For sure Sent from my iPad
> On Mar 14, 2017, at 11:54 AM, Todd Grand <tgr...@tgrand.com> wrote: > > 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:lguill...@reservetele.com] > Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 11:39 AM > To: Todd Grand <tgr...@tgrand.com> > Cc: NANOG <nanog@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 <tgr...@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:lguill...@reservetele.com] >> Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 11:08 AM >> To: Todd Grand <tgr...@tgrand.com> >> Cc: Eric Dugas <edu...@unknowndevice.ca>; Graham Johnston >> <johnst...@westmancom.com>; NANOG <nanog@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: lguill...@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 <tgr...@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....@nanog.org] On >>> Behalf Of Eric Dugas >>> Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 10:00 AM >>> To: Graham Johnston <johnst...@westmancom.com> >>> Cc: NANOG <nanog@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 >>> <johnst...@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 >>> johnst...@westmancom.com >>> >>>> >>> >>>> \-----Original Message----- >>> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@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. >>> >> >