FCC chair helps ISPs and landlords make deals that renters can’t escape

Lobby groups thank new FCC chair

Housing industry lobby groups praised Carr in a press release issued by the National Multifamily Housing Council (NMHC), National Apartment Association (NAA), and Real Estate Technology and Transformation Center (RETTC). “His decision to withdraw the proposal will ensure that millions of consumers—renters, homeowners and condominium owners—will continue to reap the benefits of bulk billing,” the press release said.

The industry press release claims that bulk billing agreements negotiated between property owners and Internet service providers “typically secur[e] high-speed Internet for renters at rates up to 50 percent lower than standard retail pricing” and remove “barriers to broadband adoption like credit checks, security deposits, equipment rentals, or installation fees.”

“Bulk billing arrangements have made high-speed internet more accessible and affordable for millions of Americans, especially for low-income renters and seniors living in affordable housing,” NMHC President Sharon Wilson Géno said.

While the FCC prohibits deals in which a service provider has the exclusive right to access and serve a building, there are other ways in which competitors can be effectively shut out of buildings. In 2022, the FCC said its existing rules weren’t strong enough and added a ban on exclusive revenue-sharing agreements between landlords and ISPs in multi-tenant buildings. The revenue-sharing ban was approved 4–0, including votes from both Rosenworcel and Carr.

Comcast, Charter, Cox, and cable lobby group NCTA opposed Rosenworcel’s plan for a bulk billing ban, saying that “interfering with the ability of building owners to offer these arrangements to their tenants will result in higher broadband and video prices and other harms for consumers, with questionable and limited benefits.”

Carr issued a statement today, saying, “During the Biden-Harris Administration, FCC leadership put forward a ‘bulk billing’ proposal that could have raised the price of Internet service for Americans living in apartments by as much as 50 percent. This regulatory overreach from Washington would have hit families right in their pocketbooks at a time when they were already hurting from the last administration’s inflationary policies. That is why you saw a broad and bipartisan coalition of groups opposing the plan. After all, seniors, students, and low-income individuals would have been hit particularly hard.” Carr also said that he plans more actions “to reverse the last administration’s costly regulatory overreach.”