Washington, June 6, 2025 – The trust of the Universal Service Fund in a shrinking basis of traditional language services has created a non -sustainable contribution rate that asks the industry leaders to demand technologists to start in the fund.
While companies such as Apple, Amazon, Meta and Netflix earn an estimated 2,600 US dollar from every household connected via the USF, they practically contribute to the maintenance of this connectivity, an expert for a BreitbandLive committee said on Wednesday.
“Those who pay for USF Roslyn LaytonSenior Vice President at Beach Consult, one advice. She referred to an annual total turnover of a typical Big Tech company.
Broadband breakfast on June 4, 2025 – What happens to USF when Scotus rules?
Defender of the USF counter that the 1996 Telecom Act sets clear limits and that the role of the universal service management company is strictly ministerial.
The discussion takes place when the Supreme Court is preparing for a constitutional authority of the structure of the fund in FCC against Consumer Research, which argues that the congress has delegated the authority to the FCC to manage the fund and the use of a private company by the agency to collect fees against the constitutional principles.
While the experts expressed cautious optimism that the High Court would comply with the universal service, there was a broad consensus that the financing mechanism must be revised regardless of the legal result. For example, spoken telephone services pay 36% of telecommunications costs in the USF.
“This is a potentially large bowing point,” said Jason NealA partner of the HWG law firm, which represents the broadband coalition of the schools that represent health and libraries, one of the parties that defend the fund. “I very much hope that the political decision -makers have time to work carefully and think about finding out things after an unfortunate decision by the Supreme Court in a crazy scramble,” said Neal.
Targeting -Tech giants with specific metrics
Layton outlined a concrete proposal based on the Senate threshold. 1651, in which these companies have to make a contribution: people with an annual turnover of 5 billion US dollars or more and 3% or more of the total US internet traffic.
“That is about 30 companies,” said Layton and found that individual technology companies operate dozens of applications that together can easily reach the traffic threshold of 3%. “Netflix can sometimes be a third of the overall traffic in the USA.”
The economic justification extends beyond the users of residential buildings. According to Layton, rural companies generated via USF generate almost 20,000 US dollars annually through cloud computing, advertising and cyber security annually for technology companies.
Nicholas meansThe chief strategist of the Digital Progress Institute emphasized the historical precedent for the Network -beneficiaries funds who finance the universal service and come from the Kingsbury engagement of 1913, when AT&T made comparative payments available to the smaller providers.
“Those who extract the most economical value from the company are those who pay primarily,” said Degani and argued for a return to this principle.
Three separate suggestions for reform on the table
The discussion participants discussed three potential solutions about the status quo. In addition to focusing on large technology companies, the option included the widening of the evaluation base in order to cover all broadband services and not just a traditional voice, or relocating general tax revenues from congress tools.
The general revenue approach was suspended by a uniform rejection of the discussion participants. “This is simply not suitable for something for congress every year or every or two years to try to record and debate” Andrew SchwartzmanSenior Counselor of the Benton Institute calls it “an unobstructable solution” due to the uncertainty of the means and the risk of a program interruption in state shutdowns.
Lynn FollansbeeVice President of Utelecom, agreed and said that rural providers “really need the certainty” that the current self -supporting mechanism delivers.
The Basic Broading option – The contribution requirement for all broadband services instead of language – received more support, but was considered insufficiently.
“I think we can combine two of them, which extends the base and brings Big Tech,” said Follansbee.
Several discussion participants pointed out existing cross -party laws as proof that the dynamics of reform exists. P. 1651 is sponsored by Sens. Mark KellyD-Arizona and Markwayne MullinR-Oklahoma. It aims specifically on large technology companies.
There are 100 million Americans who are estimated to access Internet services via the USF program, including rural broadband, school and library connection, telemedia services and support with low income.
“Universal service is really important for pretty much every American,” emphasized Degani.
Despite the rising rate, Schwartzman found that the surprising resilience of the system as an increasing contribution rate, which was passed on to consumers, did not significantly reduce the number of people who pay for connections.
Take a look at the full video:
Broadband breakfast on June 4, 2025 – What happens to USF when Scotus rules?
Defender of the USF counter that the 1996 Telecom Act sets clear limits and that the role of the universal service management company is strictly ministerial.
