TELECOM Digest Fri, 25 Feb 2000 14:26:50 EST Volume 20 : Issue 3Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson
FCC Regulated Charges on Telephone Service (Monty Solomon) Book Review: "Sams Teach Yourself E-Travel Today", Orwoll (Rob Slade) Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees (Danny Burstein) Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees (Joseph Singer) 7D Dialing Across NPA Boundaries (Ed Ellers) Directory Number Fee (John Schmerold) TELECOM Archives Censored as "Pornography" (??) (Bennett Haselton) Tektronix/Microwave Logic ST-112 SONET Testset (Glenn Simpson)
TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.
TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copywrited. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occassional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author.
Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 765 Junction City, KS 66441-0765 Phone: 415-520-9905 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org
Subscribe/unsubscribe: subscriptions@telecom-digest.org
This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the second oldest e-zine/ mailing list on the internet in any category!
URL information: http://telecom-digest.org
Anonymous FTP: hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)
Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org
Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email.
* TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. *
In addition, a gift from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert has enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com
Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list.
All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization.
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2000 22:26:38 -0500 From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> Subject: FCC Regulated Charges on Telephone Service
http://www.state.ma.us/dor/rul_reg/directiv/2000/dir00_2.htm
Directive 00-2
FCC Regulated Charges on Telephone Service
Background: The Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 granted the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") authority to regulate pricing of telecommunications services. As the result of FCC regulations, some retail customers may see unfamiliar separately stated charges on their telephone bills. The Department has received a number of taxpayer inquiries concerning whether Massachusetts sales or use tax is properly due on these charges.
Issue: Are FCC regulated surcharges, which may be separately stated as a recurring monthly charge on a retail customer's telephone bill, subject to the Massachusetts sales and use tax on telecommunications services?
Directive: Generally, FCC regulated surcharges, which may be separately stated as a recurring monthly charge on a retail customer's telephone bill, are part of the sales price of telecommunications services subject to tax. The charges include, but are not limited to, local telephone number portability charges, universal service charges, federal subscriber line charges, and Presubscribed Interexchange Carrier Charges.
Discussion of Law: Massachusetts has imposed a sales and use tax on telecommuncations services since 1990. Taxable telecommunications services include "any transmission of messages or information by electronic or similar means, between or among points by wire, cable, fiberoptics, microwave, radio satellite or similar facilities but not including cable television." (1) G.L. c. 64H, 1 and G.L. c. 64I,1. Telephone services including separately stated charges for long distance telephone calls are subject to tax. See TIR 99-2 and 830 CMR 64H.1.6. Generally, tax is imposed on the retail sales price of taxable services, which includes the vendor's cost of materials, labor or services, interest charges, losses or other expenses. G.L. c. 64H, 1.
Following is a brief explanation of some charges or surcharges that may appear on a retail customer's telephone bill based on information from the F.C.C. The description of these charges on a customer's bill (or whether they are separately stated to the retail customer at all) may vary from one telecommunications vendor to another. These charges are not taxes; they are not remitted to any federal or state government agency. The charges represent part of the vendor's cost of doing business and are retained by the vendor. As part of the regulation of the pricing of telephone services, the FCC permits, but does not require, a telecommunications vendor to recover these costs from its retail customers through a separately stated charge appearing on the retail customer's telephone bill. These charges are part of the sales price of the telecommunications services subject to tax. See generally DD 86-1. These recurring charges are eligible for the thirty dollar per month residential exemption. 830 CMR 64H.1.6(5).
The Massachusetts Department of Revenue does not regulate the pricing of telephone services. The following information is provided for general reference purposes only:
Local Telephone Number Portability Charges - To increase competition in local telephone market service, Congress directed local telephone companies to offer "telephone number portability," which refers to the customer's ability to retain the same telephone number if the customer elects to change local carriers. In order to provide this capability, local companies had to invest in upgrades to their network. The FCC determined that local companies could (but were not required to) recover these costs through a small, fixed monthly charge assessed to customers. These charges began appearing in February, 1999 in areas where telephone number portability is available and may continue to appear for 5 years.
Universal Service Charges (2) - Generally, the FCC's Universal Service support mechanisms ensure that affordable access to telecommunications services is available to low income telephone customers, telephone customers who live in areas where the costs of providing telephone service is high, schools and libraries, and rural health care providers. This federally mandated support is funded by compulsory contributions from all interstate telecommunications carriers, including long distance companies, local telephone companies, wireless telephone companies, paging companies, and payphone providers. The amount of the contribution is less than 4 percent of their billings for the previous year, adjusted quarterly based on projected Universal Service demands. The FCC does not require that companies contributing to Universal Service recover these costs directly from their customers, however they are permitted to do so through a separately stated monthly charge that may be a percentage of the customer's bill or a flat amount.
Federal Subscriber Line Charges - Local telephone companies recover some of the costs of the actual lines connecting homes and businesses through a monthly charge appearing on the customer's telephone bill. This charge is usually called the "subscriber line charge," but also may be referred to as the "federal subscriber line charge" because it is regulated and capped by the FCC. Currently, the charge is capped at $3.50 a month for a primary residential line. The charge for additional residential lines at the same service address and business lines is permitted to be higher.
Presubscribed Interexchange Carrier Charges ("PICC") - A charge that long distance companies pay to local telephone companies to help them recover the costs of providing the telephone wires, underground conduit, telephone poles, and other facilities that link each telephone customer to the telephone network. A long distance company pays this charge for each residential and business telephone line presubscribed to that long distance company. There is no tax due on PICC charges paid from one telecommunications vendor to another. However, if a retail consumer or business has not selected a long distance company, the local telephone company may bill the consumer or business for the Presubscribed Interexchange Carrier Charge. If the PICC charge is billed to the retail customer, it is subject to sales tax.
More detailed information on federal regulation of the pricing of telecommunications services is available from the Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th St., SW, Washington, D.C. 20554 (toll free number: 888-225-5322) and the FCC website at : http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/factsheets. Additional information regarding the pricing of telephone services is also available from the Consumer Division of the Massachusetts Department of Telecommunications and Energy (toll free number 800-392-6066), One South Station, Boston, MA 02110 and the DTE website at www.magnet.state.ma.us.
Bernard F. Crowley, Jr. Senior Deputy Commissioner of Revenue
January 28, 2000 DD 00-2
Footnotes: 1. A temporary amendment to the definition of taxable telecommunications services which excluded "internet access services, electronic mail services, electronic bulletin board services, web hosting services or similar on-line computer services" expired on July 1, 1999. However, subsequent federal legislation generally created a moratorium on the imposition of new taxes on Internet access charges and electronic commerce until October, 2001. See TIR 99-2 for more details concerning the federal legislation. Despite the expiration of the Massachusetts statutory exclusion for Internet-related services, taxpayers may continue to rely on the lists of taxable and non-taxable services in TIR 99-2 until the expiration of the federal moratorium (and any extensions) or further notice from the Department. (return to text)
2. AT&T currently uses the label "National Access Contribution" when they show the combined charges for Universal Service and the Carrier Access Line Charge (PICC). (return to text)
From: Rob Slade <rslade@sprint.ca> Organization: Vancouver Institute for Research into User Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 08:09:49 -0800 Subject: Book Review: "Sams Teach Yourself E-Travel Today", Mark Orwoll Reply-To: rslade@sprint.ca
BKETRAVL.RVW 20000119
"Sams Teach Yourself E-Travel Today", Mark Orwoll, 2000, 0-672-31822-9, U$17.99/C$26.95/UK#12.99 %A Mark Orwoll askmark@amexpub.com %C 201 W. 103rd Street, Indianapolis, IN 46290 %D 2000 %G 0-672-31822-9 %I Macmillan Computer Publishing (MCP) %O U$17.99/C$26.95/UK#12.99 800-858-7674 317-581-3743 info@mcp.com %P 302 p. %T "Sams Teach Yourself E-Travel Today"
This guide would appear to be aimed primarily at those who are completely comfortable with the Internet, but are totally new to travel planning. There isn't much material on the net and its tools, but more pointers of the "oh yes, you will want to find out this type of information" type.
Part one starts out with basic facts. Chapter one is a sampling of travel tools on Web sites, starting out with the suggestion that you learn how to use a search engine. (On your own.) How to bookmark Web sites is explained in chapter two. That might be just a tad patronizing, but chapter three's points on how to evaluate the reliability of a Web site are actually very good. Chapter four introduces the major tour guide sites. Web sites for foreign newspapers are mentioned as a good source of pre-travel info in chapter five, but Orwoll doesn't mention the fact that a very large number of foreign radio stations now also broadcast over the net. Government tourism sites are discussed in chapter six.
Part two outlines the process of planning a vacation. Chapter seven gives you a quiz to determine what kind of traveller you are, although this doesn't seem to have an awful lot of relevance to the rest of the book. Chapter eight is a bit odd, and it tersely reprises a look at a couple of search engines. Unusual sources of information, such as the US State Department, the CIA World Factbook, and personal travel sites, are suggested in chapter nine. The sites in chapter ten seem to have been chosen almost randomly. There is limited information on weather and events in chapter eleven.
Part three looks at booking travel online, with respective chapters discussing online travel agents, travel planning tools, hotels, airfare (with very good tips), rail, car rentals, and sea transport.
Part four deals with other travel preparations. Chapter nineteen covers taking your laptop along, but doesn't mention such areas as taking along proof of purchase, electrical adapters, and phone systems and adapters (for modems). There are sites you can use to obtain information about required documents, discussed in chapter twenty. Digital cameras are recommended in chapter twenty one. Chapter twenty two closes with miscellaneous travel tips.
There is a lot of joking around in the writing, to very little purpose. The humour does not really support the material under discussion, and even detracts a bit at times. The Internet content is fairly limited, and I found it a bit surprising how few Web sites were included, among the thousands that are out there. On the other hand, Orwoll does seem to go for quality.
For those new to travel planning, this book should provide some valuable and useful suggestions. But you'll have to do a lot of work yourself.
copyright Robert M. Slade, 2000 BKETRAVL.RVW 20000119
====================== (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer) rslade@vcn.bc.ca rslade@sprint.ca slade@victoria.tc.ca p1@canada.com Nunc Tutus Exitus Computarus http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev or http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~rslade
From: dannyb@panix.com (Danny Burstein) Subject: Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees Date: 24 Feb 2000 16:42:11 -0500 Organization: "mostly unorganized"
In <telecom20.2.3@telecom-digest.org> Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> writes:
> By SETH SCHIESEL
> A debate is raging at the Federal Communications Commission about whether
> cellular telephone customers must continue to pay to receive calls as
> well as to make them.
> http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/yr/mo/biztech/articles/22phon.html
There is NO federal nor any other legal requirement that the recipient pay for the call. This is a business decision made by the cellular carrier (and, in corresponding turn, endorsed by the subscriber). These companies could, if they wished, end incoming charges tomorrow and simply try to live off the revenue stream from the monthly service fee and outgoing call charges. Gee. just like landline telcos.
Clearly the cellular companies want to make money (and there's nothing wrong with that). But what's not so clearly obvious is that they've been running into customer opposition to the incoming airtime charges and are looking for other ways to continue the money stream. Many of them prefer the "caller pays" method since that way they don't have to listen to the hoofbeats of their customers leaving them for less expensive competitors.
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
From: Joseph Singer <dov@mail.oz.net> Subject: Re: F.C.C. Debates Changes to Cell Phone Fees Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2000 15:01:28 -0800 Organization: fuzz'n such Reply-To: dov@mail.oz.net
On Mon, 21 Feb 2000 22:38:29 -0500, Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> wrote:
> By SETH SCHIESEL
> A debate is raging at the Federal Communications Commission about whether
> cellular telephone customers must continue to pay to receive calls as
> well as to make them.
> http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/yr/mo/biztech/articles/22phon.html
In part from the article: "Regarding consumers, the most important issue is to make sure that people who dial a wireless subscriber who uses a caller-pays plan are made aware that they will be charged, and how much."
I see this as a major problem in the North American numbering plan. In the US the FCC took great pains to *not* have a separate numbering space for cell providers in the name of "fairness." If they had allowed separate number space for mobile/cell service it would be a lot easier to implement caller pays. As is the caller pays scheme here is just a crap shoot. You're not sure whether a number might or might not be a motile/cell number. People in most of the US are too used to being able to call anyone on what looks like a "local" number and don't expect to pay anything or at least not pay additional charges. Many areas even have "toll alert" to make a subscriber aware that they must dial a 1 and area code before a call because it is a premium rate call. This is not the case everywhere, but in the majority of locations in the US that's the case.
"The wireless carriers appear to be in favor of less notification rather than more. "
Of course! If they can put one over on people of course they're not going to announce that there would be a premium charge for the call!
"In Europe, where the caller-pays system is generally the rule, wireless phone numbers usually include one digit more than do traditional lines. So while European callers do not hear a notification message, the additional digit indicates that additional fees may apply"
Many countries have a separate "area code" for mobile/cell phones. That's not the case in the US.
Joseph Singer Seattle, Washington USA
From: Ed Ellers <ed_ellers@msn.com> Subject: 7D Dialing Across NPA Boundaries Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2000 23:06:33 -0500
Linc Madison (LincMad001@telecom-digest.zzn.com) wrote:
"That feature still exists in many places, but fewer and fewer with each passing year. The last major city with such an arrangement was Kansas City, which is currently phasing out 7D FNPA local calling due to the shortage of prefixes."
Um, I would suggest that Louisville, Kentucky is also a major city! We still have 7D dialing between parts of the 502 and 812 NPAs, and since the state (wisely IMHO) changed the 270 addition from an overlay to a split I expect we'll have it for some time to come. (The state decision came during the permissive 10D dialing period, and -- guess what? -- permissive 10D hasn't been turned off. Not that it does any harm, of course.)
From: John Schmerold <john@katy.com> Subject: Directory Number Fee Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 00:01:58 -0600
In Missouri, there is no fee for Directory numbers. If you have a business with 6 lines, you get 6 numbers, despite the fact that you only need one number. Indeed, the business is better off without 6 numbers due to prevelance of caller-id. So, why not create a revenue neutral tarrif on directory numbers. If a customer wants multiple numbers, that is fine, but there will be a monthly $3 per line charge.
Anyone know if this has been tried? Why not?
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 02:29:11 -0800 From: Bennett Haselton <bennett@peacefire.org> Subject: TELECOM Archives Censored as "Pornography" (??)
Hi Patrick,
I found the URL http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/ blocked as "pornography" by an Internet blocking program used to censor Internet access in schools. Obviously the people who added that site to the list didn't bother to check what it was -- and you even have an "All ages" label from SafeSurf!... (The RSAC label does give it a "1" for language, but hardly enough to make it illegal for minors and worth censoring from high schools.)
Just thought you might like to know :) I'm doing research on this program to see how accurately it blocks sites in the .edu domain. So far it looks like over half the sites it blocks in the .edu domain are errors by the program.
There's an article at: http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=00/02/21/1745232 about a project I did, analyzing the error rate of another blocking program called X-Stop. It turned out to have an error rate of 68% for blocking sites in the ".edu" domain. Normally the list of sites blocked by these programs is encrypted, but I also had to write a program that decrypted the list and printed the list of blocked sites.
-Bennett
bennett@peacefire.org http://www.peacefire.org (425) 649 9024
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Whatever you can do to deal with this will be appreciated. I am still a bit wobbly and not in a mood to start a fight with anyone right now. Let me know whatever results you have. Thanks. PAT]
From: Glenn Simpson <gsimpson@nortelnetworks.com> Subject: Tektronix/Microwave Logic ST-112 SONET Testset Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2000 13:54:43 -0500 Organization: Nortel Networks
Could somebody quickly tell me, Does the Tektronix/Microwave Logic ST-112 SONET testset have STS-3 ECL NRZ clock and data input/output ports (50 Ohm BNC)? From what I can tell there are STS-1 outputs on the front faceplate. Are there additional ports on the back?
Glen Simpson
End of TELECOM Digest V20 #3