A Thursday Senate Commerce Committee hearing is likely to highlight stark differences between panel leaders’ competing proposals for a spectrum legislative package, including whether it should mandate sales of specific bands before NTIA completes studies of those frequencies in keeping with the Biden administration’s national spectrum strategy (see 2403120006). Lawmakers’ apparent failure to reach a deal allocating additional money for the FCC’s affordable connectivity program and Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Reimbursement Program (see 2403190062) as part of a FY 2024 still-unreleased “minibus” spending package also ratchets up the pressure for a spectrum bill to use future auction revenue to pay for multiple telecom priorities, officials and lobbyists told us.
Industry largely welcomed an FCC proposal to rely on the broadband serviceable location fabric for updating and verifying compliance with certain high-cost program support recipients’ deployment obligations in comments posted Monday in docket 10-90 (see 2402130058). Some sought assurances and support thresholds for rural carriers and those nearing their final deployment milestones.
Advocates of additional federal funding for the FCC’s affordable connectivity program and Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Reimbursement Program were closely monitoring congressional negotiations Friday in hopes appropriators would reach a deal addressing both priorities as part of a second tranche of FY 2024 spending bills lawmakers want approved before midnight March 22. Rip-and-replace supporters voiced strong optimism that the next “minibus” package would include $3.08 billion to fully fund that program. ACP backers were, at least privately, growing less hopeful of a deal including their priority.
The FCC’s March 7 response opposing Essential Network Technologies and MetComm.net's Feb. 26 emergency motion to expedite consideration of the companies' E-rate program appeal “confirms that the motion should be granted,” according to the petitioners’ reply Wednesday (docket 24-1027) at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
The FCC’s March 7 response opposing Essential Network Technologies and MetComm.net's Feb. 26 emergency motion to expedite consideration of the companies' E-rate program appeal “confirms that the motion should be granted,” according to the petitioners’ reply Wednesday (docket 24-1027) at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
The entire Arizona Corporation Commission refused hiking monthly surcharges on customer bills for the state’s high-cost fund, despite projections that the Arizona Universal Service Fund (AUSF) will soon run out of cash. The ACC's lone Democrat joined four Republican commissioners in voting against increased surcharges during a livestreamed meeting Tuesday. Staff warned last month that the AUSF would be depleted by the end of April, meaning no more payments starting May for funding AUSF administrator Solix or Frontier Communications, the only company in the state receiving this high-cost support (see 2402280038). Frontier supported staff’s proposal to increase the monthly surcharge on customer bills. However, Arizona commissioners said during the livestreamed meeting that they preferred addressing the issue through an upcoming Frontier rate case planned for this fall. Commissioner Kevin Thompson (R) can’t support increasing the AUSF fee, he said. “Let’s look at this in the rate case and have a broader discussion on the merits of the AUSF as we go forward.” Arizona commissioners also declined raising AUSF contribution rates in 2022 and 2023 (see 2312050032).
It’s unconstitutional for Washington state to tax federal Lifeline reimbursements, the Washington Supreme Court unanimously decided Thursday. Siding with T-Mobile subsidiary Assurance Wireless, the state’s high court reversed a lower court’s opinion because it found that the Universal Service Administrative Co. (USAC) is the FCC’s instrumentality and thus immune from state taxes.
It’s unconstitutional for Washington state to tax federal Lifeline reimbursements, the Washington Supreme Court unanimously decided Thursday. Siding with T-Mobile subsidiary Assurance Wireless, the state’s high court reversed a lower court’s opinion because it found that the Universal Service Administrative Co. (USAC) is the FCC’s instrumentality and thus immune from state taxes.
Senate Commerce Committee ranking member Ted Cruz, R-Texas, called Wednesday for Congress to substantially rein in the FCC's autonomy in setting USF spending and creating new programs amid a bicameral working group’s examination of a possible universal service revamp (see 2305110066). “Caught in a dilemma of wanting to further expand USF programs but having already maxed out the level of taxation American consumers can reasonably tolerate, the conversation at the FCC and in Congress has focused on expanding the pool of companies and products subject to” the USF contribution factor, which is effectively a “tax on the working class,” Cruz said in a paper. “This approach is anything but fair to American taxpayers: it would hide the problem of excessive USF taxation rather than fix it and ultimately make tax burdens worse by emboldening further unaccountable spending growth.” Instead, he said Congress should “take charge of defining universal service and deciding where USF funds may go.” Cruz proposes making most USF programs subject to congressional appropriations but believes “it may make sense to keep the High-Cost program within the current” funding framework “given ongoing multiyear commitments to providers.” Congress should eliminate “duplicative” USF spending, including combining the Lifeline program with the currently independent affordable connectivity program, given perceptions that the “federal government has too many broadband programs, and a poor record of coordinating them,” Cruz said. He also proposes curbing the FCC’s expansion of E-rate eligibility, citing concerns about permitting schools and libraries to use program support for off-premises Wi-Fi hot spots and wireless internet services (see 2311090028).
Many small and mid-sized internet service providers (ISP) have doubts that they will participate widely if at all in the broadband equity, access and deployment (BEAD) program. At ACA Connects' annual summit Wednesday in Washington, President Grant Spellmeyer said members are concerned "about where BEAD is headed" on project requirements and conditions. "Places like Pennsylvania have got some troubling provisions that are slowing members down," he said. "I think you're going to see wildly disparate results across the 50 states." One ISP that operates in multiple states told us it's leaning away from participating in the states with particularly onerous conditions.