<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Re: Providers get rid of the &#x22;network access fee&#x22; in </title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r13380600</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 09:30:08 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 09:30:08 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: Providers get rid of the &#x22;network access fee&#x22;</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13393468</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/567879"><b>Kearnstd</b></A> : wonder if FIOS is taxable, if they pull the POTS line from your house when you subscribe that means your phone is technicly VOIP and isnt taxable except for the 911 fee.<br><SMALL>--<br>[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports</SMALL>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13393468</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 12 May 2005 18:06:53 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Providers get rid of the &#x22;network access fee&#x22;</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13382296</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/0"><b>anon</b></A> : This is ripe for something that will be under high powered wifi voip that doesn't subscribe to any 'tax' local, state of federal.. but its scope would be quite limited at first, companies would need to see s sustainable business model first..<br>There is a tax revolt on POTS lines going on to the tune of over 10 million voice lines already between the major carriers of voip today]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13382296</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 11 May 2005 11:47:13 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Providers get rid of the &#x22;network access fee&#x22;</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13380600</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/570239"><b>TheSaint</b></A> : They could be a bit more honest themselves and just list the wholesale price they have to pay the government for the various "fees" they pass on to the consumer. I wonder how much of it is padded with additional "markup". Still, that doesn't dispute the fact that cell phone taxes are already much too high as it is.<br><SMALL>--<br>The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.  --- Edmund Burke<BR>Kill your TV, then Internet Explorer: &raquo;<A HREF="http://www.mozilla.org" >www.mozilla.org</A></SMALL>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13380600</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 11 May 2005 03:28:15 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Providers get rid of the &#x22;network access fee&#x22;</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13377398</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/681589"><b>lazarus_</b></A> : Sales reps already say that fee is a government tax. (here in Canada anyways), so now providers can kill that tax, and their sales people will no longer be lying..<br><SMALL>--<br>Facts are meaningless; you can use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! Facts, schmacks</SMALL>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13377398</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 10 May 2005 19:06:57 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
