The FCC is trying to make it easier for ISPs to charge hidden fees

Federal Communications Commission This would make it difficult for consumers to receive detailed bills containing accurate information from their Internet service providers, . The draft would review previous “unnecessary” requirements on the grounds that a fact-based list of fees “may confuse customers.”

This comes in response to More than a Which . Adhering to this rule requires that ISPs make it easier for consumers to compare prices and avoid hidden fees. This usually comes in the form of a so-called “nutrition sticker,” which outlines the speeds, fees, and data allowances for internet plans.

The FCC plans to examine ways to remove “any other labeling requirements that are unnecessarily burdensome and provide minimal benefit to consumers.” Having an actual list of what we pay $100 each month seems like little benefit to me.

The regulatory agency is not looking to get rid of these nutrition labels completely, at least not yet, but it is seeking to eliminate location-based fee breakdown requirements. “We propose to eliminate the requirement that providers itemize discretionary, recurring monthly charges that represent the costs they choose to pass on to consumers and which vary by consumer location,” the draft proposal said.

It also targets the requirement to make this data readily available to all consumers. The proposal contains language that would stop forcing ISPs to make this information multilingual and available to online and telephone customers. It also seeks to separate these classifications from customer account portals. We’re not sure where these nutrition labels will go.

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr Who seemed more interested in a pumpkin latte discussion than ISP regulation. He said the proposal seeks to “separate the wheat from the chaff” so that consumers can “get quick and easy access to the information they want and need to compare broadband plans.” The language of the proposal seems to suggest exactly the opposite of that sentiment, but that’s politics for you.

A vote on the proposal is scheduled for October 28. This is all part of Carr’s proposal which seeks to appease President Trump by removing as many government regulations as possible.