HEADLINES

  • SpokesmanReview: Universal Service Phone Fee Gets Overdue Scrutiny
  • ASPNews.com: FCC Moves To Fund Rural Broadband
  • InternetNews.com: Taxpayers Not Keen To Fund Broadband Subsidies
  • PC Magazine: The First Step to Better Broadband? Mapping
  • ARS Technica: Up to 20 percent of all Universal Service Fund Fees Distributed in Error
  • LEARN ABOUT USF TAX WASTE

    Runaway spending on the "high-cost" portion of the federal Universal Service Fund (USF) phone tax have caused it to skyrocket from $2.2 billion in 1999 to about $4 billion in 2006. The overall USF tax has surged to $7 billion, up from less than $4 billion in 1998. To pay for the Universal Service Fund, the tax rate applied to long distance revenues has skyrocketed five-fold from 2.1 percent to its current level of just under 11 percent. Unwary U.S. taxpayers pay up to $13,345 per telephone line per year for federally subsidized phone service under the U.S. government's steep USF phone bill tax. (See Thomas W. Hazlett, "Universal Service" Telephone Subsidies: What Does $7 Billion Buy," study for The Seniors Coalition, June 2006, http://www.senior.org/Documents/USF.Master.6.13.06.pdf.)

    Rather than providing phone service to low-income consumers in need, the bulk of USF taxpayer dollars are now part of a multi-billion wealth-transfer that goes from the pockets of U.S. taxpayers to small, uneconomical private rural telephone companies that often have only a few hundred customers and are so engorged with tax dollars that they can afford to pay out more in dividends to shareholders than they actually charge for phone service. Increasingly, USF funds are also flowing to large wireless companies that provide what is often purely duplicative service competing with unsubsidized service providers.

    According to a review by CapTheFund.org of public records and news accounts, the real beneficiaries of Universal Service Fund federal phone tax subsidies include the following telephone companies and executives that are very far removed from the low-income and otherwise disadvantaged Americans who are supposed to be aided by the high-cost portion of the USF. The concern in these cases is not about any illegal activity, since USF tax dollars are being deliberately doled out by the federal government with no apparent concern about the lack of results. Instead, the focus here is on billions of dollars in federal tax dollars subsidizing companies that clearly do not need them: