Hiding Cell Phone Taxes Doesn't Make Them Go Away
from the hidden-taxes dept
The Supreme Court has declined to hear a case regarding whether cell phone companies should be allowed to list taxes as separate line items on customer bills. Apparently, certain state governments have begun passing laws prohibiting companies from listing taxes as separate line-items on customer bills, requiring them instead to build those costs into the base prices they charge consumers. Cell phone companies argue that this makes it impossible for them to establish uniform nationwide pricing because they have to adjust the prices in each state to reflect the varying tax burden. This seems to me to be a pretty clear-cut effort by state governments to avoid scrutiny of the taxes they impose. Voters ultimately end up paying these costs whether they're listed separately on the bill or not, so this seems like little more than an attempt by state legislators to avoid accountability. Taxpayers have every right to know what fraction of their bills are going to the government. With the Supreme Court declining to weigh in on the issue, the issue has gone back to the FCC for further consideration. I hope they'll continue to push for greater transparency. Of course, it should be noted that the companies hands aren't totally clean here. While phone companies should be allowed to list extra fees when they're actually required to hand the money over to the government, we've noted before that they shouldn't be allowed to label as "fees" money they're planning to keep for themselves.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: fees, mobile operators, supreme court
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
If only....
Landline phone companies; Cable companies; Gas and Electric; etc. This has been going on since the '70s and the lobbies are too powerful and prevent capital hill from reviewing these practices.
If you think I am exaggerating, do your homework. There have been numerous attempts at class-action lawsuits against these practices that have been summarily rejected!
Free money.... now that is a racquet
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
you got sores
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm for it in this way:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sprint just changed their terms on the 1st to where the fees are all covered under administrative fee and regulatory fee. This allows them to charge you for anything they feel like charging you for and you can't dispute it because you don't know what that fee actually is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Xanius
And yet, I don't care. All i care about is how much I pay for how much use, bottom line. If everyone had to play by the same rules I could price compare. If 39.99 was the price you pay all plans would have to compete in that tier. As it is they can advertise 39.99 and have final charges ranging from $50 to $80. and unless you hold them at gun point the only way to find out is to sign up and wait for the bill.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The real problem?
I think it should be broken out in the bill, but if they're advertising, I'd like to see two numbers, how much I'm paying them, and how much I'm paying the government.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
List But Advertise Turthfully
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
compare to gasoline
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
tax credits
Some of those fees are obviously taxes and, depending on yor tax status, some of that money can be discounted from net income in your yearly tax statement. That is, you don't pay taxes for money paid as taxes...
Maybe you can't do that in the US (i.e take credit for already paid taxes) but if you can and amounts suddenly get hidden... Well, you'll pay even more taxes...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Separate Line Items for Questionable Fees
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And the problem is?
Wouldn't we all rather our politicians roll around in their own filth a little more if it actually saves the individual consumers some money each month instead of costing us more?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TAXES,
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Taxes
[ link to this | view in chronology ]