Universal Service FeeSBC USF charges ( old news - 08:19AM Friday Feb 27 2004) You may be interested to know that the pesky little fee imposed on telecommunications companies and passed onto DSL subscribers (in some, but not all cases), is variable with your package price in the case of SBC. The fee schedule has been posted here. When contemplating monthly DSL bills, you must include USF in your calculations (if you can find out what it will be in advance!). Past news on USF can be found here. Our editorial opinion on the way USF is chargedGiven that the USF is not a tax imposed on the economic outputs of a company, we state as we have before, that Telecommunication companies should break their addiction to "tax line items" on bills, and base their nett package prices inclusive of USF. The should not succumb to the temptation of adding USF onto the subscriber bills after the fact as though they are collecting the exact revenue on behalf of someone else. To do so is misrepresenting the nature of USF. The USF is a cost of doing business, just as power, light, employee health insurance, and federal government taxes. Adding a line item after a neat 69.95 package price, and charging it, especially one that is now variable with package price, is no more sensible than adding a new line item called "cost of executive health plan". In addition, the FCC states, in relation to USF, that companies may not shift more than an equitable share of the contribution to any customer or group of customers. It is unclear to us how customers on faster speeds should be required by SBC to "contribute" more to USF than the slow speed customers, when the back-end USF cost is fixed per circuit.
|
 Cybertoad
join:2001-11-08
Houston, TX | Where's our fixed rate? Good point. If the fee is fixed to SBC then
the fee should be fixed to the customers and
not increment with the service package. | |
|  | 
justin
Australian
join:1999-05-28
Brooklyn, NY
Host:
IPv6
Business Connectiv..
Home/Office setup ..
Console/Handheld g..
Console Tech
| Re: Where's our fixed rate?it shouldn't even be shown.
Their package price is what it is, and thats it.
They are advertising one lower price and offering it at another. The FCC should change the rules to insist the USF is not added on to the bill. It makes NO sense, as it is NOT a percentage of the bill, just a cost of doing business like no different than every other cost a company has. Its as sensible as having a bill that reads:
El Cheapo Package "A": $19.95
Employee Health Insurance: $9.34
TOTAL DUE $29.29
| |
| | 
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
 ·AT&T Yahoo
·AT&T DSL Service
 ·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest
| SBC's USF is OUTRAGEOUS. Let's make no mistake here, SBC sets the pricing structure of the fee, not the FCC or someone else.
What SBC is essentially doing is placing an extremely high fee on their "heavily demanded" services while discounting and placing a very minimal fee on the basic services.
In other words, the people with fast DSL packages are subsidizing and paying far more then their share of the fee so that SBC can keep the fee low on service areas like long distance where they have to compete with others....
When you add the $6 charge (as well as the charge already charged on POTS, LD, etc etc) it makes SBC's DSL packages look much less attractive. This is why they split it out.... so they can market a falsely low selling point and then say "Oh this $6 USF fee... that's the Government's fault..."
People have a right to be pissed off. At SBC. They set this rate structure!
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) | |
| | | 
boogie74
join:2001-06-19
Neenah, WI
clubs:
| Re: Where's our fixed rate? said by KrK  :
SBC's USF is OUTRAGEOUS. Let's make no mistake here, SBC sets the pricing structure of the fee, not the FCC or someone else.
What SBC is essentially doing is placing an extremely high fee on their "heavily demanded" services while discounting and placing a very minimal fee on the basic services.
In other words, the people with fast DSL packages are subsidizing and paying far more then their share of the fee so that SBC can keep the fee low on service areas like long distance where they have to compete with others....
When you add the $6 charge (as well as the charge already charged on POTS, LD, etc etc) it makes SBC's DSL packages look much less attractive. This is why they split it out.... so they can market a falsely low selling point and then say "Oh this $6 USF fee... that's the Government's fault..."
People have a right to be pissed off. At SBC. They set this rate structure!
Ummm... no. But nice try. Regulators set the USF for EVERY company (including SBC- they don't get a "Get out of jail free" card on this to set their own USF rates) on a quarterly basis. These rates are changed quarterly based on a number of variables including revenue and expense audits, population studies, public telecom needs (schools and libraries) as they fluctuate, etc. The rates are based as a percentage of revenues (which is why higher priced plans have higher USF charges) and are also set based on data presented and audited in arrears.
Of course, you have no desire to believe anything legitimate about SBC anyways- if SBC said the sky is blue, you'd call them liars and crooks that were stealing your grey clouds to eliminate competitors of the jet stream to somehow charge for sunlight!
Boogie | |
| | | |
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·AT&T Yahoo
·AT&T DSL Service
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest
| Re: Where's our fixed rate? So true... while at the same time, misleading. Regulators set the rate. As you mentioned, based on several factors, like revenue and expenses. Provided by the Telcos.
SBC decides who, when, and if they are going to assess USF charges. And I guess they figure their more profitable plans should pay more.
As for believing anything legitimate about SBC, I'll have to wait and see when they provide something legitimate. I certainly am not going to take anything you say about them as fact!
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) | |
| | | | |
boogie74
join:2001-06-19
Neenah, WI
clubs:
| Re: Where's our fixed rate? So you've said,
quote:
SBC's USF is OUTRAGEOUS. Let's make no mistake here, SBC sets the pricing structure of the fee, not the FCC or someone else.
What SBC is essentially doing is placing an extremely high fee on their "heavily demanded" services while discounting and placing a very minimal fee on the basic services.
And then you've said,
quote:
So true... while at the same time, misleading. Regulators set the rate. As you mentioned, based on several factors, like revenue and expenses. Provided by the Telcos.
You seem to contradict yourself. Beyond that, however, the actual methodology isn't created by SBC. It's standard for all companies. At present it is figured as a percentage (around 9% total) of all revenue generated by interstate voice and data traffic.
This means that higher bandwith DSL creates more revenue from interstate data traffic in a month's time than lower bandwith DSL. You must realize that this isn't only retail customer associated revenue either. Any time data or voice traffic is handed off to another carrier, access charges are assessed.
This all adds up to the fact that higher bandwith and higher voice traffic makes for a higher USF charge.
It's too bad that you were relying on the "SBC is the devil" concept to support your entire method of thinking. Perhaps you should learn a bit more about how this sort of thing works and spend less time pretending to know what you're talking about.
Boogie | |
| | | | | |
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·AT&T Yahoo
·AT&T DSL Service
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest
| Re: Where's our fixed rate? It's misleading to claim the charge is set by the FCC. It isn't, and you know it. SBC has decided how much to charge, and to whom. Period. It IS a rip-off. Period.
The USF is a giant slush-fund as it is. This stinks, but that's business as normal for SBC. Next thing you'll know they'll want to sue companies who "cheat" them by using the Internet to send voice encoded as data, rather then pay long distance fees. I can't wait.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) | |
| 
TexasGuy
49 States And Texas
Premium
join:2002-12-02
Houston, TX |  Do they owe me some money?
| |
| nhjones
join:2002-09-12
Dayton, OH
| Let's Show How High Taxes Are While I don't think SBC should tack on an extra charge for the USF, I do think it is helpful that SBC and other businesses show the cost of USF and other taxes so people understand that SBC is paying that much in taxes. I know this is not always practical, but I wish that all businesses could show the amount they pay in taxes so that people start to understand that sometimes half of what they pay for something actually goes to taxes. High taxes are a major reason for high prices, but most people don't understand that because they don't see the tax amounts broken out -- they just think that businesses are greedy (which some are, but the government is greedy too with high taxes).
Also, is it just a coincidence that we file our tax returns on April 15th, and then vote in early November, which is as far away from the tax day as possible in the calendar year? People might vote very differently if they voted right after they filed their taxes!!!! | |
| |
justin
Australian
join:1999-05-28
Brooklyn, NY
Host:
IPv6
Business Connectiv..
Home/Office setup ..
Console/Handheld g..
Console Tech
| Re: Let's Show How High Taxes Are No, don't agree.
A business is subjet to loads of taxes, and the ones that apply to business INPUTS do not get broken out for the benefit of the customer. To follow your example, our bills should show a myriad of "add-ons" for payroll tax, state, city and local tax, property tax, and so on.
If SBC want to show that the government has yet another fee for their specific industry, put it in a footnote at the bottom of the bill:
We would like to point out that your bill would be a few bucks less if the FCC did not charge USF
Anything else is misleading. | |
| | lvas
join:2001-05-17
Glen Carbon, IL
| its pretty simple people - if you don't like the taxes & fees imposed upon you by the FCC or PUC of your state - you need to talk to them - not SBC.
WHy should SBC include those fees as part of there price of the service - you all make no sense at all. when you go into stores to BUY anything - do you see the taxs included into the price?? no you do not - you don't see those until you get your bill at the checkout line.;)
The Universal Service Fund charge is a surcharge collected from telecommunications carriers such as Verizon or SBC to support the federal Universal Service Fund. The Fund ensures that schools, libraries, rural hospitals, and other individuals have access to affordable telecommunications service. All communications providers must contribute to the fund based on revenue incurred during the previous year. Most carriers recover their Universal Service Fund charges from their customers in some form. The fee passed through to you depends on the fee assessed to SBC and is along with the services you have ordered. For additional information about this charge, contact the FCC at www.FCC.gov or call them at 1-888-225-5322 | |
| | |
justin
Australian
join:1999-05-28
Brooklyn, NY
Host:
IPv6
Business Connectiv..
Home/Office setup ..
Console/Handheld g..
Console Tech
| Re: Let's Show How High Taxes Are said by lvas :
its pretty simple people - if you don't like the taxes & fees imposed upon you by the FCC or PUC of your state - you need to talk to them - not SBC.
WHy should SBC include those fees as part of there price of the service - you all make no sense at all. when you go into stores to BUY anything - do you see the taxs included into the price?? no you do not - you don't see those until you get your bill at the checkout line.;
The USF is not a tax on output.
You are confused.
Sales tax is a tax on the cost of the item, it is the ONLY tax that a business can show under the line. | |
| | | | lvas
join:2001-05-17
Glen Carbon, IL
| Re: Let's Show How High Taxes Are I understand your point - but my example still stands. The USF fee and other fees are imposed upon you by your govt, not SBC. They are not part of the price of the service so SBC should not list them. If all the fees disappered tomororow it would not relfect on the price of the service one bit.
SBC just collects the fees for your local, state and federal govt. if you have issues with that - complain to your govt.
No SBC does not get to "keep" some of the money and then pass on the rest.
all of the USF monies go into the USF fund and then phone companies collect there share "back" from the fund. It would perhaps help if you understood these things a tad better.  I'm sure it would suit SBC just fine if these fees went away - of course along with the requirement of universal phone service. then SBC would just charge that Farmer 20 miles out of town the "real" cost of stringing up a phone line & all of the polls - say around 10 or 15 thousand dollars. you wouldn't mind that - right:p | |
| | | | |
justin
Australian
join:1999-05-28
Brooklyn, NY
Host:
IPv6
Business Connectiv..
Home/Office setup ..
Console/Handheld g..
Console Tech
| Re: Let's Show How High Taxes Are said by lvas :
I understand your point - but my example still stands. The USF fee and other fees are imposed upon you by your govt, not SBC. They are not part of the price of the service so SBC should not list them. If all the fees disappered tomororow it would not relfect on the price of the service one bit.
No you don't understand the point then.
Anything "below the line" can only be clearly and transparently passed on. The only tax that qualifies is sales tax, as it is defined as a percentage of the cost of an item.
The USF is NOT clearly and transparently passed back to the government. Where is an accounting that shows how many dollars are collected by SBC "below the line", and how many they pay into USF?
Without that accounting, the charge belongs, like ALL OTHER GOVERNMENT IMPOSED TAXES AND FEES EXCEPT SALES TAX, *above* the line and mixed into the overall fee, where we do not have to be concerned about it.
it is vital to be able to compare provider plans on an equal basis. This is impossible if below the line fees are added that are not disclosed as part of the price up front.
it is a scam. | |
| | | | 
Show me the Bill
@66.52.x.x
| Justin, you're making no sense on this issue. Some taxes vary by locality. Should businesses have to change their broadcast advertising to scroll a list of different prices by the screen for every locality the advertisement might reach? Should they list prices pre- and post- tax?
You are aware that businesses who buy a product for resale don't have to pay certain taxes, right?
And what is this non-sense about USF taxing inputs? USF taxes a telecom company's revenue for telecom services, as do all taxes. They either tax the revenue, tax the good by volume, or they tax the profit left over. If anything, inputs are a Deduction.
It is absolutely great that businesses break out taxes; government would like nothing more than to be able to tax without people seeing it. | |
| | | | |
justin
Australian
join:1999-05-28
Brooklyn, NY
Host:
IPv6
Business Connectiv..
Home/Office setup ..
Console/Handheld g..
Console Tech
2 edits | Re: Let's Show How High Taxes Are What are you talking about?
USF does not vary by location, and it is imposed on the company. Tell me why USF is different than, say, payroll tax?
ISPs are totally unique in getting away with putting USF below the line, tell me another business that puts a "cost of doing business" below the line, excepting sales tax, which is put below the line for good reason that it DOES vary according to the buyer, and the buyers location, and what is more, is a percentage of the above the line cost.
USF is a fee imposed on the BACK END of a companies operation - their inputs. It is imposed on the items they BUY or LEASE in order to provide service. If they wish to sell those items at a huge profit, or a huge loss, makes no difference to the USF they must pay.
You'll have to come up with some links to prove that USF relates to the *revenue* of an ISP. If it does, if it directly relates to the amount of $'s collected from consumers, then I agree it should be split out on the bill. Although even in that case, I still think it is false advertising to not show inclusive price, as clearly everyone has to pay it, and the same amount for everyone, (that reads the adverts). | |
| | | | | |
Show me the Bill
@66.52.x.x
| Re: Let's Show How High Taxes Are I had a longer reply, but the power went out. OH well. Anyway, see my fcc.gov link in my post from yesterday farther down the list. It shows that USF is a Revenue tax.
The only thing I'll add is that I think USF sucks and should be repealed. It's a big pot of money for the RBOCs to sell high priced services to schools and governments, but instead of the school or government paying, or RBOCs giving a discount, they get all of their competitors customers to pay.. Bad stuff. | |
| | | | | | kumdo
join:2004-02-18
Union City, CA
| As you stated --
The Universal Service Fund charge is a surcharge collected from telecommunications carriers such as Verizon or SBC to support the federal Universal Service Fund. -- it is not tax. The company can pay themselves or collect it from customers.
Issue is that companies are using this to bring in more money for them. They pass their share to FCC/PUC and keep the rest!
 | |
| | 
Eagle 1
join:2000-11-30
Rocky River, OH | But why do you have to pay a USF fee on both the voice invoice and the dsl invoice, when most likely it is the same copper wires (lineshare adsl)? | |
| | | 
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
| Re: Let's Show How High Taxes Are said by Eagle 1 :
But why do you have to pay a USF fee on both the voice invoice and the dsl invoice, when most likely it is the same copper wires (lineshare adsl)?
I agree. sounds like they're 'double dipping' if you ask me.
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth | |
| | 
jinjimbob
Troy Mcclure
join:2001-11-13
| said by nhjones :
While I don't think SBC should tack on an extra charge for the USF, I do think it is helpful that SBC and other businesses show the cost of USF and other taxes so people understand that SBC is paying that much in taxes. I know this is not always practical, but I wish that all businesses could show the amount they pay in taxes so that people start to understand that sometimes half of what they pay for something actually goes to taxes. High taxes are a major reason for high prices, but most people don't understand that because they don't see the tax amounts broken out -- they just think that businesses are greedy (which some are, but the government is greedy too with high taxes).
Do you want them to include the cleaning supply bill too? What about the water bill for the month? | |
| 
SKYHN
Lu.. Lu.. Lulululu
Premium
join:2001-09-16
99999
| $5.83?! Cripes, I didnt know my fee was gonna be $5.83, thats a lot of damn money. It should be included in the monthly fee im already paying for service. But, SBCs service is excellent so I cant complain too much.
Good things always gotta get fees and taxes tacked on all to hell, im sick of it.
--
Im Rick James... | |
| |
Eagle 1
join:2000-11-30
Rocky River, OH
| Re: $5.83?! Speakeasy also charges a USF fee. It seems to change all the time. When i signed up in 2002, it 2.25, then in May 2003 it changed to 4.38, then they changed it to 2.25 USF and 2.13 regulatory compliance fee, then when i upgraded to their 3/768 plan it changed to
Federal Regulatory Fees Orderid: 3.35
Regulatory Compliance Fee Orderid: 2.44
so an extra 5.79 a month more than stated plan costs. | |
| | | 
jjoshua
Premium
join:2001-06-01
Scotch Plains, NJ | Re: $5.83?! It costs $2.44 to collect and process $3.35???
BS! | |
| 
Jan Janowski
join:2000-06-18
Skokie, IL | BS Tax "ABUSE TAX" At this point, An upgrade from 1.5/384 to 3.0/384 will cost me $4.50 a month, with a $5.83 tax added...
Sorry!! I'll stay where I am!!!
Tax amounts to 130% of the upgrade!!!
--
Looking for 1939 Indian Motocycle | |
| LoungeLizard2
join:2003-11-21
Vallejo, CA
| Profiting from USF fees? | |
| |
justin
Australian
join:1999-05-28
Brooklyn, NY
Host:
IPv6
Business Connectiv..
Home/Office setup ..
Console/Handheld g..
Console Tech
| Re: Profiting from USF fees? If they list prices INCLUSIVE of USF they can "profit" all they like!
While they list them EXCLUSIVE of USF, consumers deserve to see the books, to make sure that every penny that is paid, goes to USF out the back just as sales tax does.
This is, of course, impossible.
Therefore, they should list prices INCLUSIVE of USF so everyone can stop caring about it. | |
| | | | jethrogump
Premium
join:2001-03-02
Mesquite, TX
| a profit In Texas SBC must make a profit on this I know in 2003 the total USF went up and up on my bills.
You would think with all this money supposedly pegged for rural maintenance farmers and ranchers would not still be on dial up but would have the most state of the art wireless connectivity.  | |
| 
footballdude
Premium
join:2002-08-13
Imperial, MO
| they have to I don't know all of the details but I'm pretty sure federal law (or at least the FCC) regulate exactly where on the bill the various fees and taxes are shown and even the exact wording that the phone companies are supposed to use. At least, it used to be that way. | |
| |
justin
Australian
join:1999-05-28
Brooklyn, NY | Re: they have to that is for PHONE COMPANIES and for fees that they show below the line. USF was always optional (to show). A mistake by the FCC being taken advantage of for DSL. | |
| 
veloct
Premium
join:2003-01-21
Moosup, CT | typical SBC stuff And I'm supposed to be shocked by this?
--
Yes, I'm a Mac user and proud of it!! | |
| Freezone
join:2000-09-29
Southfield, MI | Michigan has it the worst $11 for the phone line and the total cost is $23 and some change. This just so you can have dsl. Phone CO is in big trouble as more people opt for total bypass.
Pay more in taxes and fees then the cost of the service. | |
| mdurkin
join:1999-08-11
San Bruno, CA
| uh, the editorial facts are a bit off... "...the back-end USF cost is fixed per circuit."
Actually, that's patently false. USF is a percentage of interestate telecom revenue, at present a bit over 9%. Even for LEC-affiliated ISPs, the data LEC division charges the affiliated ISP as well as independent ISPs for each DSL transport circuit to which Internet access is added to make the retail product, and that wholesale DSL transport circuit charge generally varies based on the speed... certainly in the case of SBC. The USF is generally more for faster speed lines; not a fixed price. FUSF being percentage based is the same reason that the folks that think they are being double charged FUSF since they pay it on their LD bill too are wrong, because it's a %age of revenue and not a per-circuit charge.
Also IMHO, whether to itemize it is a matter of philosophy, but hardly nefarious, and "cost of doing business" is overly simplified. Certainly the ISP should fully disclose it ahead of time. Technically at least in California the sales tax is a tax on the seller who is liable for it, and businesses are allowed to pass it on on top of the advertised price. The FCC expressly permits the FUSF to be itemized onto customers bills. Lots of other taxes and government fees are itemized on telephone and cable bills, and if those government fees and taxes are reduced then you should expect them to be reduced or eliminated from your bill, just as you should from FUSF. If it's factored in as the cost of doing business then should the ISP factor in a profit on FUSF too just in case the government decides to increase it? And if factored it becomes a windfall for the ISP if it is reduced or eliminated and drops out as a cost. Itemizing the FUSF at very least ties your total retail rate directly to the cost to the ISP. Just don't take the advertised rate as final... do your research to see if and how much FUSF you need to add to be comparing apples to apples. | |
| |
Show me the Bill
@66.52.x.x
| Re: uh, the editorial facts are a bit off... Great post.
For those people who wonder why their USF was going up, this is part of it:
»www.fcc.gov/wcb/universal_servic···ter.html
The contribution rate can change every 3 months, and it was going up for quite a while. It just went down a small amount recently.
I think there were also rule changes (perhaps a year ago?) on how USF was supposed to be spread among customers that may have caused changes in your bill. | |
| | | 
RavonTUS
join:2003-10-15
Indianapolis, IN | Re: Taxes Greetings,
Wasn't this country founded in blood because of high and unreasonable taxes? Maybe they quit teaching that in public schools.
-Ravon
Hail King George! Tax the tea! | |
| | succotash
Premium
join:2002-12-14
Monterey Park, CA
| said by mdurkin :
Also IMHO, whether to itemize it is a matter of philosophy, but hardly nefarious, and "cost of doing business" is overly simplified. Certainly the ISP should fully disclose it ahead of time....Just don't take the advertised rate as final... do your research to see if and how much FUSF you need to add to be comparing apples to apples.
Most excellent info and advice from mdurkin, who should know, since he runs an ISP | |
|
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·AT&T Yahoo
·AT&T DSL Service
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest
| Don't forget who gets paid the money in the USF... Yes, that's right, the USF is money FOR THE TELEPHONE COMPANIES.
It's really quite a neat scam.
Here's how it works.
The USF was created to "cover the costs" of providing telecommunications services to schools, libraries, certain rural areas, and people who refuse to pay for their own phones (among other things.)
So, who sets these costs? Why, the Telecommunications providers, themselves, of course.
So, they declare "It cost us xxxx billions to provide universal service. Therefore, we are going to charge xxxx billions in USF fees to "cover our costs".
Too bad there's little accountability.
It's a receipe for overcharging. You have the company who is going to be paid from the USF the one who determines how much the Universal service costs and then they collect how much they want from the consumer.
in other words, you have the Telephone companies telling you how much they want to charge, and then the bill is passed to you.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) | |
| |
boogie74
join:2001-06-19
Neenah, WI
clubs:
| Re: Don't forget who gets paid the money in the USF... said by KrK :
Yes, that's right, the USF is money FOR THE TELEPHONE COMPANIES.
It's really quite a neat scam.
Here's how it works.
The USF was created to "cover the costs" of providing telecommunications services to schools, libraries, certain rural areas, and people who refuse to pay for their own phones (among other things.)
So, who sets these costs? Why, the Telecommunications providers, themselves, of course.
So, they declare "It cost us xxxx billions to provide universal service. Therefore, we are going to charge xxxx billions in USF fees to "cover our costs".
Too bad there's little accountability.
It's a receipe for overcharging. You have the company who is going to be paid from the USF the one who determines how much the Universal service costs and then they collect how much they want from the consumer.
in other words, you have the Telephone companies telling you how much they want to charge, and then the bill is passed to you.
Not quite. The USF funds things like discounts for low income customers and pays subsidies only to those companies that service extremely rural areas. Qwest, for example, is an example of a company that gets more USF funding than many ILECs- as they service states such as Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, Montana and Idaho. Verizon gets a good chunk of the USF funds for the largely rural areas serviced from the old GTE areas.
However, the majority of the USF funding for rural areas goes to the thousands of independent LEC companies that service roughly 1000 or less customers in a given tri-county area in the bare bones sticks of this nation.
Of course, you don't believe that- you actually think that those independent companies service the 200 customers they do by charging them $800 per month for dialtone. That would make more sense in your convoluted world so you can continue hating the ILECs.
Oddly enough, for someone that hates SBC with such fervor as yourself, you sure rate them highly in your review- gee- a loyal customer that knows he's got other options around him, but he must complain and slam the company he likes so much! I don't get it...
Boogie | |
| | |
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·AT&T Yahoo
·AT&T DSL Service
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest
| Re: Don't forget who gets paid the money in the US Don't muddy the issue, please.
The USF charges in discussion are nothing to do with providing Universal Telephone service at an affordable rate --- which is already done and covered with other charges and subsidies.
These are new "USF" charges, dealing with telecommunications services, most specifically, internet access, for Schools, Libraries, supposedly rural areas (still lacking) and for people who already collect way too much freebie handouts.
Most everything about the new Universal service system is flawed, from how it is provided, to whom, how it is funded, how much it costs, and who pays for it.
And it's a great moneymaker for those incumbents ILEC's.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) | |
| | | |
boogie74
join:2001-06-19
Neenah, WI
clubs:
| Re: Don't forget who gets paid the money in the US said by KrK :
Don't muddy the issue, please.
The USF charges in discussion are nothing to do with providing Universal Telephone service at an affordable rate --- which is already done and covered with other charges and subsidies.
These are new "USF" charges, dealing with telecommunications services, most specifically, internet access, for Schools, Libraries, supposedly rural areas (still lacking) and for people who already collect way too much freebie handouts.
Most everything about the new Universal service system is flawed, from how it is provided, to whom, how it is funded, how much it costs, and who pays for it.
And it's a great moneymaker for those incumbents ILEC's.
Ummm... again, no. The USF pays subsidies for low income customers, subsidies for POTS service to rural areas and subsidies to provide telecom services to schools and libraries.
ALL telecom providers pay into this fund- whether they provide POTS service or not. It isn't divided up into smaller funds in ways such that internet providers subsidize only internet services and POTS providers subsidize only POTS services.
If it's so profitable to offer any kind of service in these rural areas in question, why aren't you doing it? It's such a money maker, right? You'd be raking in extra profits from USF for doing nothing... right?
Please show us all how you've invested in providing rural telecom service to make all those profits yourself. You've got 5 years. Go make billions!
Boogie | |
| 
TXTigerman
Monopolies Kill
join:2000-12-21
Beeville, TX
| So, Where's the "service" in USF? Since SBC is now inclined to charge their DSL customers a USF where is the "service" from "Universal Service" for their rural customers.
I'm so glad I got the hell away from that company finally. Now, if I can just get their damned telemarketers to quit calling here.
--
Completely SBC free since December 2003! | |
| |
boogie74
join:2001-06-19
Neenah, WI
clubs:
| Re: So, Where's the "service" in USF? said by TXTigerman :
Since SBC is now inclined to charge their DSL customers a USF where is the "service" from "Universal Service" for their rural customers.
I'm so glad I got the hell away from that company finally. Now, if I can just get their damned telemarketers to quit calling here.
USF doesn't pay for universal DSL service. That would be like saying that since you pay USF charges on your cell phone bill, why can't I also get your cell company to provide me service in the middle of Wyoming? It's because the USF doesn't pay out "long distance" subsidies, "local POTS" subsidies, "wireless" subsidies, "Internet provider" subsidies, etc.
The fact that all telecom providers (those that provide and handle interstate data and voice traffic, that is) pay into the USF- that doesn't mean that they ALL have something paid back to them in the form of subsidies.
Boogie | |
| 
WireHead
Hayabusa Eater
Premium
join:2001-05-09
hiatus
clubs: 
| What me worry? everyone in America is supposed to have broadband by 2007.. I believe that's what Bush is saying.. well SOMEONE has to subsidize the welfare recipients so they can 1. get a computer and 2. have free access.
Why not.. I already pay more in federal tax than the median national income.. what's another few bucks.. ROFL.. The way the govt. see's it I don't even need money, again ROFL..
Anyway take solace in the fact that when the rural and dis-enfranchised get the access you subsidized it will choke cable networks with all the p2p:p I mean, you KNOW they'll be doing something constructive with it ROFLCAG!!
The whole thing is a sham.. If they can't get BB then freaking MOVE.. and I could care less if Johny/Suzy snotnose has BB at school or not.. if the school can't afford it DON'T get it..
I have to live within my means why should they be any different?
Its like all the people who live in a desert and wonder why there is no food.. MOVE to where the FOOD is or starve.. your choice.. no one forcing you..
--
Join BBR Team Starfire Team Q III and help the SETI project.
Put your unused clock cycles to work!
I refuse to tip toe through life merely to end up safely at death. | |
| 
ronkops
join:2004-06-25
Saint Helen, MI | Why why is sbc so hated, because they are successful ? | |
| | | |
|
|
