New Bill Tackles 'UnFees' As well as contract extensions and early termination fees... A new bill being proposed in Congress would prevent wireless phone providers from listing cost-of-doing-business fees as taxes on customer phone bills, says Reuters. The bill would also require that cell phone providers no longer extend customer contracts every time they make changes to their plan. Apparently, Verizon and AT&T were well clued into the fact that this bill was coming, and have already changed the latter practice in the last month (Verizon as of October 1 and AT&T as of November 1). The bill would also require that early termination fees be prorated. Of course, it's tough to think the bill will make it past Verizon and AT&T's lobbying muscle.
|
  dobby10Premium
join:2000-12-13
Denville, NJ | Finally! I've fought with Cingular/ATT since some of them first showed up and I even wrote to the FCC regarding it. The cost of doing business should be built into their price. Not added on later! | |
|  |  pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | Re: Finally! said by dobby10:The cost of doing business should be built into their price. Not added on later! It doesn't even have to go that far. All that any such bill needs to mandate is that the advertised price is the price that you actually pay. Companies could be free to break down the fees out of those prices any way they choose, but the final price should have to match the advertised price.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. | |
| | | gateguyPremium
join:2001-02-12
Reisterstown, MD Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| Re: Finally! said by pnh102:It doesn't even have to go that far. All that any such bill needs to mandate is that the advertised price is the price that you actually pay. Companies could be free to break down the fees out of those prices any way they choose, but the final price should have to match the advertised price. I agree that the advertised price should include ALL of the 'unfees'.
But when was the last time you have seen something advertised that included the sales taxes?
Most things, that I have seen advertised, do not include taxes.
--
Without data, it is just an opinion | |
| | | | pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | Re: Finally! said by gateguy:But when was the last time you have seen something advertised that included the sales taxes? True. I can accept that sales taxes are not included in the price.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. | |
| | | |  MysticGogetaThe Robot DevilPremium
join:2005-03-14
League City, TX
1 edit | Gas does why not every thing? I sure would be pissed after pumping out 30 dollars for it to go up 3-4 dollars from tax. Atleast you know what your getting into early. | |
| | | | | | | Re: Finally! said by MysticGogeta:Gas does why not every thing? I sure would be pissed after pumping out 30 dollars for it to go up 3-4 dollars from tax. Atleast you know what your getting into early. Simple answer... gas stations don't normally advertise their prices beyond the sign at the actual station. Each state has slightly different tax rates so for a nation-wide provider to have to create pricing brochures, commercials, etc, etc, etc, for every single state is just going to cost them, or really, the consumer, more money.
There are certainly plenty of other consumer goods that are advertised with prices that don't include taxes; in many cases, the companies would have to create County/City specific commercials, etc since taxes can vary county by county, city by city. Imagine the nightmare of keeping all that straight. I can just imagine the irrate customer who would claim "I saw your ad, it said $14.37, but you're charging me $14.74, I'm suing for false advertising!!!!" | |
|
| | | | | A local pizza place near where I work advertises all of their prices including tax. It makes it so much easier to figure out how much your order will be when you don't need to multiply by 8.25%. | |
|
| KearnstdElf WizardPremium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | out the door prices should definitely be listed outright on the price plan charts from the wireless or any service provider for that matter.
ETFs should also only be allowed on first run contracts, the way i have always seen them is ETFs are how the company covers the cost of that deeply discounted or free phone you got for signing up. so when you renew the contract the ETF has no real purpose.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
| | | | | Re: Finally! said by Kearnstd:ETFs should also only be allowed on first run contracts, the way i have always seen them is ETFs are how the company covers the cost of that deeply discounted or free phone you got for signing up. so when you renew the contract the ETF has no real purpose. So the carrier then eats the cost of the new deeply discounted phone that intices you to renew for another 12-24 months should you decied to leave 45 days later? | |
|
 rudnickePremium
join:2004-10-23
Rantoul, IL
kudos:3 | Great It would be nice if something like this passed. | |
| | | | Pass or Fail It's not whether the bill will pass or fail, it's the fact that the telcos have now been put on notice since Congress is aware of what the wireless companies are doing. I too went through the issue with having my contract changed and extended when I opted for the international plan (temporarily) when I went to Mexico. | |
|
 Masque
join:2001-12-04
Auburn, MI | Also...... They need to do the same for cable and telco landline customers. | |
| |  MrMoodyFree range slavePremium
join:2002-09-03
Smithfield, NC | Re: Also...... Just what I was going to say, although cable doesn't generally do it to nearly the same extent.
Really it should just be illegal to claim or imply any charge is tax when it isn't OR add anything but tax after quoted price, regardless of the type of business. It's dishonest and misleading.
--
"It is a future in which globalization really does work ... and everybody winds up getting to be part of the third world." - William Gibson | |
| | |
1 edit | Re: Also...... Exactly what Viatalk tried doing a couple days ago. When they started billing everyone, that had prepaid before the laws went into effect, for USF and E911. Their CSR said it was federally mandated. I said repeatedly that it was not federally mandated to pass the fee on to customers, but he kept insisting that federally mandated, as if it were a tax.
And I'd go further and say that VOIP should be held to the same standards as wireless as well. | |
| | |  morboComplete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000 | agreed. this should apply to all bills, not just wireless. no surcharges, etc. anything that is not included in the service cost must be legally required that the consumer pay. not that someone (the corp) pay.
SERVICE COST: $40
-FEDERAL TAX: $3
-STATE TAX: $2
-LOCAL TAX: $1
TOTAL: $46 | |
| | | hurfyPremium
join:2002-08-06
Spokane, WA Reviews:
 ·Cutting Edge Com..
| Well, in at least one case here (B&O taxes) it IS illegal or not allowed as they say. That does NOT stop at&t from doing it on long distance anyway. That will be a nice class action in WA one of these days. Qwest stopped when the auto dealers got in trouble for it. at&t says the line that reads B&O tax is really something else...i guess lying about what they bill you for is better...
Auto dealers can't charge you, stores can't charge you, we can't charge you...i bet at&t can get around it tho :/ | |
|
|  KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
1 edit | I'd go a step further. I'd add all contracts for good measure. Call it the "Truth-in-Spending" Act if you will 
You can list a tax as a tax... but everything else is your normal business expenses, stop nickel-and-diming consumers and letting them erroneously believe that it's the Government forcing extra taxes upon them when it's really hidden price increases.
BTW--- I'm not naive to think this would lead to price decrease. Companies involved would merely hike the base rate once this passes. ---BUT--- It's still a boon for consumers. because it would make COMPARISIONS to the Competition's offer much easier to decipher, thus fostering informed consumer choices and more competition.
Two Thumbs Up! From me.... | |
| | KearnstdElf WizardPremium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | id rather see a hike in base price then having their extra profits hidden in "unFees" that arent listed in their ads. though i think wireless ads should say true cost with the fees/taxes. atleast print ads which can be regionalised to account for state taxes.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
| | | cghh
join:2001-01-15
Milpitas, CA | Re: Also...... said by Kearnstd: though i think wireless ads should say true cost with the fees/taxes. atleast print ads which can be regionalised to account for state taxes. I don't know how it is in other states, but sales taxes in California can vary by what city you are in, and certainly vary by the county you are in, so it would be utterly impractical to include sales tax in print ads. For example, in the San Francisco Bay area, there are at least six counties (depending on how far out you go), all with different sales tax rates. The Los Angeles area is similar. The major newspapers in these areas serve the entire area. | |
| | | | hurfyPremium
join:2002-08-06
Spokane, WA Reviews:
·Cutting Edge Com..
| Re: Also...... yup, sales tax is a seperate line. Can't get around that one 
Washington tries to make sure CA has nothing on them. 326 tax zones or some crazy number in the 300's
And is there REALLY sales tax on federal tax or utility tax? Is that how you figure out which taxes are real or not perhaps? Not that a telcom has actually been able to tell me which items they are charging sales tax on.
Try asking them which items are taxed and then calculate how much they charged tax on...fun stuff to play stump the CSR with. | |
| | | | OCPPremium
join:2004-10-11
USA | A simple solution is to print the range with the added line "depending on local taxes".
Example:
$20.92-21.32/month depending on local taxes. | |
|
| | Break out the "fee" spray! This should include utilities also. They seem to jump on the "tax/fee" too. I also love how they charge to make a payment on their websites. Fortunately they can teach CSR's to say it's the government required tax...riiight. Oh well my penny's worth.
--
Insulin is NOT a cure... | |
|  not
@comcast.net | Add this to the bill They need to add the restriction of carriers from disabling native features of cell phones for their own personal gain. We all know VZW is notorious for such practices. | |
| FisamoPremium
join:2004-02-20
Apex, NC | Why limit to telecom/services? Buy a new car recently? Any kind of "doc" fee should be included in the price of the car... | |
| | | I don't mind a breakout in my bill.... If they want to provide a breakout in my bill of where my money is going to, that's fine so long as they follow 2 simple rules:
1 - Don't list anything as a tax or government mandated fee unless it's an actual tax/fee that the government is *requiring* them to impose on me. No, taxes/fees that they pay don't count as taxes/fees on my bill. That's just their cost of doing business.
2 - When the prices for services are advertised, list the final price. Don't advertise that your service is $20 when you really add $40 in fees and "taxes." (What my Verizon landline did before I got rid of it.) Consumers should have clear pricing information when making a decision as to the service to choose.
As other posters said, I'd like to see this expanded to include VoIP, cable digital phone, landline phone, and more. For now, Wireless phone is a good start, though. | |
| | Reviews:
 ·net2phone
| Re: I don't mind a breakout in my bill.... I agree the bill's application should be expanded.
The base cost of my local POTS landline is $16.42 before other junk charges. The final amount due is over $42. That's with no long distance charges, no call waiting, etc. Much of the added $26 is FUD that is not remitted to any government agency or legitimate tax authority. | |
|
 av8r7I'd Rather Be FlyingPremium
join:2002-06-14
Boca Raton, FL
1 edit | Taxes vs Fees I can't see any practical method of putting taxes into an advertised 'bottom line' price. There are just too many variations - what city you are in, what county, etc.
Fees are another matter - cost recovery, regulatory maintenance, etc. These go into the same category as the auto shop that charges for rags and paper floor covers. This is a cost of business expense.
I don't charge my customers for my expense to turn on the lights, have the carpet vacuumed, or the water cooler filled. These are my costs of business. They are built into the price I charge my customer. If I was required to collect sales tax (I'm not), that would be a line item on the invoice.
--
If I am not for myself, Who will be for me? If I am only for myself, What am I? If not now, When? -- Hillel | |
| | | airlines, too Airline tickets should be included as well with their fuel surcharges, airport fess and such. | |
| | | Re: New Bill Tackles 'UnFees' Honestly, it doesn't even matter if this bill does pass. The companies would just raise the price of their plans, maintenance plans, phones, etc. until they recouped the costs. | |
|  BenPremium
join:2007-06-17
Glen Carbon, IL | Not Every Company Goes Overboard With "UnFees" Phone - When I called SBC to get my home phone, I was told that it would cost about $62 after taxes. They weren't too far off, since it costs a little under $65. This includes the unlimited domestic long distance. This, combined with no per-call charges, means my bill stays the same regardless of how many calls I make. There are, however, per-minute charges if I call a different country. So, only international phone calls will make my bill vary.
Cable Internet - When I called up Charter, I was told that it would cost $66.99. And, it costs $66.99, nothing extra. My bill looks like this: $61.99 for the Internet, and $5.00 Static IP option. Despite others' negative opinions of Charter, my experience hasn't been too bad. They quoted the correct prices, no surprises. Also, while cable Internet in general is sketchy, it seems to be on par with other cable providers. Actually better, since the static IP means no DHCP issues. There was a little difficulty in getting it started, but it wasn't a big deal. I just wish I had other choices (there's no DSL here).
I also once used Insight in the past, when I used to live in that area. With them, I was told the price would be X amount, and the price I actually paid was X amount.
Cell Phone - Now this is bad. At least with Verizon, they aren't very good about this. To quote the prices on their webpage, I should pay $94.97. That's for the 700 minute family plan with four lines, and $5/mo. insurance for one device. There aren't any extra features that cost more money. I have comprehensive text-message block on all lines, but that costs nothing. However, the bill is closer to $135/mo., a cost difference of $40!
So to recap, SBC (AT&T), Charter, and Insight seem fine so far, by quoting me prices that are in line with what I actually pay. Verizon Wireless is awful, since they won't tell you what the extra fees are.
I don't know about the other cable companies or mobile phone companies. I also don't know about Verizon, since when I lived in a Verizon area the phone line was in someone else's name. | |
|
| |
|
|
