IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/idt/journl/cs8003.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Replacement of the Legacy High-Cost Universal Support Fund with a Connect America Fund. Key Economic and Legal Considerations

Author

Listed:
  • Christian DIPPON

    (Vice President, National Economic Research Associates (NERA))

  • Christopher HUTHER

    (Partner, Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP)

  • Megan TROY

    (Partner, Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP)

Abstract

On April 21, 2010, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) released a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) and a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) that seek the public’s input on the FCC’s effort to replace the legacy high-cost universal service fund (USF) with a broadband “Connect America” fund (CAF). In effect, the FCC seeks to implement cost-cutting measures for existing voice support (USF) and create a new fund (CAF) to support the provision of broadband communications in areas that would be unserved without such support or that depend on USF support for the maintenance of existing broadband service. An initial review of the NOI/NPRM raises a number of key economic and legal considerations. In the following, we identify some of the considerations, questions, and challenges raised by the FCC’s USF reform attempt, which is likely to have far-reaching consequences not only for operators that currently rely on USF subsidies or broadband providers in high-cost regions but for the entire communications industry.The purpose of this note is not to provide an all-inclusive list of, or responses to, the critical questions raised by the NOI/NPRM, but rather to illustrate the complexities of this proceeding and the impact the proposed reforms may have on industry performance. As the CAF is necessary for the success of the FCC’s National Broadband Plan (NBP), the policy directions taken by the FCC in establishing it are critically important. USF reform is also essential to the performance and competitiveness of the U.S. communications industry and policy missteps could have serious economic and legal consequences.

Suggested Citation

  • Christian DIPPON & Christopher HUTHER & Megan TROY, 2010. "Replacement of the Legacy High-Cost Universal Support Fund with a Connect America Fund. Key Economic and Legal Considerations," Communications & Strategies, IDATE, Com&Strat dept., vol. 1(80), pages 67-82, 4th quart.
  • Handle: RePEc:idt:journl:cs8003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://repec.idate.org/RePEc/idt/journl/CS8003/CS80_DIPPON_et_al.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gasmi, F. & Laffont, J. J. & Sharkey, W. W., 2000. "Competition, universal service and telecommunications policy in developing countries," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 221-248, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Antonio Estache & Marco Manacorda & Tommaso M. Valletti, 2002. "Telecommunications Reform, Access Regulation, and Internet Adoption in Latin America," Economía Journal, The Latin American and Caribbean Economic Association - LACEA, vol. 0(Spring 20), pages 153-218, January.
    2. Philippe Choné & Laurent Flochel & Anne Perrot, 1999. "Allocating and Funding Universal Service Obligations in a Competitive Network Market," Working Papers 99-55, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    3. Wallsten, Scott, 2005. "Regulation and Internet Use in Developing Countries," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 53(2), pages 501-523, January.
    4. Recuero Virto, Laura & Gasmi, Farid & Noumba Um, Paul, 2009. "The role of institutional design in the conduct of infrastructure industries reforms - An illustration through telecommunications in developing countries," MPRA Paper 12881, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Chone, Philippe & Flochel, Laurent & Perrot, Anne, 2002. "Allocating and funding universal service obligations in a competitive market," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 20(9), pages 1247-1276, November.
    6. Emmanuelle Auriol & Antonio Estache & Liam Wren-Lewis, 2018. "Can Supranational Infrastructure Regulation Compensate for National Institutional Weaknesses?," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 69(6), pages 913-936.
    7. Holthausen, Cornelia & Rochet, Jean-Charles, 2006. "Efficient Pricing of Large Value Interbank Payment Systems," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 38(7), pages 1797-1818, October.
    8. Auriol, Emmanuelle & Biancini, Sara, 2009. "Economic Integration and Investment Incentives in Regulated Industries," IDEI Working Papers 555, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
    9. Chone, Philippe & Flochel, Laurent & Perrot, Anne, 2000. "Universal service obligations and competition," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 249-259, September.
    10. Gasmi, F. & Laffont, J. J. & Sharkey, W. W., 2002. "The natural monopoly test reconsidered: an engineering process-based approach to empirical analysis in telecommunications," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 435-459, April.
    11. Estache, Antonio & Laffont, Jean-Jacques & Xinzhu Zhang, 2004. "Universal service obligations in developing countries," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3421, The World Bank.
    12. Major, Iván & Kiss, Károly M., 2011. "Regulation of network industries in the European Union and in Central and Eastern Europe," 22nd European Regional ITS Conference, Budapest 2011: Innovative ICT Applications - Emerging Regulatory, Economic and Policy Issues 52194, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    13. Estache, Antonio & Laffont, Jean-Jacques & Zhang, Xinzhu, 2006. "Universal service obligations in LDCs: The effect of uniform pricing on infrastructure access," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(6-7), pages 1155-1179, August.
    14. Garbacz, Christopher & Thompson, Herbert Jr., 2005. "Universal telecommunication service: A world perspective," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 495-512, October.
    15. Bourguignon, Helene & Ferrando, Jorge, 2007. "Skimming the other's cream: Competitive effects of an asymmetric universal service obligation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 761-790, August.
    16. Antonio Estache & L. Wren-Lewis, 2008. "Towards a Theory of Regulation for Developing Countries: Following Laffont's Lead," Working Papers ECARES 2008_018, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    17. Knieps, Günter & Zenhäusern, Patrick, 2009. "Stepping stones and access holidays: The fallacies of regulatory micro-management," Discussion Papers 123, University of Freiburg, Institute for Transport Economics and Regional Policy.
    18. Paul L. Joskow, 2014. "Incentive Regulation in Theory and Practice: Electricity Distribution and Transmission Networks," NBER Chapters, in: Economic Regulation and Its Reform: What Have We Learned?, pages 291-344, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Losada, Ramiro, 2004. "On the definition of affordable prices under universal service obligations," UC3M Working papers. Economics we044015, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
    20. Antonio Estache & Liam Wren-Lewis, 2009. "Toward a Theory of Regulation for Developing Countries: Following Jean-Jacques Laffont's Lead," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(3), pages 729-770, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Federal Communications Commission; America Fund;

    JEL classification:

    • O00 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - General - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:idt:journl:cs8003. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: BLAVIER Thomas (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/idatefr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.