numbers as spam. Truecaller contends that such exemptions could allow unwanted calls to evade scrutiny.
Despite these criticisms, the latest regulatory amendments maintain existing restrictions and stop call-management applications from blanket blocks or spam-tagging certain designated number series used for commercial communication. Users can still individually block these calls on their devices, TRAI clarified.
Technical and Jurisdictional Challenges Ahead
Sumeysh Srivastava, a partner at The Quantum Hub consulting firm, noted that the new rules effectively bridge the gap between telecom operators, who manage the underlying network, and caller-ID applications that operate atop this network. However, he raised critical questions about the technical requirements for reporting and how enforcement will occur for companies that are not telecom operators.
Earlier drafts suggested using India’s IT laws to enforce compliance with these requirements. Still, the final announcement did not clarify if that enforcement mechanism was included.
Data Transmission Requirements and User Consent
Questions remain regarding the specific information that apps will have to share under the updated regulations. Kazim Rizvi, founding director of The Dialogue think tank, emphasized that requiring detailed spam reports from users differs significantly from asking apps to share broader datasets or analytical tools they utilize for detecting spam calls.
Rizvi highlighted the need for clarity on how user consent will be acquired, the type of data that will be transmitted, and how long that data can be retained before usage.
New Framework for AI-Driven Calls
The recent amendments also address the rising trend of software and AI-driven voice calls. From now on, calls made automatically, without direct human dialing, will fall under TRAI’s application-to-person (A2P) framework, categorizing robocalls and calls using pre-recorded voices as spam unless declared in advance.
Companies employing such systems must notify their telecom operators beforehand. Undeclared A2P calls will be treated as spam, according to TRAI. The focus here is less about the voice technology used and more on how the call is initiated.
The Road Ahead
While the new regulations do not inhibit businesses’ usage of AI or automation in telecalling, they do necessitate transparency regarding such practices. Telecom operators are also permitted to impose a termination charge of up to 5 paise (approximately $0.052) per minute on A2P calls, excluding those made from designated number ranges.
Rizvi cautioned that the revised definitions might unintentionally expand the scope of A2P calls to include calls from contact centers or click-to-call services. Without well-defined boundaries, the regulatory measures could extend beyond what is necessary.
As we navigate these changes, the impact of these regulations on spam management in India remains to be seen. The landscape is evolving, and both users and service providers will need to adapt.
