Eagle 1
join:2000-11-30
Rocky River, OH
| Speakeasy raises addon taxes again and again
Speakeasy raises addon taxes again and again.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The rate for your Federal Regulatory Fee has changed. For
information on these fees, please visit
»www.speakeasy.net/reg. Questions about your bill? Check
out our Billing Resource Center online at
»www.speakeasy.net/brc (login required).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
thanks speakeasy...taxes for internet line, that I already pay taxes to SBC, seems like being charged twice... |
|
valderost
Here, There, Everywhere
join:2004-02-03
Boston, MA
| While Speakeasy has control over the way FUSF is billed to individuals, it's quite possible the US government increased Speakeasy's bill. Speakeasy gets to pass this particular one on to customers as it sees fit.
It surprised me that the "regulatory compliance fee" (which is actually just extra revenue beyond the contractual price and not a fee) has gone up more than the FUSF itself.
I called the Massachusetts Department of Revenue to ask whether the state charges any tax on internet service or any part of it: they said no and pointed me to a reference document. So I asked Speakeasy about the "State sales tax reimbursement" line, which they claim is a tax that I pay. I asked who is imposing the tax and the name of the tax over a month ago and am still waiting for an answer.
Speakeasy's silence on these topics speaks volumes. |
|
kapil
The Kapil
join:2000-04-26
Chicago, IL
| FUSF is not mandatory. Especially for an ISP. This is not the first time this topic has come up...and this is not the first time a response from Speakeasy has been missing.
I'll make ya' a deal Speakeasy. You agree to get regulated like a telco and I'll start paying you all the taxes and fees that a telco is required/authorized to charge.
Until then, it really isn't my problem that your cost of doing business is high and you deceive your customers by advertising one price but charging another.
--
::: Do, or do not, there is no try:::»www.kapilville.com |
|
Windogg
join:2002-07-24
Cambridge, MA
| reply to Eagle 1
A significant drop in service, loss of the local Boston POP, uncompetitive pricing, and these silly fees is what persuaded me to leave Speakeasy last year. Would people stand for it if McDonald's charged an extra nickel for the wrapper on your burger under the guise of "complying with regulations"? To me these "compliance costs" should either be added to or be absorbed into the regular cost of service.
I have been with Lighting Bolt DSL for about a year and have experienced none of the issues mentioned above. Brent, the owner of lbdsl.net, is 100% straight forward in his business practices. The monthly price quoted on LB's website is what you pay. If it says $49.99 for a DSL package, that is it, period. No taxes, no USF, no "compliance fees," and no other surprises. All service and fees are rolled up into the quoted price. I like this honest approach to business and highly encourage people to check out LBDSL.net. |
|
russotto
join:2000-10-05
Collegeville, PA
| reply to kapil
We've been through this in other threads: Speakeasy is paying the FUSF rather than Covad. It's not mandatory for them to pass it on, but it's sure as heck mandatory for them to pay it.
The phony "regulatory compliance fee" is IMO a bigger issue. Along with the taxes which are either being incorrectly charged or confusingly labeled. Unfortunately I looked up all of mine and they do exist :-(. |
|
kapil
The Kapil
join:2000-04-26
Chicago, IL
| FUSF is not "mandatory for them to pay it". Speakeasy has NO obligation to collect for or pay into the Universal Service Fund. Speakeasy VOLUNTARILY signed up to contribute to the fund...presumably because they were planning to become a ISP/Telco hybrid, kinda' like Covad. |
|
borborpa
Slipping Slowly Into Oblivion
Premium
join:2002-02-20
New Cumberland, PA
clubs:
 ·Speakeasy
| said by kapil  :FUSF is not "mandatory for them to pay it". Speakeasy has NO obligation to collect for or pay into the Universal Service Fund. Speakeasy VOLUNTARILY signed up to contribute to the fund...presumably because they were planning to become a ISP/Telco hybrid, kinda' like Covad. Well, actually, it IS mandatory for SE to pay the FUSF. They used to pay it as Covad passed it on to them, then they decided it was easier to simply handle it themselves, and now collect it themselves. There ARE taxes on DSL lines, whether people want to believe it or not. I've told this story a thousand times, but I'll do it again.
In 1997 I had DSL in Arizona. US West was the telco, and Inficad was the ISP. The way DSL worked back then (it WAS lineshare), our US West bill had the charges for the DSL line delivery, including all applicable taxes, FUSF, etc included. The bill from Inficad was for the Internet access, on the DSL line. Someone somewhere got smart, and said it was too confusing to the customer to pay two bills, and that the ISP should just be able to bill for the whole thing, and just pay the telco. So, they started doing this. Regardless of how you look at it though, you STILL have two parts associated with the bill. The cost from the telco, and the cost from the ISP. The ISP portion is not taxed. The telco portion IS STILL taxed, whether or not an ISP absorbs the costs or not. I prefer the way SE breaks out the taxes on the Telco portion, because I pay less than other people do. Some people pay less than I do, but some pay more. It's not SE's fault that different states tax the telco differently, but it makes a diffrerence on each person's bill. If Bob pays $25 in taxes on his line, and I pay $10, I sure don't want SE raising their prices $25 for everyone, just so they can cover Bob's stupid taxes!
--
Dr. Bunsen Honeydew and Beaker in 2008!!! [AIM - BoyBandsMakeUGay] |
|
kapil
The Kapil
join:2000-04-26
Chicago, IL
| Your understanding of telecom laws and FCC rulings is highly flawed.
Universal Service Fee is on your bill so that a LEC can provide UNIVERSAL SERVICE within its territory...even to the far out, remote, unprofitable areas...the USF subsudises this for the carriers.
The FCC doesn't MANDATE that a carrier charge its customers a USF fee...it merely allows carriers to do so.
The FCC also does not determine the amount a carrier can charge...it is upto each carrier.
Speakeasy is an ISP and is categorized as an "information service" provider not a telco that is a "common carrier"
Speakeasy CHOSE to take certain steps towards becoming a LEC..but didn't get all the way there.
If speakeasy wants to charge taxes and fees like a telco ...FINE...but then become a telco and be regulated like one. You can't have it both ways.
--
::: Do, or do not, there is no try:::»www.kapilville.com |
|
russotto
join:2000-10-05
Collegeville, PA
| reply to Eagle 1
The FCC mandates that the carriers pay into the fund. They do not mandate that the carriers pass that fee on to their customers. Speakeasy did take steps so it collects and pays the USF fee itself, but before that, they still paid it -- Covad paid the USF fee, and passed the charge right on to Speakeasy. Speakeasy does not _keep_ or otherwise benefit from the USF... in actuality, it goes to the ILECs. |
|
borborpa
Slipping Slowly Into Oblivion
Premium
join:2002-02-20
New Cumberland, PA
clubs:
·Speakeasy
1 edit | reply to kapil
said by kapil :Your understanding of telecom laws and FCC rulings is highly flawed. Universal Service Fee is on your bill so that a LEC can provide UNIVERSAL SERVICE within its territory...even to the far out, remote, unprofitable areas...the USF subsudises this for the carriers. The FCC doesn't MANDATE that a carrier charge its customers a USF fee...it merely allows carriers to do so. The FCC also does not determine the amount a carrier can charge...it is upto each carrier. Speakeasy is an ISP and is categorized as an "information service" provider not a telco that is a "common carrier" Speakeasy CHOSE to take certain steps towards becoming a LEC..but didn't get all the way there. If speakeasy wants to charge taxes and fees like a telco ...FINE...but then become a telco and be regulated like one. You can't have it both ways. Um, your understanding is much more flawed than mine.
Carriers are REQUIRED to put money into the FUSF. They are allowed but not required to pass this on to you as a line item.
The carriers are REQUIRED to pay only a specified amount, which changes quarterly. The percentage is determined by the FCC.
SE IS NOT technically supposed to pay into the USF. However, Covad is. Covad used to pass the USF onto SE, but now SE just handles the whole thing on their own.
No matter how you look at it, SE IS NOT taking the money and spending it on a new Jag for the President. The money collected goes to the FCC, so raising it doesn't help SE ONE BIT.
»www.fcc.gov/wcb/universal_servic···ter.html
--
Dr. Bunsen Honeydew and Beaker in 2008!!! [AIM - BoyBandsMakeUGay] |
|
kapil
The Kapil
join:2000-04-26
Chicago, IL
| A carrier is only required to contribute to the fund if it wishes to receive a handout from the USF.
Once again, the FCC does not mandate that the carrier pass on the USF contribution costs to its customers, it merely allows it. The FCC also does not mandate that the carrier charge its customers a certain amount...it merely requires that the charge to its customers not exceed the actual USF contribtion of the carrier...if the charge is passed to the customers at all.
Covad has the right to collect USF fees, Speakeasy does not.
It is sneaky to the point of being unethical that Speakeasy advertises one price but charges yet another.
If it costs you 1 dollar to provide service and you want to make a $1 profit...advertise the service at $2...not $0.99 + $1.01 in undisclosed fees.
Speakeasy is not a "carrier" It is a freakin' ISP. Would you justify AOL tacking on a $1.50 fee on their dial up service?
--
::: Do, or do not, there is no try:::»www.kapilville.com |
|
CylonRed
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-06
Bloom County
1 edit | Unless you realize that 99.9999999% of what I buy in the real world is not the correct price either - so 99.999999999% of EVEYTHING I pay for you would say is unethical becuase I pay a price that they do not advertise. My car did not cost me the negociated price of $14K nor did my house actually sell for about $120K and the sandwich at the local fast food joint does NOT cost me $2.99...
I know taxes are part of the bill - I personally would rather have it broken out on the bill than think I am not paying the taxes whrn in reality I am but it is included in the total cost (as other carriers do) and not broken out. YOu say potatoe - I say Potahtoe but in the end the vast majority of the folks with DSL pay the exact same taxes whether they are listed or not.
--
Brian
America's Army Forum Moderator and America's Army Beta Tester |
|
borborpa
Slipping Slowly Into Oblivion
Premium
join:2002-02-20
New Cumberland, PA
clubs:
·Speakeasy
| reply to kapil
said by kapil :Covad has the right to collect USF fees, Speakeasy does not. Then why does SE have an account with the FCC into which they deposit the FUSY they collect?
So, you think it's unethical to advertise one price, and "charge" another. Does that mean you complain to your phone company, cell phone provider, gas company, etc? They ALL break out taxes that way.
I would MUCH rather see SE break out the taxes, so I know what they are. Plus, when something like the FUSF rate changes, SE can let you know, and you can see that change. Otherwise, they'd just perform a price change, and you'd have no idea where your money is going.
When a plumber comes to work on your house, do you want a bill with parts and labor all broken down, or do you want a scrap of paper that says "$787"? This is the same idea.
It is impossible for SE to advertise the "after-tax" price for every area of the country. Therefor, on the site it has the price, and states that it does not include applicable taxes.
If you would rather have SE bill you one price, and change it quarterly when the FUSF changes, then you're crazy. More people would bitch about that than anything else.
Do the ILEC's have the option to pass on none, or a portion of the FUSF? Yes. Are they stupid not to pass on the whole thing? Yes. It's going to get passed in whole, from the ILEC to the consumer somehow.
--
Dr. Bunsen Honeydew and Beaker in 2008!!! [AIM - BoyBandsMakeUGay] |
|
kapil
The Kapil
join:2000-04-26
Chicago, IL
| reply to CylonRed
Believe it or not, in most of the world, the sale price is inclusive of all taxes.
The USF fee is NOT A TAX. It is an optional fee that, in this case, Speakeasy CHOOSES to charge its customers.
As an ISP, Speakeasy has NO obligation to pay into the universal service fund. Speakeasy VOLUNTARILY chose to do so.
The vast majority of the folks pay the same amount of TAXES...but as I stated above, the FUSF is NOT a tax...it is a fee...and the fee varies a LOT.
--
::: Do, or do not, there is no try:::»www.kapilville.com |
|
CylonRed
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-06
Bloom County
| And the reason they collect it has already been explained and in the US fees AND taxes are usually NOT included in the price... Just look at a hotel bill about the fess and taxes unknown to you till you leave.
--
Brian
America's Army Forum Moderator and America's Army Beta Tester |
|
kapil
The Kapil
join:2000-04-26
Chicago, IL
| reply to borborpa
Speakeasy does NOT have an account with the FCC. They pay the USF corporation setup to run and manage the fund.
I do not complain to my mobile phone provider or gas company about taxes. But the USF fee is not a TAX. I left SBC for the same reason.
If a plumber charges me $1000 plus 7$ sales tax...fine! But if charges me a 5% premium to cover the cost tires on his van...and changes that premium periodically based on what the tires cost him...then sure as hell, that plumber won't get much of my business.
Again the USF fee is NOT A TAX. No TELCO is required to pass it along to customers. No ISP is even required to participate in the program
Speakeasy also charges me excise and sales tax...and to top it off it charges me a fee to cover the cost of charging me all the other bogus fees. WTF?
Speakeasy is not based in IL...so it does not need to charge sales tax. It is not a telco so it does not need to charge an excise or telecom tax.
I have already checked with the Illinois Department of Revenue...Speakeasy pays NOTHING to Illinois....nor is it obligated to.
Speakeasy is NOT a LEC. What part of that do you not get?
--
::: Do, or do not, there is no try:::»www.kapilville.com |
|
kapil
The Kapil
join:2000-04-26
Chicago, IL
| reply to CylonRed
Speakeasy is not a telecommunications carrier. It has no obligations to charge the USF fee.
A hotel HAS to charge sales tax to comply with the law.
Do you really not see a difference?
--
::: Do, or do not, there is no try:::»www.kapilville.com |
|
borborpa
Slipping Slowly Into Oblivion
Premium
join:2002-02-20
New Cumberland, PA
clubs:
·Speakeasy
| said by kapil :Speakeasy is not a telecommunications carrier. It has no obligations to charge the USF fee. The fee is PASSED to SE from Covad, they are then required to handle it. They choose to PASS it onto the consumer, as a line item. As it gets passed along, eventually you are going to have to pay it. From the get-go, it is passed on as a line item. It keeps getting passed from company to company, until SE gets it. They MUST pay it, and have the option of covering it in the cost, or writing it in as a line item, since it's NOT money that goes to them in any way. By proxy, SE must pay the USF, whether you like it or not.
This is how Government and big business work. Government wants rural people to get phone service. Phone company doesn't want to pay for it. Government says "OK, we're going to MAKE you pay for it". Lobbyists get involved, and they come up with the USF. The phone companies all pay into this fund, and they don't have to charge it, but they can if they want to. If you have ANY brain, you know they are GOING to pass it along, no questions asked. It's free money for the phone companies, that's all it is. Does it suck? Yes.
As has been stated before, SE breaks out any applicable taxes on the TELCO portion of the bill, and I, for one, would much rather see that broken out, since it's NOT money that, in any way, goes to their bottom line.
--
Dr. Bunsen Honeydew and Beaker in 2008!!! [AIM - BoyBandsMakeUGay] |
|
kapil
The Kapil
join:2000-04-26
Chicago, IL
| LECs don't charge each other USF fees. At least as a separate line item. It is figured into the wholesale cost, if at all.
ILECs don't charge Covad a USF fee. I also have it on good authority that Covad does NOT charge its resellers and partners USF fees on the circuits. Again, not as a separate line item. Although, you could argue that the since Covad does contribute to the USF, their wholesale prices absorb the cost...without the USF obligation their wholesale cost to Speakeasy could be lower. But in any event, there is no line item USF charge in the Covad bill to Speakeasy.
Speakeasy is, once again, NOT a telco. It has no obligation to, is not required to, doesn't have to by proxy, contribute to the USF...and then pass the cost along to its customers.
The reason for the fees on your Speakeasy bill is this: Sometime ago, amid "regulatory uncertainty", to ensure that it can remain a going concern, Speakeasy took steps towards becoming a CLEC. Among those steps was filing to be a contributor to the USF...like every other LEC. Strictly as an ISP, Speakeasy has no USF obligations...as a CLEC it would. Along the way, Speakeasy seems to have lost the will or motivation to become a CLEC. But it left that door open by continuing its USF contributions...and as long as it keeps passing along the USF costs to the customers, it can justify imposing the "regulatory compliance fee"
If the regulatory compliance fee were to equal $1.00 per customer each month and Speakeasy had 100,000 customers...that is an extra $100,000 in revenue - mostly profit - each month.
Do you really think it costs Speakeasy $100,000 each month to collect the various taxes and fees and pass them along to the appropriate taxing bodies?
Of course, the numbers I have used are hypothetical...the real numbers are much HIGHER.
--
::: Do, or do not, there is no try:::»www.kapilville.com |
|
borborpa
Slipping Slowly Into Oblivion
Premium
join:2002-02-20
New Cumberland, PA
clubs:
·Speakeasy
1 edit | said by kapil:
ILECs don't charge Covad a USF fee. I also have it on good authority that Covad does NOT charge its resellers and partners USF fees on the circuits. Please see the following post, and the entire thread.
»These "FUSF" charges????
SE was haveing it passed onto them, and they chose to handle the billing themselves, and Covad then CEASED billing SE.
--
Dr. Bunsen Honeydew and Beaker in 2008!!! [AIM - BoyBandsMakeUGay] |
|
