[194077] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Regulatory Recovery Surcharge for Canadian corporations
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Luke Guillory)
Tue Mar 14 12:39:26 2017
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Luke Guillory <lguillory@reservetele.com>
To: Todd Grand <tgrand@tgrand.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 16:39:20 +0000
In-Reply-To: <7JsW9.92468faf66.001a01d29ce0$36afe470$a40fad50$@tgrand.com>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
I just went back over my email string with one of our transit providers sin=
ce I recalled submitting an exempt form for something.=20
They added the Federal Universal Service Fund Surcharge to our transit link=
, odd since this isn't a voice related circuit. This also wasn't on the quo=
te or anything else, sales tax is assumed but this wasn't. I'm sure it's bu=
ried in an agreement somewhere.=20
=20
Sent from my iPad
> On Mar 14, 2017, at 11:30 AM, Todd Grand <tgrand@tgrand.com> wrote:
>=20
> In reply to the group as my reply was only to Luke.
>=20
>=20
> This is why I say, they should need to justify the extension of these cos=
ts.
> In my opinion a transit provider should not have any justification to ext=
end said costs.
> One might suggest that the unjustified extension of these costs could be =
construed as fraudulent charges.
>=20
> Todd Grand
>=20
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Luke Guillory [mailto:lguillory@reservetele.com]=20
> Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 11:08 AM
> To: Todd Grand <tgrand@tgrand.com>
> Cc: Eric Dugas <edugas@unknowndevice.ca>; Graham Johnston <johnstong@west=
mancom.com>; NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
> Subject: Re: Regulatory Recovery Surcharge for Canadian corporations
>=20
> On transit though? We in the US pay all of these types of fees as well th=
ough not on service outside of telephone.
>=20
>=20
>=20
> Sent from my iPad
>=20
>>=20
>=20
> Luke Guillory
> Network Operations Manager
>=20
> Tel: 985.536.1212
> Fax: 985.536.0300
> Email: lguillory@reservetele.com
>=20
> Reserve Telecommunications
> 100 RTC Dr
> Reserve, LA 70084
>=20
> _________________________________________________________________________=
________________________
>=20
> Disclaimer:
> The information transmitted, including attachments, is intended only for =
the person(s) or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidenti=
al and/or privileged material which should not disseminate, distribute or b=
e copied. Please notify Luke Guillory immediately by e-mail if you have rec=
eived this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mai=
l transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as informati=
on could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incompl=
ete, or contain viruses. Luke Guillory therefore does not accept liability =
for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as=
a result of e-mail transmission. .
>=20
>> On Mar 14, 2017, at 10:58 AM, Todd Grand <tgrand@tgrand.com> wrote:
>>=20
>>=20
>> These costs are related to federal, provincial and/or municipal=20
>> mandates, programs and requirements such as provincial 9-1-1 fees,=20
>> spectrum acquisition, licensing charges, and contribution charges to=20
>> help subsidize telephone service in rural and remote areas. These=20
>> costs are not taxes or amounts that the government requires carriers=20
>> to collect. The specific amount of these costs can vary as the=20
>> fees/costs of government mandates/programs change.
>>=20
>> I would have them outline what regulatory costs they incur, as they=20
>> have to justify the extension of these costs, or in my opinion it is a=20
>> form of fraud.
>>=20
>> Todd Grand
>>=20
>>=20
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces+tgrand=3Dtgrand.com@nanog.org] On=20
>> Behalf Of Eric Dugas
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 10:00 AM
>> To: Graham Johnston <johnstong@westmancom.com>
>> Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
>> Subject: Re: Regulatory Recovery Surcharge for Canadian corporations
>>=20
>> From what I've gathered so far, every other carriers that we use are=20
>> either invoicing us from Canada or outside the US (e.g. Telia from=20
>> Vancouver, BC and Cogent from Toronto, ON).
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> A couple of minutes after firing my first email, our rep called me to=20
>> follow up. He'll escalate this as far as he can with his COO and CFO=20
>> and suggested two scenarios.
>>=20
>>=20
>> On Mar 14 2017, at 10:41 am, Graham Johnston=20
>> <johnstong@westmancom.com>
>> wrote:
>>=20
>>> We don't explicitly pay a charge like this for the transit bandwidth=20
>>> we
>> purchase in Toronto from an international carrier, and I doubt that it=20
>> is built into the cost without any mention of it. I've never heard of=20
>> such a thing.
>>=20
>>>=20
>>=20
>>> Graham Johnston
>> Network Planner
>> Westman Communications Group
>> 204.717.2829
>> johnstong@westmancom.com
>>=20
>>>=20
>>=20
>>> \-----Original Message-----
>> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Eric Dugas
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 9:04 AM
>> To: NANOG
>> Subject: Regulatory Recovery Surcharge for Canadian corporations
>>=20
>>>=20
>>=20
>>> I recently negotiated a new contract with a tier1 for IP transit in=20
>>> Canada
>> and
>> just got the invoice. I saw a "new" Regulatory Recovery Surcharge of=20
>> 10% the MRC (before taxes) that I've never seen before. Do any of my=20
>> Canadian fellows on this list are paying this outrageous surcharge?
>>=20
>>>=20
>>=20
>>>=20
>>=20
>>>=20
>>=20
>>> Other than saying "it's in the MSA", our rep, their tax and billing
>> department
>> are not useful at all. The actual rate is not specified anywhere in=20
>> the MSA or in the contract.
>>=20
>=20
