IANAL but that's how I read it too. USF is to be levied on interstate services (of which voip is automatically because internet) and a contract shortfall is neither federal in jurisdiction nor a telecommunications service.
> On Dec 2, 2015, at 19:23, Peter Beckman <beck...@angryox.com> wrote: > > Hey Folks -- > > I've got a carrier to which I've made a minimum commitment. I didn't get > around to getting my spend up to the commit, and when my contract renewed, > they billed me a minimum commit fee. Understandable, and I'm fine paying > it. I didn't get anything for it -- zero telecom-related services. > > However, they also charged the USF percentage on the minimum fee. > > The Language from the FCC leads me to believe that this carrier's > assessment of the USF on minimum billing is incorrect and illegal, as that > fee is not interstate nor international end-user revenues. For specific > detail, FCC Form 499-Q item 115 clearly states that the USF is to be > taxed on: > > "Telecommunications provided to other universal service contributors for > resale as telecommunications or as interconnected VoIP" > > The minimum fee is not telecommunications. > > Additionally Form 499-A for Line 418 states: > > "Line 418. — Other revenues that should not be reported in the contribution > bases; Non-interconnected VoIP Revenues. Line 418 should include all > non-telecommunications service revenues on the filer’s books, as well as > some revenues that are derived from telecommunications-related functions, > but that should not be included in the universal service or other fund > contribution bases. For example, information services offering a capability > for generating, acquiring, storing, transforming, processing, retrieving, > utilizing, or making available information via telecommunications are not > included in the universal service or other fund contribution bases." > > Anyone else experience this? Or have any background? I do not believe the > carrier should charge me nor pay the FCC the USF on non-telecom fees. > > Any Telecom lawyers out there? > > Beckman > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Peter Beckman Internet Guy > beck...@angryox.com http://www.angryox.com/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------_______________________________________________ > VoiceOps mailing list > VoiceOps@voiceops.org > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps@voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops