Jump to content

Broadband choice reduction by Brendan Carr's FCC: Difference between revisions

From Consumer_Action_Taskforce
No edit summary
Tag: 2017 source edit
mNo edit summary
 
(7 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
= 2025 FCC Bulk Billing Decision Impact on Tenant Choice =
=2025 FCC Bulk Billing Decision Impact on Tenant Choice=


In January 2025, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) made a sweeping decision affecting consumer choice in broadband internet for residents of multi-tenant buildings. This decision reversed course on a previous proposal that would have given tenants more control over their internet service provider options.
In January 2025, the [[Federal Communications Commission]] (FCC) made a sweeping decision affecting consumer choice in broadband internet for residents of multi-tenant buildings. This decision reversed course on a previous proposal that would have given tenants more control over their internet service provider options.


== Background ==
==Background==
In March 2024, then-FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel announced a proposal aimed at increasing tenant's choice at choosing their ISP for internet access in multi-tenant buildings.<ref name="doc-4009">[[:File:DOC-400915A1.pdf|FCC Press Release, "FCC CHAIRWOMAN ANNOUNCES PUSH TO LOWER BROADBAND COSTS & INCREASE CHOICE FOR FAMILIES LIVING IN APARTMENT BUILDINGS"]] ''FCC''. March 5, 2024</ref> The proposal followed the Commission's 2022 rules that had already:


In March 2024, then-FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel announced a proposal aimed at increasing tenant's choice at choosing their ISP for internet access in multi-tenant buildings<ref>FCC Press Release, "FCC CHAIRWOMAN ANNOUNCES PUSH TO LOWER BROADBAND COSTS & INCREASE CHOICE FOR FAMILIES LIVING IN APARTMENT BUILDINGS", March 5, 2024</ref>. <ref>[[:File:DOC-400915A1.pdf]]</ref> The proposal followed the Commission's 2022 rules that had already:
*Prohibited broadband providers from entering into certain revenue sharing agreements with building owners
 
*Required providers to clearly inform tenants about exclusive marketing arrangements
* Prohibited broadband providers from entering into certain revenue sharing agreements with building owners
*Clarified that FCC rules prohibit "sale-and-leaseback" arrangements that block competitive access
* Required providers to clearly inform tenants about exclusive marketing arrangements
* Clarified that FCC rules prohibit "sale-and-leaseback" arrangements that block competitive access


The March 2024 proposal would have specifically targeted "bulk billing" arrangements - agreements where tenants are required to pay for a specific provider's internet service as part of their rent or utilities, even if they don't want that service. The proposed rules would have:
The March 2024 proposal would have specifically targeted "bulk billing" arrangements - agreements where tenants are required to pay for a specific provider's internet service as part of their rent or utilities, even if they don't want that service. The proposed rules would have:


* Allowed tenants to opt out of bulk billing arrangements
*Allowed tenants to opt out of bulk billing arrangements
* Made it more economically viable for competing providers to serve buildings where tenants were previously required to pay for a specific provider's service
*Made it more economically viable for competing providers to serve buildings where tenants were previously required to pay for a specific provider's service
* Maintained existing prohibitions on revenue sharing and exclusive access agreements
*Maintained existing prohibitions on revenue sharing and exclusive access agreements


Rosenworcel argued this change was necessary because "it is not right when your building or apartment complex chooses that service for you, saddling you with unwanted costs, and preventing you from signing up for the plan and provider you really want."<ref>FCC Press Release, "FCC CHAIRWOMAN ANNOUNCES PUSH TO LOWER BROADBAND COSTS & INCREASE CHOICE FOR FAMILIES LIVING IN APARTMENT BUILDINGS", March 5, 2024</ref><ref>[[:File:DOC-400915A1.pdf]]</ref>
Rosenworcel argued this change was necessary because "it is not right when your building or apartment complex chooses that service for you, saddling you with unwanted costs, and preventing you from signing up for the plan and provider you really want."<ref name="doc-4009" />


== Understanding the Changes: A Timeline ==
==Timeline of changes==


To get how consumer rights with internet service in multi-tenant buildings have changed over the years, here is the timeline:
===Pre-2022 Status Quo===
Prior to 2022:
*Building owners couldn't enter into "exclusive access" agreements (e.g., preventing Verizon from wiring a building that TimeWarner serviced)
*Building owners could implement "bulk billing" arrangements (requiring all tenants to pay for a specific provider's service as part of rent)


=== Pre-2022 Status Quo ===
===2022 FCC Rule Changes===
Prior to 2022, two key practices existed:
In 2022, the FCC modified its rules regarding multi-tenant environments:<ref>[https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/01/fcc-chair-nixes-plan-to-boost-broadband-competition-in-apartment-buildings/ "FCC chair helps ISPs and landlords make deals that renters can't escape"] ''Ars Technica'', January 27, 2025. Retrieved 2 February, 2025.</ref>
* Building owners couldn't enter into "exclusive access" agreements (e.g., preventing Verizon from wiring a building that TimeWarner serviced)
*The ban on exclusive access agreements remained
* Building owners could implement "bulk billing" arrangements (requiring all tenants to pay for a specific provider's service as part of rent)
*Bulk billing arrangements remained permissible
*The FCC added new rules regarding revenue sharing agreements between landlords and ISPs(this is the process by which the ISP can share revenue from tenants with the landlord after they enter into a "bulk billing" agreement)


=== 2022 FCC Rule Changes ===
===March 2024 Proposed Changes===
In 2022, the FCC modified its rules regarding multi-tenant environments<ref>Ars Technica, "FCC chair helps ISPs and landlords make deals that renters can't escape", January 27, 2025</ref>:
Then-Chairwoman Rosenworcel's proposal would have:<ref name="doc-4009"/>
* The ban on exclusive access agreements remained
*Maintained the ban on exclusive access agreements
* Bulk billing arrangements remained permissible
*Required bulk billing arrangements to include tenant opt-out provisions
* The FCC added new rules regarding revenue sharing agreements between landlords and ISPs


=== March 2024 Proposed Changes ===
===January 2025 Final Outcome===
Then-Chairwoman Rosenworcel's proposal would have<ref>FCC Press Release, "FCC CHAIRWOMAN ANNOUNCES PUSH TO LOWER BROADBAND COSTS & INCREASE CHOICE FOR FAMILIES LIVING IN APARTMENT BUILDINGS", March 5, 2024</ref><ref>[[:File:DOC-400915A1.pdf]]</ref>:
Chairman Carr's decision specifically addressed the bulk billing proposal:<ref>[[:File:DOC-409130A1.pdf|FCC Press Release, "Chairman Carr Stops Costly Regulatory Overreach"]] ''FCC'', January 27, 2025</ref>
* Maintained the ban on exclusive access agreements
*Building owners still cannot enter exclusive access agreements
* Required bulk billing arrangements to include tenant opt-out provisions
*Building owners can continue mandatory bulk billing without opt-out provisions


=== January 2025 Final Outcome ===
===Practical Example===
Chairman Carr's decision specifically addressed the bulk billing proposal<ref>FCC Press Release, "Chairman Carr Stops Costly Regulatory Overreach", January 27, 2025</ref>[[:File:DOC-409130A1.pdf]]:
* Building owners still cannot enter exclusive access agreements
* Building owners can continue mandatory bulk billing without opt-out provisions
 
=== Practical Example ===
Here's how these rules work in practice in an apartment complex in 2025:
Here's how these rules work in practice in an apartment complex in 2025:
* The landlord can't prevent Verizon from installing service even if they prefer TimeWarner (exclusive access prohibition)
*The landlord can't prevent Verizon from installing service even if they prefer TimeWarner (exclusive access prohibition)
* The landlord can require all tenants to pay $50 monthly for TimeWarner service as part of their rent, even if tenants don't want it (bulk billing permitted)
*The landlord can require all tenants to pay $50 monthly for TimeWarner service as part of their rent, even if tenants don't want it (bulk billing permitted)
 
While the FCC implemented rules in 2022 regarding revenue sharing between landlords and ISPs, Chairman Carr's 2025 announcement specifically addressed bulk billing arrangements without clarifying the status of those revenue sharing rules.
 
This negatively affects consumer choice through the bulk billing provision, by forcing tenants into paying for service from a provider they may not want. While multiple providers may have physical access to a building, the economic reality of mandatory bulk billing greatly diminishes the economic viability of another ISP wiring the building.
 
[Rest of sections remain the same until "Relationship to Existing Rules"]
 
== Relationship to Existing Rules ==


This decision exists within an overall framework of FCC rules regarding multi-tenant environments. The Commission previously:
Chairman Carr's 2025 announcement specifically addressed bulk billing arrangements without clarifying the status of the 2022 revenue sharing rules.
* Banned exclusive service agreements giving providers sole rights to serve a building
* Added rules in 2022 affecting revenue sharing arrangements between landlords and ISPs, though the current status of these rules following Chairman Carr's 2025 decision is not explicitly addressed in available materials
* Required providers to disclose exclusive marketing arrangements to tenants


== References ==
Bulk billing provision is said to negatively affect consumer choice, as it can force tenants into paying for service from a provider they may not want. While multiple providers may have physical access to a building, the economic reality of mandatory bulk billing greatly diminishes the economic viability of another ISP wiring the building.
==References==
<references />
<references />


[[Category:Internet Service Providers]]
[[Category:Incidents]]
[[Category:Internet service providers]]
[[Category:Consumer Choice]]
[[Category:Consumer Choice]]
[[Category:FCC Regulations]]
[[Category:FCC Regulations]]
[[Category:2025 Consumer Protection Changes]]
[[Category:2025 Consumer Protection Changes]]

Latest revision as of 12:24, 13 March 2025

2025 FCC Bulk Billing Decision Impact on Tenant Choice[edit | edit source]

In January 2025, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) made a sweeping decision affecting consumer choice in broadband internet for residents of multi-tenant buildings. This decision reversed course on a previous proposal that would have given tenants more control over their internet service provider options.

Background[edit | edit source]

In March 2024, then-FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel announced a proposal aimed at increasing tenant's choice at choosing their ISP for internet access in multi-tenant buildings.[1] The proposal followed the Commission's 2022 rules that had already:

  • Prohibited broadband providers from entering into certain revenue sharing agreements with building owners
  • Required providers to clearly inform tenants about exclusive marketing arrangements
  • Clarified that FCC rules prohibit "sale-and-leaseback" arrangements that block competitive access

The March 2024 proposal would have specifically targeted "bulk billing" arrangements - agreements where tenants are required to pay for a specific provider's internet service as part of their rent or utilities, even if they don't want that service. The proposed rules would have:

  • Allowed tenants to opt out of bulk billing arrangements
  • Made it more economically viable for competing providers to serve buildings where tenants were previously required to pay for a specific provider's service
  • Maintained existing prohibitions on revenue sharing and exclusive access agreements

Rosenworcel argued this change was necessary because "it is not right when your building or apartment complex chooses that service for you, saddling you with unwanted costs, and preventing you from signing up for the plan and provider you really want."[1]

Timeline of changes[edit | edit source]

Pre-2022 Status Quo[edit | edit source]

Prior to 2022:

  • Building owners couldn't enter into "exclusive access" agreements (e.g., preventing Verizon from wiring a building that TimeWarner serviced)
  • Building owners could implement "bulk billing" arrangements (requiring all tenants to pay for a specific provider's service as part of rent)

2022 FCC Rule Changes[edit | edit source]

In 2022, the FCC modified its rules regarding multi-tenant environments:[2]

  • The ban on exclusive access agreements remained
  • Bulk billing arrangements remained permissible
  • The FCC added new rules regarding revenue sharing agreements between landlords and ISPs(this is the process by which the ISP can share revenue from tenants with the landlord after they enter into a "bulk billing" agreement)

March 2024 Proposed Changes[edit | edit source]

Then-Chairwoman Rosenworcel's proposal would have:[1]

  • Maintained the ban on exclusive access agreements
  • Required bulk billing arrangements to include tenant opt-out provisions

January 2025 Final Outcome[edit | edit source]

Chairman Carr's decision specifically addressed the bulk billing proposal:[3]

  • Building owners still cannot enter exclusive access agreements
  • Building owners can continue mandatory bulk billing without opt-out provisions

Practical Example[edit | edit source]

Here's how these rules work in practice in an apartment complex in 2025:

  • The landlord can't prevent Verizon from installing service even if they prefer TimeWarner (exclusive access prohibition)
  • The landlord can require all tenants to pay $50 monthly for TimeWarner service as part of their rent, even if tenants don't want it (bulk billing permitted)

Chairman Carr's 2025 announcement specifically addressed bulk billing arrangements without clarifying the status of the 2022 revenue sharing rules.

Bulk billing provision is said to negatively affect consumer choice, as it can force tenants into paying for service from a provider they may not want. While multiple providers may have physical access to a building, the economic reality of mandatory bulk billing greatly diminishes the economic viability of another ISP wiring the building.

References[edit | edit source]