dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
915

arpawocky
Premium Member
join:2014-04-13
Columbus, OH

1 edit

2 recommendations

arpawocky to MartinM

Premium Member

to MartinM

Re: [General] Does your ITSP bill any taxes?

said by MartinM:

Smaller ITSP, they (FCC/USF) will knock at your door soon enough if you haven't been paying it, and the fun part is that it is retroactive. Prepare your checkbook hehe.

This!

And, really tiny ITSPs, even if you are "de minimis" and therefore don't have to pay USF, you still have to register with the FCC and file a 499A annually with USAC.

On a side but related note:
Sure would be nice if there was a section on dslr to review DC registered agents.

cb14
join:2013-02-04
Miami Beach, FL

1 recommendation

cb14 to OzarkEdge

Member

to OzarkEdge
said by OzarkEdge:

Yep, and the current FCC debate over how to classify ISPs may rule broad enough to include ITSPs for taxation purposes i.e. they're all just service providers. They may hesitate to call an ISP a utility (it is!) but I don't see them hesitating to call an ITSP a utility since an ITSP is very much like telephone service.

OE

Unfortunately, it's the legislative bodies from federal government down to the city level which decide what to tax and how much. The dramatic differences in taxation between states, counties and cities are the result of that. The status of a service as an utility is a mere technicality.
OzarkEdge
join:2014-02-23
USA

OzarkEdge to cb14

Member

to cb14
said by cb14:

said by OzarkEdge:

said by cb14:

e911 is largely pushed by the VOIP providers which make good money on it.,

VoIP.ms offers e911 as an optional service. I believe they pass the $1.50 on for the cost of the service and make no money on it. I also believe other providers who charge less than $1.50 are embedding the difference in their other fees and rates for all their customers.

That's actually not true. The real cost of e911 for companies like VOIP.ms or Callcentric seems to be about $ 0.75, depending what they exactly negotiated. So with $ 1.50/month they do make money on it. I am fine with it, since I have free NYC DID from Callcentric and they have to make money somewhere; so I do not bitch about it. I would very much bitch about it if I had to pay it multiple times, which is fortunately not the case with the other providers I have.

Both VoIP.ms and Callcentric state on their websites that their $1.50 monthly 911 Cost Recovery Fee goes directly to their 911 service provider. I see no reason why they would misstate this when they could have stated nothing at all.

OE

cb14
join:2013-02-04
Miami Beach, FL

cb14

Member

said by OzarkEdge:

Both VoIP.ms and Callcentric state on their websites that their $1.50 monthly 911 Cost Recovery Fee goes directly to their 911 service provider. I see no reason why they would misstate this when they could have stated nothing at all.

OE

the fact that they state that does not mean that it is true. there has been a discussion about that here in the past and some other ITSP's chimed in ( I think it was Nitzan) with the estimates.
OzarkEdge
join:2014-02-23
USA

OzarkEdge

Member

said by cb14:

said by OzarkEdge:

Both VoIP.ms and Callcentric state on their websites that their $1.50 monthly 911 Cost Recovery Fee goes directly to their 911 service provider. I see no reason why they would misstate this when they could have stated nothing at all.

OE

the fact that they state that does not mean that it is true. there has been a discussion about that here in the past and some other ITSP's chimed in ( I think it was Nitzan) with the estimates.

I have no reason not to believe their published statements. It makes no sense for VoIP.ms and Callcentric to markup the cost of 911 service for profit and then state otherwise when they could simply not declare the markup.

OE

cb14
join:2013-02-04
Miami Beach, FL

cb14

Member

said by OzarkEdge:

I have no reason not to believe their published statements. It makes no sense for VoIP.ms and Callcentric to markup the cost of 911 service for profit and then state otherwise when they could simply not declare the markup.

OE

You are free to believe whatever you wish to, we have a freedom of religion, but there are good reasons for disguising the true costs of the service. But then again, it is not really a problem as long as we are not paying for the same thing with multiple providers, the little up mark is a part of the overall profit calculation and if we did not pay for that we would pay for something else. So no point to argue.