BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                  AB 1717
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:  May 13, 2014


                     ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON REVENUE AND TAXATION
                                Raul Bocanegra, Chair

                     AB 1717 (Perea) - As Amended:  April 2, 2014


          2/3 vote.  Urgency.  Fiscal committee.  
           
          SUBJECT  :  Telecommunications:  prepaid mobile telephony  
          services:  state surcharge and fees:  local charges collection

           SUMMARY  :  Establishes a new point-of-sale system for collecting  
          and remitting specified fees, surcharges, and taxes applicable  
          to prepaid mobile telephony services (MTS).  Specifically,  this  
          bill  :  

          1)Contains the following legislative findings and declarations:

             a)   Maintaining effective and efficient communications  
               services, 911 emergency systems, communications-related  
               public policy programs to promote universal service, and  
               various local programs across the state benefits all  
               persons with access to the telecommunications system.  

             b)   Providers of end-use communications services, including  
               providers of mobile voice telecommunications services,  
               which the Federal Communications Commission terms MTS, are  
               required to collect and remit communications taxes, fees,  
               and surcharges on various types of communication service  
               revenues, as provided by existing state or local law.  

             c)   Consumers purchase prepaid MTS at a wide variety of  
               retail locations and other distribution channels, as well  
               as through service providers.  

             d)   Prepaid MTS are an important and growing segment of the  
               communications industry.  Such services are often the only  
               means by which persons with low incomes can obtain limited  
               access to the telecommunications system.  

             e)   To ensure equitable contributions from end-use consumers  
               of postpaid and prepaid MTS in this state, there should be  








                                                                  AB 1717
                                                                  Page  2

               standardization with respect to the method used to collect  
               communications taxes, fees, and surcharges from end-use  
               consumers of prepaid MTS.  

             f)   Prepaid MTS are frequently sold by a third-party  
               retailer that is not the provider of MTS, and collecting  
               taxes, fees, and surcharges from prepaid consumers of MTS  
               at the time of the retail transaction is necessary and the  
               most efficient and competitively neutral means of  
               collection.  

             g)   An equitable distribution mechanism is necessary to  
               ensure that utility user taxes (UUTs) and other  
               telecommunication charges are collected on behalf of cities  
               and counties and are properly distributed to those  
               jurisdictions.

          2)Enacts the Prepaid MTS Surcharge Collection Act.

          3)Imposes, on and after January 1, 2016, a "prepaid MTS  
            surcharge" on each prepaid consumer.  Sellers shall collect  
            the surcharge from prepaid consumers at the time of each  
            retail transaction in this state.   

          4)Specifies that the "prepaid MTS surcharge" shall be imposed as  
            a percentage of the sales price of each retail transaction in  
            this state.  

          5)Provides that the "prepaid MTS surcharge" shall be in lieu of  
            any charges imposed under the Emergency Telephone Users  
            Surcharge Act and the "Public Utilities Commission (PUC)  
            surcharges" for prepaid MTS.   

          6)Defines the "prepaid MTS surcharge" as a surcharge consisting  
            of the emergency telephone users surcharge and the "PUC  
            surcharges", as specified.    

          7)Defines the "PUC surcharges" to include:

             a)   The California High-Cost Fund-A Administrative Committee  
               Fund program surcharge;

             b)   The California High-Cost Fund-B Administrative Committee  
               Fund program surcharge;









                                                                  AB 1717
                                                                  Page  3

             c)   The Deaf and Disabled Telecommunications Program  
               Administrative Committee Fund surcharge;

             d)   The California Teleconnect Fund Administrative Committee  
               Fund program surcharge;

             e)   The California Advanced Services Fund program surcharge;  


             f)   The Moore Universal Telephone Service Act; and, 

             g)   PUC reimbursement fees.  

          8)Requires the PUC to compute annually, by October 1 of each  
            year beginning on October 1, 2015, the following:

             a)   A reimbursement fee as a percentage of the sales price  
               for prepaid MTS, to be effective on January 1 of the  
               following year and to be collected and remitted pursuant to  
               this bill; and, 

             b)   The cumulative amount of the telecommunications  
               universal service surcharges as a percentage of the sales  
               price for prepaid MTS, to be effective on January 1 of the  
               following year and to be collected and remitted pursuant to  
               this bill.

          9)Requires the State Board of Equalization (BOE) to calculate  
            annually the prepaid MTS surcharge by November 1 of each year  
            beginning on November 1, 2015, by adding the following:

             a)   The emergency telephone users surcharge rate reported by  
               the Office of Emergency Services (OES); and, 

             b)   The PUC's reimbursement fee and telecommunications  
               universal service surcharges.   

          10)Permits sellers to deduct and retain 2% of the amounts  
            collected from prepaid consumers for the prepaid MTS surcharge  
            and local charges as vendor compensation, except in cases  
            where the seller is the provider of prepaid MTS and sells the  
            prepaid MTS directly to the prepaid consumer.  

          11)Requires the BOE to administer and collect the prepaid MTS  
            surcharge pursuant to the Fee Collection Procedures Law.  








                                                                  AB 1717
                                                                  Page  4


          12)Establishes the Prepaid MTS Surcharge Fund (Fund) in the  
            State Treasury.  The Fund shall consist of all surcharges,  
            interest, penalties, and other amounts collected and paid to  
            the BOE, less reimbursements to the BOE for expenses incurred  
            in administering and collecting the prepaid MTS surcharge.

          13)Enacts the Local Prepaid MTS Collection Act.

          14)Provides that on and after January 1, 2016, a "local charge"  
            imposed on prepaid MTS shall be collected from prepaid  
            consumers in the same manner as the prepaid MTS surcharge is  
            collected if, on or before September 1, 2015, the local agency  
            enters into a contract with the BOE for the BOE to perform  
            specified functions.  In the contract, the local agency shall  
            certify to the BOE:

             a)   That its ordinance applies its "local charge" to prepaid  
               MTS and that the local agency agrees to indemnify the BOE  
               for any and all liability for damages resulting from  
               collection; and, 

             b)   The amount of the local 911 charge, or the applicable  
               tiered rate for a UUT.  

          15)Defines a "local charge" as UUTs, as specified, and charges  
            for access to communication services or to local "911"  
            emergency telephone systems, as specified.   

          16)Suspends, on and after January 1, 2016, the authority of any  
            city, county, or city and county to impose a UUT on the  
            consumption of prepaid MTS at the rate specified by ordinance.  
             Instead, establishes a "tiered method" for collection of the  
            UUT rate, with rates ranging from 0 to 9%.   

          17)Suspends, on and after January 1, 2016, the authority of any  
            city, county, or city and county to impose a charge applicable  
            to prepaid MTS for access to communication services or to  
            local "911" emergency telephone systems at the rate specified  
            by ordinance.  Instead, establishes a simplified "tiered  
            method" for collection of these charges.  

          18)Requires the amount of the combined prepaid MTS surcharge and  
            local charges to be separately stated on the invoice provided  
            to the prepaid consumer.  








                                                                  AB 1717
                                                                  Page  5


          19)Provides that a seller that relies in good faith on  
            information provided by the BOE to match the location of a  
            point-of-sale transaction to the applicable prepaid MTS  
            surcharge amount and local charges, collects that amount from  
            the prepaid consumer, and remits the amount to the BOE, shall  
            not be liable for any additional MTS surcharge or local  
            charges and shall not be required to refund any amounts. 

          20)Provides that this is an urgency statute necessary for the  
            immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety.

           EXISTING LAW  :

          1)Imposes a surcharge, under the Emergency Telephone Users  
            Surcharge Act, on amounts paid for intrastate telephone  
            service.  These surcharges provide revenues sufficient to fund  
            "911" emergency telephone system costs.  Amounts are  
            determined annually by the OES and, upon collection, are paid  
            to the BOE on a monthly basis by the telephone service  
            supplier.  Funds are then deposited into the State Treasury to  
            the credit of the State Emergency Telephone Number Account in  
            the General Fund, to be expended for limited purposes,  
            including to pay the Department of General Services for its  
            costs administering the "911" emergency telephone number  
            system.    

          2)Grants the PUC regulatory authority over public utilities,  
            including telephone corporations.  Specifically, the PUC is  
            authorized to fix just and reasonable rates and charges for  
            services provided by public utilities.  

          3)Establishes the PUC Utilities Reimbursement Account and  
            authorizes the PUC to determine annually a fee to be paid by  
            every public utility (except railroad corporations) providing  
            service directly to customers or subscribers and subject to  
            the PUC's jurisdiction.  Specifically, the PUC establishes the  
            fee, with the approval of the Department of Finance, to  
            produce funds sufficient to cover the PUC's budget and an  
            appropriate reserve.  

          4)Establishes the state's telecommunications universal service  
            programs and authorizes the PUC to impose charges to fund  
            those programs.  Pursuant to this authority, the PUC has  
            established 6 end-user surcharges to fund 6 universal service  








                                                                  AB 1717
                                                                  Page  6

            programs.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  The BOE estimates that, in 2016, this bill will  
          result in a revenue loss of $1.7 million.  The BOE further notes  
          that its estimate does "not take into consideration additional  
          revenue lost under this measure for reimbursement to the BOE for  
          administrative costs, which are substantial . . . ."  

          As for local revenues, the BOE has identified over 150 local  
          UUTs.  Because of the high number of UUTs and the various rates  
          involved, the BOE is unable to estimate the impact on UUT  
          revenues.  

           COMMENTS  :   

          1)The author has provided the following statement in support of  
            this bill:

               AB 1717 would modernize our tax collection system to keep  
               pace with the rapidly evolving technology and market of the  
               wireless industry.  Doing so will ensure that prepaid  
               wireless customers, a growing segment of the market, pay  
               the same, existing taxes and fees that all other phone  
               customers pay to maintain effective and efficient 911  
               systems, while also benefitting local governments and other  
               public purpose programs.

               Everyone who uses phone services pays a small monthly fee  
               as part of their bill to help fund 911 and support other  
               important state and local programs.  However, for prepaid  
               wireless services, there is no collection mechanism for  
               customers to pay these fees. Nearly 25% of all wireless  
               customers are now prepaid customers.  The current system  
               leaves state and local governments without a reliable,  
               predictable means for ensuring collection of these  
               revenues.

               Modernizing state statutes to keep pace with evolving  
               markets and technology in the prepaid segment of the  
               wireless industry means implementing a point-of-sale  
               collection method on prepaid wireless services.  AB 1717  
               ensures tax fairness and equity while also generating  
               stable revenue for 911 systems, local governments and other  
               public purpose programs.  Thirty-two states and the  
               District of Columbia have enacted the point-of-sale  








                                                                  AB 1717
                                                                  Page  7

               collection model, and the system is working in those  
               states.

          2)Proponents of this bill note the following:

               Prepaid wireless service's unique business model offers  
               excellent wireless service to consumers at a very  
               affordable rate, often less expensive than post paid  
               service.  Moreover, prepaid services are offered on a  
               "pay-as-you-go" basis with no required contracts, term or  
               volume commitments, early termination penalties, overage  
               charges, or credit checks.  These important factors make  
               prepaid services available to those consumers to whom the  
               security and convenience of mobile telephone service would  
               not be available.  This business model offers reliable  
               service and affordable pricing.  However, the fact that the  
               service is not billed creates a challenge as to how to  
               collect end user fees to fund programs such as 911, and the  
               various public purpose programs administered by the  
               California Public Utilities Commission.  

               AB 1717 would establish a uniform, statewide retail  
               point-of-sale collection for taxes and fees on prepaid  
               wireless services.  AB 1717 will create a transparent and  
               predictable source of funding for critical 911 services.   
               AB 1717 also promotes consumer equity and fairness by  
               ensuring that all wireless customers who use the same 911  
               services pay the same taxes and fees to fund those  
               services.  In fact, point-of-sale collection methods have  
               been successfully enacted and implemented in at least 33  
               states.  

          3)Opponents of this bill note the following:

               There already is a system in place to collect 9-1-1 fees.   
               According to law, carriers are currently collecting and  
               remitting the required fees and surcharges to the  
               California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC).  Currently,  
               the State collects $480 million annually in surcharges at a  
               cost of $2.5 million.  Under the proposal of AB 1717, it  
               will cost California $12-$14 million dollars annually to  
               collect roughly 10% of the market ($48 million from prepaid  
               wireless) while also continuing to pay $1 million to  
               collect the remaining $430 million in surcharges.  









                                                                  AB 1717
                                                                  Page  8

               In the recently published CPUC analysis of AB 1717, they  
               estimate that the source of 9-1-1 funding would face severe  
               financial losses annually.  The CPUC also concluded that by  
               creating a bifurcated collection system for public purpose  
               surcharges and user fees, AB 1717 will raise administrative  
               charges that are  passed on to the consumer.   In 2012, 50%  
               of the prepaid market had an annual household income of  
               less than $35,000.  AB 1717  WILL  unfairly hurt low income  
               earners by creating additional revenue costs that will be  
               passed on to the consumer.  (Emphasis in original.)   

          4)Committee Staff Comments

              a)   Where the law and market trends collide  :  In the case of  
               traditional "postpaid" services, carriers know the personal  
               identities of their customers and generally collect  
               surcharges and fees by levying a certain percentage on top  
               of the cost of monthly services billed.  
                
                In the case of "prepaid" services, however, carriers often  
               do not know the identity of individual purchasers,  
               especially where services are provided through third-party  
               retailers, rending the "collection" and "remittance" of  
               surcharges for prepaid MTS a subject of considerable  
               controversy.  The PUC asserts that carriers are already  
               collecting and remitting state surcharges and fees from  
               both their postpaid and prepaid customers.  The wireless  
               telecommunications industry, on the other hand, asserts  
               that carriers are currently remitting the taxes, fees, and  
               surcharges with no standardized or feasible way to collect  
               them from prepaid customers.  With the use of prepaid  
               services only expected to grow, carriers argue that it is  
               time to establish a uniform statewide method for collecting  
               and remitting fees and surcharges from prepaid consumers.    
                

              b)   What would this bill do  ?  This bill would establish a  
               new point-of-sale system for collecting and remitting  
               specified fees, surcharges, and taxes applicable to prepaid  
               MTS.  Beginning January 1, 2016, retailers would be  
               required to collect a unified "prepaid MTS surcharge" from  
               prepaid consumers at the time of sale.  This surcharge  
               would be imposed as a percentage of the sales price, and  
               would be imposed in lieu of any 911 surcharge or  
               PUC-administered surcharges imposed for prepaid MTS.   








                                                                  AB 1717
                                                                  Page  9

               Retailers would be permitted to deduct and retain 2% of the  
               amounts collected as vendor compensation, with the  
               remainder paid to the BOE, which would be charged with  
               administering the new system.  The BOE, in turn, would be  
               authorized to deduct its own administrative expenses.  
              
                Essentially, prepaid MTS providers would no longer be  
               required to remit surcharges and fees out of their existing  
               (largely wholesale) revenue streams.  Instead, carriers  
               would be able to keep their existing revenue streams whole,  
               by passing the surcharge and fee costs directly on to  
               prepaid MTS consumers.  

               This bill would also establish a new point-of-sale system  
               for collecting and remitting locally imposed UUTs and 911  
               charges applicable to prepaid MTS.  Specifically, this bill  
               would establish a tiered rate structure for locally imposed  
               UUTs.  This tiered structure is designed to ameliorate the  
               administrative complexity that would necessarily be  
               involved in collecting the multiple rates imposed by the  
               numerous jurisdictions with UUT ordinances applicable to  
               MTS.

              c)   The policy arguments on both sides  :  On April 10, 2014,  
               the PUC voted unanimously to adopt an "Oppose Unless  
               Amended" position on AB 1717.  The PUC bases its opposition  
               to this bill on four main policy objections.  The  
               discussion below outlines these four points, and summarizes  
               the wireless telecommunication industry's response to each  
               argument:

                i)     The PUC argues that this bill creates a new  
                 bureaucracy and significantly increases costs  :   
                 Specifically, the PUC states that this bill shifts  
                 responsibility for the collection and remittance of  
                 surcharges and fees from carriers to third-party  
                 retailers.  By so doing, the PUC contends that this bill  
                 would require the creation of a new bureaucracy to  
                 collect surcharges and fees from roughly 45,000 retail  
                 locations instead of from approximately 20 prepaid  
                 carriers.  According to the PUC, this additional  
                 administrative complexity would significantly increase  
                 costs, with estimates ranging from $12 to $14 million in  
                 recurring costs, not accounting for the millions of  
                 dollars in startup costs.








                                                                  AB 1717
                                                                  Page  10


                 The telecommunications industry counters by asserting  
                 that, under current law, these surcharges are end-user  
                 consumer surcharges.  According to industry, a  
                 point-of-sale system is the only method available to  
                 collect from end-users in a fair and equitable manner.   
                 Industry asserts that a point-of-sale system provides  
                 transparency not currently available in any other method  
                 of collection.  Industry also asserts that this bill does  
                 not create a new bureaucracy, but instead builds upon the  
                 state's existing sales tax collection and audit  
                 structure.  Finally, industry notes that, in the postpaid  
                 context, collection takes place when the customer pays -  
                 through a monthly bill.  Thus, industry asserts that, in  
                 the prepaid context, collection should also take place  
                 when the customer pays - at the cash register.  

                ii)    The PUC argues that this bill would create an  
                 additional, parallel collection system  :  Specifically,  
                 the PUC argues that the proposed prepaid-only system  
                 would operate in addition to the existing collection and  
                 remittance systems that currently collect all  
                 telecommunications surcharge revenues for a fraction of  
                 the cost of the prepaid-, wireless-only solution proposed  
                 by this bill.  The PUC notes that, under the current  
                 system, the state collects $480 million in surcharges for  
                 $2.5 million in annual collection costs.  By comparison,  
                 the PUC contends that this bill's proposed system would  
                 cost $12 to $14 million annually to collect $48 million  
                 in surcharges.  

                 Industry counters by asserting that it would be  
                 impossible for this bill to create a parallel collection  
                 system for prepaid because there currently is no  
                 collection system for prepaid services.  Specifically,  
                 industry notes that the current system does not work for  
                 prepaid services, which are often purchased anonymously  
                 from big box stores.  As a result, carriers contend that  
                 they are incurring out-of-pocket costs by remitting taxes  
                 and surcharges without getting reimbursed from their  
                 prepaid customers.  

                iii)   The PUC argues that this bill would reduce industry  
                                                 oversight  :  The PUC contends that this bill would  
                 fragment state agency oversight into two inconsistent  








                                                                  AB 1717
                                                                  Page  11

                 surcharge collection mechanisms - one for prepaid and one  
                 for all other telecommunications service.  The PUC argues  
                 that, under the proposed arrangement, the PUC does not  
                 have enforcement authority over the retailers and "no way  
                 to keep the ratepayers from having to pay all the  
                 additional costs associated with collecting from  
                 thousands of retail locations instead [of] 20-odd  
                 carriers."

                 Industry contends that this bill would in no way fragment  
                 state agency oversight.  Specifically, industry notes  
                 that this bill proposes a single state agency - namely  
                 the BOE - as the entity responsible for uniformly  
                 collecting taxes and fees from every single retailer that  
                 sells prepaid services.  In addition, industry contends  
                 that this bill promotes oversight and transparency by  
                 designating the BOE, which already has expertise with a  
                 point-of-sale tax collection system.  

                iv)    The PUC argues that this bill proposes solutions to  
                 a problem that does not exist  :  The PUC notes that  
                 carriers currently remit all state surcharges and attest  
                 to remitting applicable local UUTs.  According to the  
                 PUC, by mandating a single point-of-sale collection  
                 mechanism, this bill prohibits more efficient and less  
                 costly collection methods that already exist.  The PUC  
                 notes that carriers often have multiple points of contact  
                 with their customers, and that prepaid carriers  
                 frequently collect detailed customer account information  
                 even for services purchased from third-party retailers.  

                 Industry contends that a problem does exist; namely, that  
                 end-users of prepaid service are not currently paying the  
                 end-user fees and surcharges.  Industry also argues that  
                 it is inaccurate to suggest that carriers currently  
                 possess multiple ways of assessing surcharges, and that  
                 this bill is consistent with state policy because it  
                 proposes a method that itemizes surcharges for customers.  
                  Additionally, industry argues "AB 1717 is less confusing  
                 to consumers, because it proposes one uniform method that  
                 all carriers must follow, rather than leaving consumers  
                 to sort through a variety of unspecified methods that may  
                 or may not provide itemized disclosure."  

              d)   Issues raised by the BOE  :  The BOE has raised a number  








                                                                  AB 1717
                                                                  Page  12

               of policy and administrative concerns with this bill.  For  
               a comprehensive discussion of these concerns, please refer  
               to the BOE's staff analysis, which notes, among other  
               things:

                i)     MTS surcharge does not exclude ancillary services  :   
                 In its current form, the surcharge consists of any and  
                 all state and locally authorized taxes, fees, and  
                 surcharges that are applicable to mobile telephony  
                 services, as described.  Except as provided, the bill  
                 requires the surcharge to apply to the  entire price  if  
                 prepaid MTS [are] sold in combination with mobile data  
                 services or any other service or products for a single  
                 price. 

                 This bill requires the MTS surcharge rate calculation to  
                 include the 911 surcharge and CPUC-surcharge rates  
                 applicable to intrastate telephone communication  
                 services, as determined by the OES and CPUC,  
                 respectively.  However, the application of the resulting  
                 MTS surcharge rate does not exclude ancillary services,  
                 such as voice-mail service, data, and messaging  
                 (texting).  Assuming no difference between post- and  
                 pre-paid wireless service cost, MTS consumers will pay a  
                 higher surcharge than post-paid wireless consumers since  
                 the 911 surcharge and CPUC surcharges do not apply to  
                 ancillary services.  (Emphasis in original.)

                ii)    This bill imposes a MTS surcharge at the time of  
                 each retail transaction for prepaid wireless services in  
                 this state  :  This bill states that a retail transaction  
                 occurs in the state if the prepaid consumer makes the  
                 retail transaction at a retail location in this state, or  
                 if the prepaid consumer makes a known-address  
                 transaction, as described.  A known-address transaction  
                 that occurs in this state generally relates to an  
                 Internet-based or telephone-based transaction.  In this  
                 case, the seller likely transfers the prepaid wireless  
                 services to the consumer by:

                  (1)       Mail as a physical prepaid wireless card or a  
                    card bundled with a mobile phone; or,

                  (2)       Directly adding the prepaid minutes to the  
                    consumer's device.  








                                                                 AB 1717
                                                                  Page  13

                   
                 In a known-address transaction, the seller may be located  
                 in this state or outside this state.  It is questionable  
                 whether or not the state may legally require an  
                 out-of-state MTS retailer, who has no physical presence  
                 in California, to remit the surcharge on services sold to  
                 an in-state consumer.  While service suppliers are  
                 currently registered with the BOE for purposes of the 911  
                 Surcharge, some prepaid MTS sellers may be located  
                 outside this state even though they sell to California  
                 consumers.  
                  
              e)   Double-referral  :  This bill was double-referred to the  
               Assembly Committee on Utilities and Commerce (U&C), and  
               passed out of that Committee on a 9-0 vote on April 21,  
               2014.  For additional discussion of this bill's provisions,  
               please refer to the U&C analysis.   

             f)   Potential amendment  :  The U&C analysis suggested that  
               the author and sponsors consider requiring entities that  
               are currently remitting state user fees and public purpose  
               program fees to continue remitting to the PUC on their own  
               direct prepaid sales.  Indeed, U&C Committee staff argued  
               that such an amendment might ensure that the PUC maintains  
               its comprehensive oversight of carriers.  This Committee  
               might also wish to consider whether this bill's proposed  
               point-of-sale collection and remittance system should apply  
               to cases where carriers sell prepaid MTS directly to  
               customers (as opposed to third-party retail transactions).   
               Excluding direct sales from the new regime might enhance  
               oversight and could potentially reduce some of the  
               administrative costs involved in having the BOE collect and  
               remit fees.  That said, such an amendment might also  
               further complicate an already bifurcated proposal for  
               prepaid sales.  

              g)   Related legislation  :  AB 300 (Perea) contained  
               provisions substantially similar to the current bill and  
               would have established a point-of-sale system for  
               collecting and remitting specified fees, surcharges, and  
               taxes applicable to prepaid MTS.  AB 300 was vetoed by the  
               Governor, who noted the following in his veto message:

                    This bill would establish an additional system for  
                    collecting and remitting








                                                                  AB 1717
                                                                  Page  14

                    fees, surcharges and taxes applicable to prepaid  
               mobile services.  These
                    charges would be collected from prepaid customers and  
                    remitted to the Board of
                    Equalization, while fees collected from postpaid  
                    customers would continue to
                    be remitted directly to the Public Utilities  
                    Commission, State 911 Fund and
                    local governments.
                     
                    There is no question that the state needs an effective  
                    system for capturing
                    local taxes related to the sale of prepaid phones. The  
                    solution, however,
                    proposed by this bill is duplicative, complex and will  
                    result in significant
                    and unnecessary costs to the state.
                     
                    I encourage the author to partner with the local  
                    governments and State
                    Agencies affected by these revenues and craft a bill  
                    with a more cost
                    effective solution.

                i)     Prior legislation  :  

                  (1)       AB 1050 (Ma), of the 2011-12 Legislative  
                    Session, would have imposed an MTS surcharge similar  
                    to this bill.  AB 1050 died in the Senate Committee on  
                    Governance and Finance.

                  (2)       AB 2545 (De La Torre), of the 2009-10  
                    Legislative Session, would have required the PUC to  
                    conduct a public process to develop recommendations  
                    for an equitable and uniform method to collect state  
                    and local fees and surcharges from consumers of  
                    prepaid MTS.  AB 2545 died on the Senate Inactive  
                    File.

           REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :   

           Support 
           
          Boost
          California Professional Firefighters








                                                                  AB 1717
                                                                  Page  15

          City of Burbank
          City of Culver City
          City of Gilroy
          City of Glendale
          City of La Verne
          City of Sacramento
          City of San Gabriel
          CTIA - The Wireless Association
          MuniServices
          Peace Officers Research Association of California
          Sprint
          T-Mobile
          TracFone Wireless, Inc. 
          Verizon
          Virgin Mobile

           Opposition 
           
          California Chapter of the National Emergency Number Association
          California Fire Chiefs Association
          California Peace Officers' Association
          California Public Utilities Commission
          California State Sheriffs' Association
          Northern California Chapter of the Association of Public Safety  
          Communications Officials
          Office of Ratepayer Advocates
           
          Analysis Prepared by  :  M. David Ruff / REV. & TAX. / (916)  
          319-2098