|
Great!I'll get refunded the tax that they owe me and they'll raise their "fees" to cover the costs of having to track this information down. | |
|
| |
Great Indeed
Anon
2011-Jun-9 10:49 am
Re: Great!Whatever happened to the "cost of doing business"... strike that, it doesn't exist.
We just have to wait for the rest of the competition to be in-place after the merger for the prices to get better, right? | |
|
| | firephotoTruth and reality matters Premium Member join:2003-03-18 Brewster, WA |
Re: Great!said by Great Indeed :Whatever happened to the "cost of doing business"... strike that, it doesn't exist.
We just have to wait for the rest of the competition to be in-place after the merger for the prices to get better, right? Investors. The cost of doing business is paying investors and skimming as much money from all parts of the business to make sure investors make their money first. Great product? Bad product? No product? it doesn't matter, you just sprinkle magic fairy dust in the wind and the press picks it up and your value goes up (or down) and the investors make money or break even (the real ones rarely actually lose money). Investors. | |
|
| | DrZEUS join:2004-01-13 Mississauga, ON |
to Great Indeed
I highly doubt any company will consider losing 1 Billion dollars as ther cost of doing business....they will find a way to recoup that by either raising prices/fees, or some other scam. | |
|
| |
to gigahurtz
Not just the fees for the tracking of the information. But a rate increase to cover the cost of the lawsuit and the fine they have to pay. | |
|
|
DSLXshould be next. They do the same thing on DSL- when it is NOT a taxed service. | |
|
NetFixerFrom My Cold Dead Hands Premium Member join:2004-06-24 The Boro Netgear CM500 Pace 5268AC TRENDnet TEW-829DRU
|
NetFixer
Premium Member
2011-Jun-9 12:15 pm
Nothing newThis is not new. Several years ago they got caught doing the same thing with DSL service. At that time as I recall, AT&T had to repay the overcharged customers themselves, and there actually was a small refund to anyone who filled out an application to receive it (payment was not automatic, and if you did not know that you had to fill out an application form to get the refund, too bad).
This time it appears that it is actually the state and local governments who will be required to repay the illegal taxes that were collected, and AT&T is just going to be the bill collector. Good luck with AT&T or anybody getting money back from budget strained state or local governments. AT&T will now have the expense of trying to collect that money (and will certainly pass that expense on to their customers), but I think it is unlikely that even a small percentage of the bogus tax money will actually be recovered and redistributed. | |
|
| SnowyLock him up!!! Premium Member join:2003-04-05 Kailua, HI |
Snowy
Premium Member
2011-Jun-10 1:12 am
Re: Nothing newsaid by NetFixer:This time it appears that it is actually the state and local governments who will be required to repay the illegal taxes that were collected, and AT&T is just going to be the bill collector. Good luck with AT&T or anybody getting money back from budget strained state or local governments. You'd think offsets would be the easiest way of dealing with that but considering that would efficient, it won't happen that way. | |
|
spewakR.I.P Dadkins Premium Member join:2001-08-07 Elk Grove, CA |
spewak
Premium Member
2011-Jun-9 1:17 pm
Take it ATTDon't just look at it, EAT IT ATT! | |
|
MrHappy316Wish I had my tank Premium Member join:2003-01-02 Columbia, SC |
911 FeeNow they can work on the bs 911 fee that is collected on data card plans. Since I cannot make a phone call on my data card I cannot see how this fee is even legal. It's akin to charging a dry loop DSL customer the fee. | |
|
| |
Re: 911 Feebecause your data card is actually issued a phone number in the system to keep track of it. That's why the 911 charge. as far as the dry loop fee- lets talk about DSLX and their tax on DSL customers. almost $3 per customer per month. Talk about pure profit. | |
|
| | |
Re: 911 Feesaid by hottboiinnc4:because your data card is actually issued a phone number in the system to keep track of it. That's why the 911 charge. Curious that Verizon Wireless does not charge any of this on their data cards. Under additional charges, I only have a $0.06 "Administrative" Fee on my data card. No taxes or anything else. | |
|
| dvd536as Mr. Pink as they come Premium Member join:2001-04-27 Phoenix, AZ |
to MrHappy316
said by MrHappy316:Now they can work on the bs 911 fee that is collected on data card plans. Since I cannot make a phone call on my data card I cannot see how this fee is even legal. It's akin to charging a dry loop DSL customer the fee. voip, magicjack | |
|
Cheese Premium Member join:2003-10-26 Naples, FL |
Cheese
Premium Member
2011-Jun-9 2:30 pm
Speaking of ATTI saw a commercial the other night, saying they were teaming up with T-Mobile, isn't it a bit premature to be creating these commercials? I supposed ATT thinks this will just be approved with no thought about it? I mean seriously? | |
|
| ModusI hate smartassery on forums Premium Member join:2005-05-02 us |
Modus
Premium Member
2011-Jun-9 2:46 pm
Re: Speaking of ATTSo you think it wont? Really think about it they ate up all the other companies.... | |
|
| | Cheese Premium Member join:2003-10-26 Naples, FL |
Cheese
Premium Member
2011-Jun-9 2:48 pm
Re: Speaking of ATTAt this point, I can't say for sure, but I still think it's premature to start running commercials about it... | |
|
| | | ModusI hate smartassery on forums Premium Member join:2005-05-02 us |
Modus
Premium Member
2011-Jun-9 2:49 pm
Re: Speaking of ATTi agree but that shows you they know what most dont and dont want to believe | |
|
| bobjohnson Premium Member join:2007-02-03 Spartanburg, SC |
to Cheese
said by Cheese:I saw a commercial the other night, saying they were teaming up with T-Mobile, isn't it a bit premature to be creating these commercials? I supposed ATT thinks this will just be approved with no thought about it? I mean seriously? The commercial says att is planning to team up with tmo to bring you a better network etc not that they are. | |
|
|
ZeddicusToo
Anon
2011-Jun-9 2:55 pm
Barring class action in fine printis also illegal. | |
|
| icp1 Premium Member join:2000-10-13 Saint Louis, MO |
icp1
Premium Member
2011-Jun-9 4:35 pm
Re: Barring class action in fine printsaid by ZeddicusToo :is also illegal. not according to the supreme court, didnt you read? | |
|
| | |
ZeddicusToo
Anon
2011-Jun-9 7:43 pm
Re: Barring class action in fine printNo, not for some months now. Well, I knew Congress was bought and paid for, but I didn't know SCOTUS was, too. I guess the justices don't even trust judges now either (not that I can blame them for that). | |
|
SuntopWolfrider Elf Premium Member join:2000-03-23 Fairfield, MT ·3Rivers Communic.. ·T-Mobile Netgear R6400 Netgear WNR1000 Netgear WNDR3400
|
Suntop
Premium Member
2011-Jun-9 3:45 pm
Is Ma Bell (Or Ma Cell) coming back?It may be illegal, but they do it every time. AT&T been doing this for years and they are trying to create "MA BELL" with cell company buying they been doing with the ill gotten taxes. We (the consumer) will never see a dime and if we do others will have to pay it back. It is not good business to steal tax money. The thing is, like banks, AT&T is "to big to fail" with T-Mobile there will be the big 3 Verizon, Sprint, and AT&T. As AT&T recently acquired Alltel that leaves Sprint, and Verizon as major networks. Now what will everyone do when MA BELL takes over the Cellphones (like they did with the telephone untill the mid 80s). And with the recent Supreme Court ruling, they will continue to bleed the consumers dry until they cannot pay then they can proceed to screw up your credit. Oh and good luck on getting it off... they are fast to put it on but slow to remove it. Once AT&T buys my cell company I will in turn switch. | |
|
|
Missing the finer point peopleAT&T, is claiming, believe them or not, that they passed the collected taxes on to various state and local entities. They didn't keep the money, as no company would. They are going to have to get the money back from these governments, and then distribute it. Other than the administrative costs, this costs AT&T nothing. The states/cities/counties are going to have to fork over the billion. | |
|
| morboComplete Your Transaction join:2002-01-22 00000 |
morbo
Member
2011-Jun-9 5:57 pm
Re: Missing the finer point peoplesaid by Nailgunner:The states/cities/counties are going to have to fork over the billion. Provided AT&T shows documentation of what was collected and what was sent to states/cities/counties. That would mean opening their books. | |
|
| | |
Re: Missing the finer point peoplesaid by morbo:said by Nailgunner:The states/cities/counties are going to have to fork over the billion. Provided AT&T shows documentation of what was collected and what was sent to states/cities/counties. That would mean opening their books. Amended returns are filed all the time by corporations. They would have to provide documentation to the states/cities/counties, sure, but those books are already open to them for audits anyway. Nothing new there. And if some attorney has already added it all up, month by month, taxing authority by taxing authority, the documentation part has pretty much already been done for them. File the amended return, attach the appropriate part of the court order applicable to them and they would be obligated to refund the money. They could have an issue with various statute of limitations on filing amended returns depending on how far back this issue goes. And I certainly wouldn't want to be the poor sap in the tax department at AT&T who has this dumped on his desk in the morning. | |
|
|
|