Regulatory Recovery Surcharge for Canadian corporations

Tue Mar 14 16:53:39 UTC 2017

I still believe the onus is on them to justify the extension of these costs,
regardless of what was in the agreement.

Todd Grand

-----Original Message-----
From: Luke Guillory [mailto:lguillory at reservetele.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 11:39 AM
To: Todd Grand <tgrand at tgrand.com>
Cc: NANOG <nanog at nanog.org>
Subject: Re: Regulatory Recovery Surcharge for Canadian corporations

I just went back over my email string with one of our transit providers
since I recalled submitting an exempt form for something. 

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 quote
or anything else, sales tax is assumed but this wasn't. I'm sure it's buried
in an agreement somewhere. 

Sent from my iPad

> On Mar 14, 2017, at 11:30 AM, Todd Grand <tgrand at tgrand.com> wrote:
> 
> In reply to the group as my reply was only to Luke.
> 
> 
> This is why I say, they should need to justify the extension of these
costs.
> In my opinion a transit provider should not have any justification to
extend said costs.
> One might suggest that the unjustified extension of these costs could be
construed as fraudulent charges.
> 
> Todd Grand
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Luke Guillory [mailto:lguillory at reservetele.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 11:08 AM
> To: Todd Grand <tgrand at tgrand.com>
> Cc: Eric Dugas <edugas at unknowndevice.ca>; Graham Johnston 
> <johnstong at westmancom.com>; NANOG <nanog at nanog.org>
> Subject: Re: Regulatory Recovery Surcharge for Canadian corporations
> 
> On transit though? We in the US pay all of these types of fees as well
though not on service outside of telephone.
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
>> 
> 
> Luke Guillory
> Network Operations Manager
> 
> Tel:    985.536.1212
> Fax:    985.536.0300
> Email:  lguillory at reservetele.com
> 
> Reserve Telecommunications
> 100 RTC Dr
> Reserve, LA 70084
> 
> ______________________________________________________________________
> ___________________________
> 
> Disclaimer:
> The information transmitted, including attachments, is intended only for
the person(s) or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
confidential and/or privileged material which should not disseminate,
distribute or be copied. Please notify Luke Guillory immediately by e-mail
if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your
system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free
as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late
or incomplete, 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. .
> 
>> On Mar 14, 2017, at 10:58 AM, Todd Grand <tgrand at tgrand.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> These costs are related to federal, provincial and/or municipal 
>> mandates, programs and requirements such as provincial 9-1-1 fees, 
>> spectrum acquisition, licensing charges, and contribution charges to 
>> help subsidize telephone service in rural and remote areas. These 
>> costs are not taxes or amounts that the government requires carriers 
>> to collect. The specific amount of these costs can vary as the 
>> fees/costs of government mandates/programs change.
>> 
>> I would have them outline what regulatory costs they incur, as they 
>> have to justify the extension of these costs, or in my opinion it is 
>> a form of fraud.
>> 
>> Todd Grand
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces+tgrand=tgrand.com at nanog.org] On 
>> Behalf Of Eric Dugas
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 10:00 AM
>> To: Graham Johnston <johnstong at westmancom.com>
>> Cc: NANOG <nanog at nanog.org>
>> Subject: Re: Regulatory Recovery Surcharge for Canadian corporations
>> 
>> From what I've gathered so far, every other carriers that we use are 
>> either invoicing us from Canada or outside the US (e.g. Telia from 
>> Vancouver, BC and Cogent from Toronto, ON).
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> A couple of minutes after firing my first email, our rep called me to 
>> follow up. He'll escalate this as far as he can with his COO and CFO 
>> and suggested two scenarios.
>> 
>> 
>> On Mar 14 2017, at 10:41 am, Graham Johnston 
>> <johnstong at westmancom.com>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> We don't explicitly pay a charge like this for the transit bandwidth 
>>> we
>> purchase in Toronto from an international carrier, and I doubt that 
>> it is built into the cost without any mention of it. I've never heard 
>> of such a thing.
>> 
>>> 
>> 
>>> Graham Johnston
>> Network Planner
>> Westman Communications Group
>> 204.717.2829
>> johnstong at westmancom.com
>> 
>>> 
>> 
>>> \-----Original Message-----
>> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces at nanog.org] On Behalf Of Eric Dugas
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 9:04 AM
>> To: NANOG
>> Subject: Regulatory Recovery Surcharge for Canadian corporations
>> 
>>> 
>> 
>>> I recently negotiated a new contract with a tier1 for IP transit in 
>>> Canada
>> and
>> just got the invoice. I saw a "new" Regulatory Recovery Surcharge of 
>> 10% the MRC (before taxes) that I've never seen before. Do any of my 
>> Canadian fellows on this list are paying this outrageous surcharge?
>> 
>>> 
>> 
>>> 
>> 
>>> 
>> 
>>> 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 
>> the MSA or in the contract.
>> 
> 