Categories: Cable

Cable Franchise Fees

Originally published September 27, 2010.

The FCC clarified several issues surrounding the calculation of cable franchise fees in its report and order in 2007, including:

(i) the franchise fee revenue base;

(ii) limitations on charges incidental to the awarding or enforcing of a franchise;

(iii) the proper classification of in-kind payments unrelated to the provision of cable service; and

(iv) the proper classification of contributions in support of PEG services and equipment.

Later in a Second Report and Order, the FCC applied the majority of these findings and rules to existing as well as competitive entrants.

Franchise Fee Revenue Base

In its order, the FCC clarified “that a cable operator is not required to pay franchise fees on revenues from non-cable services.” According to the FCC, this prohibition would specifically apply to cable modem service revenues, broadband data service revenues, Internet access revenues and other non-cable service revenues.

The FCC did not specifically address whether advertising revenues, home shopping channel commissions, launch support, late fees, installation fees and even equipment revenues, because they could be considered “non-cable” services. The FCC does note that advertising revenues and home shopping commissions have historically been included in gross revenues for franchise fee calculation purposes, but it does not say such revenues and commissions can be included in the calculation of gross revenues going forward.

Charges Incidental to the Awarding or Enforcing of a Franchise

Section 622(g)(2)(D) of the Cable Act excludes from the federal five percent franchise fee cap “requirements or charges incidental to the awarding or enforcing of the franchise, including payments for bonds, security funds, letters of credit, insurance, indemnification, penalties, or liquidated damages . . .” According to the FCC, the term “incidental” includes only those items listed in Section 622(g)(2)(D), “as well as other minor expenses” described in the order. Examples of charges that are not “necessarily” to be regarded as incidental include processing fees, acceptance fees, consultant fees, and attorney fees. Reasonable franchise application fees and processing fees are, however, to be regarded as proper incidental fees that do not count towards the federal franchise fee cap.

The FCC also concluded that “free or discounted services provided to an LFA” and certain “in-kind payments” are non-incidental costs that must be considered franchise fees. The order was silent on the specific treatment of institutional networks and whether the costs associated with providing fiber for institutional networks and furnishing free drops, outlets and cable service to governmental institutions could be deducted from a cable operator’s franchise fee payments.

In-Kind Payments Unrelated to the Provision of Cable Service

The Report and Order finds that “any requests made by LFAs that are unrelated to the provision of cable service by a new competitive entrant are subject to the statutory 5 percent franchise fee cap.” The FCC provides no concrete guidance as to what types of financial and in-kind requests would not be counted against the franchise fee cap, but does list certain examples of requirements that apparently would be deemed franchise fees, if included in franchise documents, such as scholarship grants, video hookups, money for wildflower seeds and fiber for traffic signal monitoring.

Contributions in Support of PEG Services and Equipment

Section 622(g)(2)(C) of the Cable Act specifies that “capital costs which are required by the franchise to be incurred by the cable operator for public, educational, or governmental access facilities” are not franchise fees. The FCC interprets this language to encompass “those costs incurred in or associated with the construction of PEG access facilities.” The order goes on to state that “payments in support of the use of PEG access facilities” are franchise fees. These payments in support of PEG include, but are not limited to, “salaries and training.”

Michael Bradley

Mike Bradley is a partner at Bradley Werner, LLC. Mike has spent nearly his entire 30+ year career representing local governments and access television organizations on cable television and telecommunications issues. Throughout that time, he has had the privilege of representing many of his clients continuously. Mike has received the highest attorney ratings from Martindale-Hubble and is admitted to practice in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Washington and in multiple federal courts, including the United States Supreme Court.

Recent Posts

Understanding DISH’s Force Majeure Claims and Implications

Municipal governments and public entities that maintain cell tower leases, rooftop agreements, fiber transport contracts,…

2 days ago

Local Governments Stand Up to Unsupported Claims

On behalf of the Northwest Suburbs Cable Communications Commission (NWSCCC), the North Metro Telecommunications Commission…

1 week ago

Xcel Energy Ordered to Refund $40.6 Million to Customers due to Outage

The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) has ordered Xcel Energy to refund $40.6 million—plus interest—to…

2 weeks ago

Court Vacates Digital Discrimination Rules

Court of Appeals vacates Digital Discrimination Rules on Judicial Review.

2 weeks ago

California Court Upholds Tax on Video Streaming Services

A municipal voter-approved tax on video services was upheld to apply to video streaming revenues.…

3 months ago

Minnesota Local Governments Challenge FCC’s Authority on Broadband

A coalition of Minnesota local governments filed comments with the FCC, asserting that federal preemption…

5 months ago

This website uses cookies.