nanog mailing list archives
Re: FCC FUSF charges clarification
From: Robert L Mathews <lists () tigertech com>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 16:58:06 -0700
On 10/14/20 2:14 PM, Nuno Vieira via NANOG wrote:
Company Z charges company A on top of agreed services:
It may be just a coincidence, but I had the same problem with a company that begins with "Z" (and ends with "ayo"). The quote I got was for a certain exact dollar amount with some tiny boilerplate-looking text that says they may pass on any taxes. Since I've used several providers in the same buildings who have never mentioned any taxes, I ignored it. When the actual bill came, it was 8% higher due to absurd things like "property tax surcharge". This is simply a fee they charge to cover their own property taxes. The other extras were similar. These are not taxes they are required to charge you separately. They're just adding money to the bill to get you to contribute towards *their* taxes. I complained long and hard about it, but they didn't care. -- Robert L Mathews
Current thread:
- FCC FUSF charges clarification Nuno Vieira via NANOG (Oct 14)
- Re: FCC FUSF charges clarification Nuno Vieira via NANOG (Oct 14)
- Re: FCC FUSF charges clarification TJ Trout (Oct 14)
- Re: FCC FUSF charges clarification Sean Donelan (Oct 14)
- Re: FCC FUSF charges clarification William Herrin (Oct 14)
- Re: FCC FUSF charges clarification Robert L Mathews (Oct 14)
- Re: FCC FUSF charges clarification Nuno Vieira via NANOG (Oct 15)
- Re: FCC FUSF charges clarification Nuno Vieira via NANOG (Oct 14)