April 1 USF Form Released: MPLS, Conferencing Among the Changes

On February 25, the FCC released the 2009 Form 499-A and instructions.  All telecommunications carriers are required to report their 2008 revenues on this form to calculate universal service and other regulatory fund contribution obligations. As usual, the instructions contain a number of changes in the treatment of revenues for USF purposes, which are highlighted in a Public Notice issued by the Wireline Competition Bureau. (These changes, however are of dubious legality because they are not adopted by the FCC under notice and comment rulemaking). Most notable are the following:

  • The instructions now explicitly instruct telecommunications carriers to report revenues from MPLS-based services as telecommunications services (i.e., subject to USF). The Bureau asserts that MPLS is merely “an updated technique” and a substitute for ATM transmission.
  • The instructions add conference service providers (CSPs) to the list of entities that must file. The Bureau initially referred to conferencing services as “telecommunications services,” but quickly revised its notice to state that conferencing is merely “telecommunications.”

Telecommunications carriers must file their 499-A by April 1, 2009. April 1 also is the last day for carriers to revise their 2008 499-A (reporting 2007 revenues).

FCC to CPNI Violators: You're fined!

On February 24, the FCC announced its first major CPNI enforcement actions since the new CPNI rules went into effect in April 2007. In an Omnibus CPNI NAL, the Enforcement Bureau proposed fines of $20,000 each against over 600 telecommunications carriers that failed to file their annual CPNI certifications on time. Knowledgeable staffers tell us that the 600 carriers include those who filed certifications significantly after the deadline as well as those who never filed the 2008 certification. The respondents have 30 days to respond to the NAL.

The Bureau also released over a dozen smaller NALs for various deficiencies in carrier certifications. The deficiencies were hyper-technical: failures to state whether actions were taken against pretexters or failures to state whether the carrier received any CPNI complaints.

Update: It appears that a number of late-filers received citations instead of fines. Some have all the luck.

Card Distributors Agree to Pay $2.25 Million as Part of FTC Crackdown on Fraud in the Prepaid Calling Card Industry

Major prepaid calling card distributors have agreed to pay $2.25 million as part of a settlement to resolve Federal Trade Commission charges that they made false claims to consumers about the number of minutes of talk time their prepaid calling cards would provide. The companies targeted their advertising at recent immigrants, who the FTC said depend on the cards to stay in touch with friends and family in other countries. The defendants’ cards, which retail for $2 to $10, are sold through small retailers such as grocery and convenience stores, gas stations, and newsstands in Florida, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island.

The settlement resolves charges brought by the FTC last May against Alternatel, Inc., Voice Prepaid, Inc., G.F.G. Enterprises, LLC, also d/b/a Mystic Prepaid, Voice Distributors, Inc., Telecom Express, Inc., and their individual principals, Nickolas Gulakos, Moses Greenfield, Lucas Friedlander, and Frank Wendorff. The Commission vote to approve the settlement was 4-0. The proposed settlement was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida in Miami.

In its lawsuit, the FTC charged that the companies misled consumers about the number of minutes of talk time their prepaid calling cards provided. The FTC said its testing showed that consumers received only about half the advertised minutes. In addition, the FTC alleged that the defendants’ cards carried hidden fees. For example, while the defendants’ ads for their cards often prominently claimed “no connection fees;” they then failed to clearly disclose a host of fees, such as “hang-up” and “maintenance” fees and “destination surcharges” that could wipe out the value of the cards. Such fees were said to be disclosed in a font size that was too small and stated in confusing language. At the request of the FTC, shortly after the case was filed, the court issued a temporary injunction against the companies.

In addition to the payment of $2.25 million, as part of the settlement announced today the defendants have agreed to a Consent Decree barring them from misrepresenting the number of minutes of talk time consumers will receive from prepaid calling cards, and requiring them to disclose any applicable material limitations, such as any fees or charges.

The settlement is part of an ongoing FTC crackdown on disclosures in the prepaid calling card industry. The FTC has brought similar charges against Clifton Telecard Alliance, another major prepaid calling card distributor. The FTC has also established a joint federal-state task force concerning deceptive marketing practices in the prepaid calling card industry and has other active prepaid calling card investigations. So far, the FTC has limited its actions to card distributors and has not sought to challenge prepaid carriers themselves; carriers are exempt from FTC authority as they are regulated as common carriers by the FCC. In recent times, however, the FTC has expressed frustration over the limitation on its powers and Congress has considered legislation to remove the common carrier exemption from FTC enforcement authority.