The California Public Utilities Commission should weigh legal and jurisdictional issues in a VoIP rulemaking before considering rules, said AT&T, Frontier Communications and small rural telcos in separate replies filed Monday. AT&T saw "broad agreement" in opening comments (see 2210180049) that the proposal exceeds the CPUC's authority "and could invite legal challenge if adopted,” the carrier said in docket R.22-08-008. The California Cable and Telecommunications Association agreed with opposition to the CPUC staff proposal and suggested an alternative approach. The CPUC could make a “streamlined licensing framework specific to” digital voice services like VoIP, it said. The agency would apply only CPUC rules that currently apply to VoIP service, though it could later consider "targeted" regulations, CCTA said. Noting 501 VoIP providers are informally registered with the commission, Sangoma condemned the CPUC proposal "a blueprint to stifle competition in the presently vibrant VoIP market in California.” The business VoIP provider is especially concerned with proposed tariff requirements, it said. “Tariffs are relics of a bygone era when telephone services were offered by regulated monopoly providers. That era ended long ago, and tariff requirements have rightly gone by the wayside except for a few large incumbent providers and in rural areas that lack competition.” The CPUC should reject industry’s jurisdictional arguments, The Utility Reform Network and Center for Accessible Technology replied jointly. "The Commission has jurisdiction over VoIP providers, who are telephone corporations under California law," the consumer groups said. "The Commission is not barred from regulating VoIP service by federal law, including classification as an information service and preemption principles.”
Tariff classification rulings
A draft FCC Further NPRM would seek comment on revising the rural healthcare program's telecom program, funding cap rules, and "alternative rate determination mechanisms," if adopted during the commissioners' Feb. 18 meeting (see 2201270072). Changes aim to "improve the accuracy and fairness" of the program's support and "increase the efficiency of program administration," said the item.
More than a dozen classifications of tech goods from China eligible for "preferential" tariff treatment under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement on free trade remain subject to applicable Trade Act Section 301 tariffs, Customs and Border Protection ruled. It's dated last Friday and was released by CBP this week. "The country of origin of the subject goods for purposes of Section 301 is China and therefore, subject to the Section 301 duties," said CBP. The goods include hard drives, modems, switchers, routers and power supplies.
Plug-in devices that connect to Wi-Fi and allow users to operate other devices by controlling whether electrical current flows from the wall outlet differ from wearable smart devices for classification purposes, Customs and Border Protection said in a Jan. 21 ruling, released last week. SDI Technologies argued the “SmartPlugs” deserve a similar classification as Fitbit fitness trackers that connect to mobile phones through Bluetooth. The Fitbit trackers were classified in heading 8517 due to the data transmission functions, but the plugs provide for different functions. “To the extent that data is transmitted from the application to the SmartPlug, it is in service of the primary function of controlling the electrical current to the connected appliance,” the agency said. “The transmission of data is not a function of the SmartPlugs,” it said, concluding the devices “provide electric control of electrical devices connected to them and thus are properly classified under heading 8537.” The applicable subheading, 8537.10.9, includes a 2.7 percent duty rate, and is subject to Section 301 tariffs on China, the agency said.
Plastic iPad 2 “Smart Cover” cases are classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule as articles of plastic dutiable at 5.4 percent, not as duty-free accessories for automatic data processing machines, said the Court of International Trade in a decision made public Tuesday. Apple argued for the case’s duty-free classification as an accessory because it also functions as a stand. But the court agreed with a Customs and Border Protection ruling that the cases are explicitly excluded from that classification. Apple didn’t comment.
Disagreement over VoIP classification is complicating a state pole-attachment rate-setting proceeding. The Vermont Public Utility Commission is mulling a single rate for pole attachments to replace a two-tier system based on occupied space that treats LEC and cable attachments differently. Pole owners resisted cable and CLEC pleas for a lower single rate, in Monday comments emailed to us by the PUC on a petition by the CLEC Association of Northern New England (CANNE) asking the agency amend rules.
Fossil watches that depend on a Bluetooth connection to a smartphone for timekeeping are best classified as smartwatches based on the radio transceiver, said Customs and Border Protection in a newly posted April 30 ruling. Fossil lawyers asked CBP in October 2016 for a “binding ruling” on the classification of Fossil Q hybrid smartwatches under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule, said the agency. CBP responded that the Fossil Q lacks mechanical or quartz watch movements and instead uses its Bluetooth connection to set the time. Before a Bluetooth connection is made, "the watch hands are completely inactive,” it said. “Not only are they unmoving, but they cannot be actuated or manually adjusted by the user." Once the watch is paired via Bluetooth to a mobile device, the time is automatically synchronized, CBP said. "From that point forward, the Fossil Q autonomously keeps the time of that zone throughout any interruptions to the connection with the mobile application," it said. "However, even following initial synchronization, the time cannot be adjusted manually by the user. Instead, any adjustments to the watch hands -- based, for example, on a change in time zone -- are orchestrated automatically by the mobile application." Friday, the company didn’t comment.
A plastic-covered paperboard album set to hold CDs and DVDs is classifiable as a duty-free album for collectibles, not as a storage container or box file, Customs and Border Protection said in a recent tariff classification ruling: The album set, imported by Target, is a composite good made up of three album binders and a slipcase, each made of paperboard coated in polyvinyl chloride.
Even before the FCC released its net neutrality rules on March 12, 2015, ISP interests signaled they would take the agency to court. The likes of CTIA and NCTA predicted lawsuits, as reported in Part I of this Special Report (see 1609150017). Even FCC officials predicted such suits -- accurately, as it turned out. This Part II focuses on how litigation came to pass. Part III reports how the commission won an initial court case (see 1610130014).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a lower court ruling saying cellphone cases imported by OtterBox are classifiable in the tariff schedule as generic “other” articles of plastic, dutiable at 5.3 percent, rather than as containers subject to a 20 percent duty rate. A three-judge Federal Circuit panel agreed last week with a year-old U.S. Court of International Trade decision that the cellphone cases don't meet most of the four criteria for classification as containers under heading 4202 -- organizing, storing, protecting and carrying -- and are also dissimilar from such containers because they're designed to allow use of the cellphone while inside the container.