Updated May 2, 2018
Trends in wireline and mobile services strongly suggest a refresh to the FCC Forms 499-A/Q is warranted. A shift to fewer revenue buckets (reporting categories and lines) consistent with the major services currently being offered to customers could reduce the time for services providers to prepare Forms 499-A, assist USAC staff in reviewing the forms, and help streamline USAC audits. Other incremental steps are also suggested. For purposes of brevity, this entry focuses on the Form 499-A.
Block 3: Carrier’s Carrier Revenue Information is a prime example of outdated and unnecessary revenue reporting obligations. Several lines under Fixed Local Service could be aggregated or deleted; Line 308 (USF support revenues) should be a standalone category. Toll services and all other wireline voice services should be consolidated on one line—Wholesale Wireline Voice Services, and all mobile voice services could be consolidated on one line (the toll distinction is irrelevant). All wholesale private line service revenues should be reported on one line with special access service revenues expressly included or reported on a separate line as special access is the principal wholesale data service.
Consumers increasingly purchase service in bundles:
Wireless bundles: Voice, text and data (Internet access service); occasionally, voice-only
Wireline bundles: Voice, data and video: data and video; or increasingly data-only
Voice services are assessable services. High speed Internet access and multi-channel video programming services are not. Interconnected VoIP is rapidly displacing circuit switched wireline voice services. Switched access service revenues are approaching inconsequential status.
The all-distance plans for wireline voice services may encompass unlimited domestic calls and an unlimited or an allotment of international minutes to select countries with the overage billed on a per minute basis; voice calling to other counties may be billed on a usage-basis. All-distance voice plans are even more common for mobile services. International calling card revenues remain cognizable. Payphone services revenues are not.
The utility of separate USF reporting categories for wireline voice services, depending on how they are priced, is not apparent. The same is true for mobile voice service revenues: Despite a bewildering array of pricing plans, distinguishing between prepaid and postpaid voice revenues is irrelevant for determining USF assessable revenues. The relevant USF contribution considerations for all mobile voice services are (1) apportioning revenues between assessable voice services from the revenues of bundled non-assessable services and products, and (2) determining the jurisdictional mix of voice services.
Enterprise customers often obtain a broader mix of wireline services:
Voice services (local, outbound and inbound (increasingly interconnected VoIP)) with multiple pricing options
Special access services
Private line services
Other non-Internet data services, such as MPLS-based services
High speed Internet access services
Enterprise customers, including the Federal government and many state governments, will have significant international revenues.
As with the wholesale service reporting under Block 3, all wireline retail voice services revenue reporting could be simplified. All enterprise, small business and residential wireline voice service revenues can be reported on one line, the principal USF consideration is assignment to the correct jurisdiction (intrastate, interstate, international or foreign). Again, mobile voice revenues should be reported separately with determining the correct jurisdiction being the principal USF contribution consideration.
Special access services should be reported separately from private line service, consistent with industry practice of offering and charging for these services separately. Private line service should be reported on one line as the distinction between “local’ and “toll” private line services is both confusing and irrelevant. The critical issue for private line and special access services is determining the correct jurisdiction.
For physically intrastate private lines and special access services (almost all special access services have endpoints within a single state), services providers must follow the 10% de minimis rule to determine the jurisdictional nature of these revenues associated with these services. The Bureau addressed several longstanding requests for review of USAC determinations involving the 10% de minimis rule in its 30 March 2017 Memorandum and Opinion and Order, but the decision is subject to Commission review that remains pending for over a year.
Another addressable issue raised in the 2012 USF Contribution Reform Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is the disparity between the “safe harbors” for interstate/international mobile service (37.1%) and interstate/international VoIP service (64.9%) on the one hand, and the noticeably lower assessable percentages reported for these services (based on actual traffic or traffic studies) on the other.
The Commission or the Wireline Competition Bureau could take the pragmatic step of issuing a Public Notice to refresh the record to align the safe harbors with services providers’ reported data. This could ease reporting burdens for filers and reduce administrative burdens on USAC staff. The safe harbors could be updated every three years to reflect shifts in usage, if any.