Overview - ACMA/media/Numbering and Projec…  · Web viewDemand driver analysis suggests the key ... the model is unable to identify a feasible solution ... Electronic submissions

Proposal to amend fees for accessing the Do Not Call Register in 2017–18 and to remake the Do Not Call Register determinationsConsultation paperMARCH 2017

CanberraRed Building Benjamin OfficesChan Street Belconnen ACT

PO Box 78Belconnen ACT 2616

T +61 2 6219 5555F +61 2 6219 5353

MelbourneLevel 32 Melbourne Central Tower360 Elizabeth Street Melbourne VIC

PO Box 13112Law Courts Melbourne VIC 8010

T +61 3 9963 6800F +61 3 9963 6899

SydneyLevel 5 The Bay Centre65 Pirrama Road Pyrmont NSW

PO Box Q500Queen Victoria Building NSW 1230

T +61 2 9334 7700 or 1800 226 667F +61 2 9334 7799

Copyright notice

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/

With the exception of coats of arms, logos, emblems, images, other third-party material or devices protected by a trademark, this content is licensed under the Creative Commons Australia Attribution 3.0 Licence.

We request attribution as © Commonwealth of Australia (Australian Communications and Media Authority) 2017.

All other rights are reserved.

The Australian Communications and Media Authority has undertaken reasonable enquiries to identify material owned by third parties and secure permission for its reproduction. Permission may need to be obtained from third parties to re-use their material.

Written enquiries may be sent to:

Manager, Editorial and DesignPO Box 13112Law CourtsMelbourne VIC 8010Email: [email protected]

1. Overview1.1 Introduction 11.2 Consumer safeguards 11.3 Cost recovery arrangements 21.4 Cost Recovery Implementation Statement (CRIS) 21.5 Sunsetting determinations 21.6 Consultation 3

2. Cost recovery2.1 Modelling 42.2 Direct costs 42.3 Revenue 4

3. Research—drivers of demand3.1 Industry survey 53.2 Telephone interviews 53.3 Historical demand 63.4 Findings 6

4. Forecasting4.1 Revenue modelling 74.2 Pricing sensitivities 74.3 Forecast direct costs and revenue 84.3.1 Modelling 8

5. Fee pricing structure5.1 Current fee pricing structure 95.2 Discussion 95.2.1 Volume discounts 95.2.2 Type A subscriptions 105.2.3 Fixed-price unlimited usage subscription 105.2.4 Single fixed-price model 10

5.3 Options 11

acma | iii

Contents (Continued)

5.4 Option A—Status quo 115.5 Option B—Partial removal of discount (1) 125.6 Option C—Partial removal of discount (2) 125.7 Other options 135.8 Issues for comment 14

6. Proposed changes to the determinations6.1 Application of determinations 156.2 Proposed amendments 156.3 Issues for comment 15

7. Invitation to comment7.1 Making a submission 16

Attachment A—Proposed amendments to the Fees determination

Attachment B—Proposed amendments to the Access determination

Attachment C—Proposed amendments to the Administration determination

acma | iv

1. Overview1.1 IntroductionUnder the Do Not Call Register Act 2006 (DNCR Act), the Australian Communications and Media Authority (the ACMA) is responsible for establishing and overseeing the operation of the Do Not Call Register. The DNCR Act also:> prohibits making unsolicited telemarketing calls or sending unsolicited marketing

faxes to numbers on the register> sets out the main remedies for breaches of the DNCR Act (civil penalties and

injunctions)> allows the ACMA to make determinations in relation to the operations of the

register including setting fees.

The Telecommunications Act 1997 contains additional provisions about telemarketing calls and marketing faxes. These include Part 6 (industry codes and standards), Part 26 (investigations), Part 27 (information-gathering powers) and Part 31A (enforceable undertakings).

1.2 Consumer safeguardsIndividuals and entities can list their eligible1 Australian numbers on the register. As at 31 December 2016, there were 10.86 million numbers on the register.

ACMA research indicates that there is significant awareness of the register in the community, and those with numbers listed on the register report receiving significantly fewer unwanted telemarketing calls.2

To avoid contacting numbers listed on the register, telemarketers and fax marketers check, or ‘wash’3 their lists against the numbers listed on the register. The washed list is returned with registered numbers identified.

Under Section 509 of the Telecommunications Act, complaints can be made to the ACMA if there has been a breach of the DNCR Act or an industry standard. This is subject to a limited number of exemptions to the DNCR Act, including an exemption for telemarketing calls made or authorised by registered charities, political parties, educational institutions or market researchers.

The Telecommunications Act also enables the ACMA to effectively administer additional important safeguards provided in the Telemarketing and Research Industry Standard 2007 and the Fax Marketing Industry Standard 2011. These include specified permitted calling times, information that must be provided during the call, the use of calling line identification and when calls must be terminated.

The register also serves as an important platform for the ACMA to raise broader awareness of issues relating to unsolicited telemarketing and fax marketing, for example in relation to raising consumer awareness of telemarketing scam activity.

1 A number can be added to the register if it is used or maintained primarily for private or domestic purposes, or exclusively for transmitting and/or receiving faxes, or exclusively for use by a government body, or is an emergency services number.2 www.acma.gov.au/Citizen/Phones/Landlines/Reduce-unwanted-calls/hold-the-phone-put-an-end-to-unwanted-telemarketing-calls-13 ‘Washing’ is a term used to describe the process by which telemarketers and fax marketers gain access to the register to find out whether particular numbers are registered (and hence whether they can be contacted).

acma | 1

1.3 Cost recovery arrangements Consistent with the government’s cost recovery policy, from 1 July 2008, the industry is required to fully fund the direct costs of operating and maintaining the register (100 per cent cost recovery).

The costs are recovered from industry by charging a fee to use the register’s washing service. The cost-recovery arrangements for the register were developed by the ACMA in consultation with industry and the Department of Finance.

Fees are determined by assessing the estimated direct costs to operate the register and the expected demand for subscriptions. Any under or over cost recoveries of previous years are also taken into account.

Direct costs to operate the register have been reducing since 2014–15, mainly due to:> lower cost recoverable contract fees—10 per cent less in 2015–16 than in 2014–15> reduced ACMA average staffing levels (ASL) required to manage the operations of

the register—2.53 ASL in 2014–15, 1.96 ASL in 2015–16, 1.84 ASL expected in 2016–17.

However, due to decreasing demand for the washing service, modelling undertaken by the ACMA indicates fees will be required to be increased by 42 per cent to ensure neutral cost recovery for the register over the next five years. See Section 4 for more details.

The ACMA has proposed three options for setting amended fees. These options are discussed in detail in Section 5.

1.4 Cost Recovery Implementation Statement (CRIS)As part of its cost recovery obligations, the ACMA is required under the Australian Government Charging Framework to publish an annual Cost Recovery Implementation Statement (CRIS) for the register.

The CRIS provides the basis for engagement with stakeholders on various charging aspects of the register, including the fees payable, as well as reporting on the cost recovery of the register on an annual basis.

The ACMA consults with the Department of Finance when updating the CRIS. The CRIS must also be:> certified by the ACMA Chair> approved by the Minister for the Department of Communications and the Arts.

1.5 Sunsetting determinationsAdditionally, three determinations, relating to the operation of the register, were made by the ACMA in 2007 and are due to ‘sunset’ on 1 October 2017.

Under Part 4 of Chapter 3 of the Legislation Act 2003, most legislative instruments ‘sunset’ (that is, they are automatically repealed) on 1 April or 1 October that first occurs 10 years after they are registered. This is an automatic process that applies to most legislative instruments regardless of the particular content.

The determinations are the:> Do Not Call Register (Access Fees) Determination 2007 (the Fees determination)

made under subsection 21(1) of the DNCR Act, which sets out that the ACMA may

2 | acma

determine fees payable to access the register washing service and how those fees are to be paid. The fees payable are set using cost-recovery principles and are consistent with the Australian Government Cost Recovery Guidelines .

> Do Not Call Register (Access to Register) Determination 2007 (the Access determination) made under section 20 of the DNCR Act and specifies the manner in which access seekers may submit numbers for checking against the register and other matters relating to accessing the register.

> Do Not Call Register (Administration and Operation) Determination 2007 (the Administration determination) made under section 18 of the DNCR Act, which includes requirements for placing numbers on the register and removing ineligible numbers from the register.

1.6 Consultation Collectively consulting on the options for cost recovery, the draft CRIS and the proposal to remake the three determinations is, in the ACMA’s view, an effective and efficient way for stakeholders to engage.

This approach is considered appropriate as the ACMA is proposing only minor and machinery amendments to the Access determination and the Administration determination. The amended fees will be set out in the remade Fees determination and CRIS.

The draft CRIS has been developed with the current fee pricing structure for illustrative purposes and consistency with the previous CRIS. The final CRIS will reflect the outcomes of this consultation process. The draft CRIS is available from the landing page on the ACMA website.

The details to the amendments to the determinations are in attachments A–C of this document.

The ACMA invites comments on the proposals in this consultation paper or any other issues relevant to the draft CRIS and the remaking of the determinations.

See Section 7, Invitation to comment for details about making a submission.

acma | 3

2. Cost recovery In line with the Australian Government Charging Framework, an annual cost recovery review is conducted by the ACMA to ensure alignment of register expenses and revenue (that is, neutral recovery).

2.1 ModellingThe ACMA engaged ACIL Allen Consulting Pty Ltd, an independent consultancy organisation, to assist in determining the proposed subscription fees to be charged from 1 July 2017.

In order to determine the subscription fees, two major inputs are required:> estimated direct costs associated with operating the register> estimated revenue from the number and type of subscriptions purchased.

A five-year forecasting period (1 July 2017 – 30 June 2022) has been adopted. The time frame broadly aligns with the length of the Commonwealth’s contract with its outsourced register operator and aims to provide medium-term price stability for industry.

2.2 Direct costsThe ACMA maintains separate financial records for the register in order to identify the direct costs associated with its operation.

Direct costs include contract fees, ACMA staff costs, consultation costs and other costs.

Costs not included are those related to the ACMA’s regulatory functions in monitoring and enforcing compliance with the DNCR Act, or the Department of Communications and the Arts policy activities relating to the register. The costs for these activities are met through central budget funding.

No direct costs are expected to change significantly over the next five years. More information on how direct costs are calculated can be found in the draft CRIS (available from the landing page on the ACMA website).

2.3 Revenue Revenue is driven by the demand for subscriptions. Demand may be influenced by many factors, including:> competition from other marketing methods> emerging technologies > elasticity of demand> seasonality factors > the general economy.

The ACMA can estimate the direct costs to operate the register with some confidence; however, estimating future revenue over the longer term is considered a key risk.

To better understand the drivers of demand for the washing service, the ACMA conducted further research. This is discussed in detail in Section 3 .

4 | acma

3. Research—drivers of demandIn 2016–17, the ACMA conducted qualitative and quantitative research on the drivers of demand in the telemarketing industry. This included an industry survey, telephone interviews with active users of the washing service and examination of historical usage.

3.1 Industry surveyIn October 2016, the ACMA conducted a survey to gauge future demand for subscriptions, to decrease the reliance on historical data in predicting future demand.

All active users (1,719) of the washing service were invited to complete the survey via an initial invitation email, followed by three emailed reminders during the survey period.

The survey included questions on:> the wash service used> customer expectations around subscription purchases> satisfaction with the register service.

The ACMA received 87 responses to the survey, giving a response rate of five per cent. This response rate is not considered sufficient to robustly gauge future demand.

Due to the small sample size, caution has been taken when interpreting the results; however, key results are:> the most common use for washed numbers was to make phone calls to potential

customers on behalf of the user’s own organisation> some respondents on-sold washed numbers to other organisations (12 per cent)> the majority of respondents wash numbers at least once a week (48 per cent)> of the eight factors provided to respondents, ‘price of telemarketing/fax marketing

operations’ had the greatest reported influence on their organisations demand for washing numbers, slightly ahead of ‘cost of register subscriptions’.

3.2 Telephone interviewsIn early 2017, the ACMA conducted telephone interviews with eight high-volume users of the washing service to assist in gathering qualitative information about the long-term drivers of subscription demand.

These consultations reinforce the messages conveyed through the survey. The key points in relation to developing growth parameters are that:> no respondent indicated that they expect to see longer term growth in subscription

purchases> all respondents referred to the increased use of alternative marketing

channels/platforms> several respondents referred to the large number of household on the register, and

the growing use of consent-based marketing (both long-term drivers of a decline).

acma | 5

3.3 Historical demandHistorical subscription demand was also used to inform demand forecasts by identifying high-level historical trends in subscription purchases.

Demand for subscriptions has been declining since 2013–14, which in turn, has led to a decline in revenue. Since 2013–14, subscriptions of Type B, Type C, Type D, and Type E have been in decline. This has continued into 2016–17 and has affected revenue. See current fee pricing structure for more information on subscription types.

Figure 1: Accrued revenue per subscription type

3.4 FindingsThe assumptions for subscription growth rates used in the modelling are based on the information presented above. Examination of the key drivers of subscription usage suggest the drivers of decline are long term or structural drivers and are unlikely to change over the forecast period.

Demand driver analysis suggests the key factors for industry are the:> rise of other marketing formats as an alternative to telemarketing> quantity of numbers on the register> price of telemarketing/fax marketing operations> cost of subscriptions> changing customer (marketing) requirements> increase in consent-based telemarketing.

Some qualitative responses indicated that telemarketing will remain part of the marketing mix for organisations into the future. Based on this, modelling assumptions are set to reflect a slight decline and effective stabilisation of demand into the future.

It should be noted that despite the evidence considered in these assumptions, forecasts are inherently uncertain and subject to a multitude of social and technological uncertainties. This is supported by some industry responses, which indicate the possible use of different technologies and approaches in the future.

The potential for reporting bias is also noted here, as respondents may believe that if ‘cost of register subscriptions’ is not reported as an issue, the ACMA may not take this into consideration when determining fees.

6 | acma

4. Forecasting 4.1 Revenue modelling Based on this research, ACIL Allen Consulting has updated the register model assumptions to reflect a continued decline in demand for subscriptions, but which is at a lower rate over the forecast period than in recent history. This is implemented by:> applying the historical component of the forecast to June 2017, based on the

period from January 2016 to December 2016> applying simple growth from July 2017, using the growth rates in Table 1.

Table 1: Register modelling simple growth assumptions from July 2017

Subscription type Historical growth (Jan 2016 to Dec 2016)

Growth rate(from July 2017)

Type A (500 washes) 100% 0%*Type B (20,000 washes) -13% -3%Type C (100,000 washes) -9% -5%Type D (1,000,000 washes) -15% -5%Type E (10,000,000 washes) -50% 0%Type F (20,000,000 washes) 0% 0%Type G (50,000,000 washes) 0% 0%Type H (100,000,000 washes) 0% 0%

Source: ACIL Allen Consulting.

*0 per cent growth rate applied as no charges are currently applied for Type A subscriptions.

4.2 Pricing sensitivitiesACIL Allen Consulting has modelled different ‘price elasticities’ to test the impact of pricing sensitivities. These price elasticities assume a relationship between demand and price. In the absence of robust data to estimate an elasticity, ACIL Allen estimated the required price increase under a range of elasticity scenarios for the current fee pricing structure.

Table 2: Sensitivity testing—price elasticities

Price elasticity Description Price

increase0 No customer sensitivity to price 42.0%

–0.1 For every one per cent increase in price, demand decreases in 0.1 per cent

49.2%

–0.25 For every one per cent increase in price, demand decreases in 0.25 per cent

74.3%

–0.5 For every one per cent increase in price, demand decreases in 0.5 per cent

n/a

Source: ACIL Allen Consulting analysis with updated register model.

The proposed increase in fees may accelerate the decline in demand, but due to the difficulty in sourcing robust demand data, all options considered currently assume that demand is inelastic (that is, not sensitive to changes in price). The ACMA proposes to

acma | 7

monitor any changes in demand closely over the next 12 months to gauge price elasticities that may be relevant to price setting in future processes.

Importantly, however, if the elasticity is –0.5 or lower, the model is unable to identify a feasible solution (that is, the ACMA would not be able to recover costs over the five-year period).

The ACMA welcomes information or data in relation to future demand to assist in informing the quantum of cost recovery required.

4.3 Forecast direct costs and revenueUnder current forecasting, the register is in cumulative over-recovery until 2016–17 and then is modelled to go into cumulative under-recovery if fees are not amended.

Table 3: Modelled costs, revenue and cumulative under/over recovery

Actual Actual Estimate Estimate Estimate EstimateDirect costs 2007–2015 2015–16 2016–17 2017–18 2017–2022 TotalContract fees $14,747,568 $1,750,701 $1,663,724 $1,692,274 $7,222,047 $27,076,313

ACMA staff $5,574,416 $553,414 $516,937 $543,308 $2,312,498 $9,500,574Consultants $213,751 $6,000 $22,825 $11,000 $56,946 $310,522Other $217,449 $31,529 $30,595 $31,992 $121,633 $433,197Total Cost Recovery expenditure

$20,753,184 $2,341,645 $2,234,080 $2,278,574 $9,713,124 $37,320,606

Revenue $21,575,231 $2,232,813 $1,994,957 $1,800,407 $6,579,537Financial year under/over recovery

$822,047 –$108,832 –$239,123 –$478,167 –$3,137,662

Cumulative under/over recovery

$822,047 $713,215 $474,092 –$4,075 –$3,137,662

4.3.1 Modelling The modelling is sensitive to changes in access-seekers’ behaviour. As the washing service offers a very specific service to a small number of users, small changes in demand may have an amplified impact on revenue.

Options have been modelled using all the currently available data, but the final fees under each option may change marginally when updated data is used to finalise the draft CRIS.

8 | acma

5. Fee pricing structureHistorical trends, survey results, and consultations all indicate that long-term drivers are primarily responsible for the decline in register subscription purchases. If true, this means there will be fewer subscriptions to recover the costs of the register over time.

The current fee pricing structure was put in place in 2006. The ACMA considers it is an opportune time to consult with industry on the current pricing structure and investigate alternate pricing structures.

5.1 Current fee pricing structureThe current fee pricing structure is based on annual subscription fees. Under this model, there are eight annual subscription types to choose from (Type A through to Type H).

The type of subscription taken out entitles the access-seeker to submit a specified maximum quantity of numbers—ranging from 500 through to 100 million—for checking against the register during a 12-month period. The minimum subscription (Type A, maximum 500 numbers) is free.

Single, multiple and additional subscriptions can be purchased at any time. Subscriptions are valid for 12 months, commencing from the date of purchase. If another subscription is purchased before the 12-month subscription expires, any remaining (unused) wash credits (other than Type A) will be added to the new subscription and have the new expiry date.

Table 4: Subscription charges since commencement of register

Subscription type

No. of washes 2007–08 2008–09 July 2009– Dec 2010

Jan 2011–current

Type A 500 n/a n/a n/a n/aType B 20,000 $71 $74 $78 $79Type C 100,000 $320 $340 $360 $370Type D 1,000,000 $2,800 $3,000 $3,100 $3,200Type E 10,000,000 $24,000 $25,200 $26,400 $27,000Type F 20,000,000 $40,000 $42,000 $44,000 $45,000Type G 50,000,000 $60,000 $63,000 $66,000 $67,500Type H 100,000,000 $80,000 $84,000 $88,000 $90,000

Average % increase 5.4% 4.8% 2.3%

5.2 Discussion5.2.1 Volume discountsThe current model allows for incremental quantity discounts; that is, as the quantity per order increases, the unit purchasing cost declines incrementally. Larger subscription purchases receive a discount of up to $0.003 per wash credit.

Table 5: Current subscription discounts

Type Cost per subscription

Cost per wash Current % discount

acma | 9

Type A $0 $0.0000 n/aType B $79 $0.0040 0%Type C $370 $0.0037 –6%Type D $3,200 $0.0032 –19%Type E $27,000 $0.0027 –32%Type F $45,000 $0.0023 –43%Type G $67,500 $0.0014 –66%Type H $90,000 $0.0009 –77%

It could be argued that volume discounts somewhat counter the principle of equity, although in this case, particular subscription types are available at the same fee to any user, for example, Type B users all pay the same fee for Type B subscriptions. Additionally these discounts are partially cost reflective, as washing larger lists consumes similar resources to washing smaller lists.

However, to assist in evaluating alternative structures, the ACMA has modelled options that adjust the discounts for stakeholders’ consideration. See Option B and Option C.

5.2.2 Type A subscriptionsWhen the register was established, there was strong consensus that there would be a ‘free usage’ option for small businesses, ad hoc users and optional users of the register such as charities. This has generally been a successful arrangement and there have been no complaints or calls from industry to remove Type A subscriptions.

However, the ACMA has detected some apparent misuse of the free Type A subscription through multiple account registrations. Additionally, it is questionable whether a free, subsidised option is necessary or appropriate in the mature register program, particularly given that the next type (Type B) costs only $79 per subscription.

To assist in evaluating alternative structures, the ACMA has modelled options that include a fee for the Type A subscription for stakeholders’ consideration. See Options B and C.

5.2.3 Fixed-price unlimited usage subscriptionStakeholders have approached the ACMA to introduce a fixed-price unlimited usage subscription. The introduction of this type of subscription is an alternate way of catering to the large volume users of the service and, if volume discounts are reduced, moderating some of the impact of the increase in fees.

The ACMA has modelled a fixed-price unlimited usage subscription in a scenario where the volume discounts are decreased for stakeholders’ consideration. See Option B.

5.2.4 Single fixed-price modelIntroducing a single fixed -price model by removing all the discounts was modelled, but is not considered a feasible option at this time.

This model would meet the requirement of pricing in line with the Australian Government’s cost recovery principles of simplicity, cost effectiveness and consistency. However, the resultant fee increases for the larger subscriptions were considered prohibitive. Under this option, Types G and H would experience fee increases in excess of 126 and 238 per cent, respectively.

10 | acma

In examining the register’s fixed costs versus the variable costs, the ACMA considers a discount of some order remains justified, as these discounts are partially cost reflective that washing larger lists consumes similar resources as washing smaller lists.

5.3 OptionsThe structure of the discount has an impact on price; therefore, the ACMA is consulting on three cost recovery options:> Option A—Status quo (current fee pricing structure) > Option B—Partially remove the discount across some subscription categories,

charge for Type A subscriptions and introduce a fixed-price unlimited usage subscription.

> Option C—Partially remove the discount across four subscription categories and charge for Type A subscriptions.

5.4 Option A—Status quoOption A retains the current discount structure and continues free-of-charge access to Type A subscriptions. Under this option, fees increase by 42 per cent across all remaining subscriptions.

See 5.1. Current fee pricing structure above for more details about this option.

Table 6: Option A—Status quo

Type Cost per subscription

Cost per wash

Discount %

Change in fees

Type A $0 $0.0000  n/a  n/aType B $113 $0.0057 0% 42%Type C $525 $0.0053 –7% 42%Type D $4,540 $0.0045 -20% 42%Type E $38,310 $0.0038 -32% 42%Type F $63,850 $0.0032 -43% 42%Type G $95,775 $0.0019 -66% 42%Type H $127,700 $0.0013 -77% 42%

A key advantage of this option is that it retains a pricing structure that the industry is familiar with and equitably disperses the fee increase across all fee-paying subscriptions. Additionally, this option acknowledges that the discounts in the current price structure are partially cost reflective, as the larger list washing consumes similar resources effort as smaller list washing.

The ACMA is also in the process of establishing if misuse of the Type A subscription is occuring. If confirmed, the ACMA will implement processes to reduce and eliminate any misuse.

Note: The draft CRIS has been developed with Option A calculations for consistency with the previous register CRIS. The final CRIS will be updated to reflect the outcomes of this consultation process.

acma | 11

5.5 Option B—Partial removal of discount (1)Option B proposes the partial removal of the discount across the two largest subscriptions, the introduction of charging for Type A subscriptions and a fixed price (12 month) unlimited usage subscription. Under this option, fees increase from 33 per cent to 67 per cent over the subscription types. See Table 7 for details.

By partially removing the discount for the largest customers, the price increase is less for Types B, C, D, E and F than under Option A.

Under this option:> Type A:

> number of washes adjusted from 500 to 5,000> charge increases from $0 to $30

> Type G:> partial discount is adjusted from 70 per cent to 65 per cent

> Type H:> partial discount is adjusted from 80 per cent to 75 per cent > number of washes adjusted from 100 million washes to a 12-month unlimited

usage subscription.

Table 7: Option B—Partial removal of discount (1)

Type Cost per subscription

Cost per wash

Discount %

Change in fees

Type A $30 $0.0060  n/a 300%Type B $106 $0.0053 0% 34%Type C $495 $0.0050 –7% 34%Type D $4,300 $0.0043 –19% 34%Type E $36,000 $0.0036 –32% 33%Type F $60,000 $0.0030 –43% 33%Type G $105,000 $0.0021 –60% 56%Type H $150,000 n/a n/a 67%

An advantage of this option is that it spreads the price increase across all users and removes any incentive for organisations to misuse the previously free of charge Type A subscription category.

A disadvantage of this option is that larger users will be required to take on a higher percentage increase in fees—a 67 per cent increase has been modelled for Type H users, compared to 33–34 per cent for Type B, C, D and E users.

5.6 Option C—Partial removal of discount (2)Option C proposes the partial removal of the discount across the four largest subscriptions and the introduction of a charge for Type A subscriptions. Under this option, fees increase from 34 to 52 per cent over the subscription types. See Table 8 for details.

Under this option:> Type A:

12 | acma

> number of washes adjusted from 500 to 5,000> charge increases from $0 to $40

> Type E > partial discount reduced from 40 per cent to 36 per cent

> Type F > partial discount reduced from 50 per cent to 46 per cent

> Type G > partial discount is reduced from 70 per cent to 67.5 per cent

> Type H > partial discount is reduced from 80 per cent to 77.5 per cent.

Table 8: Option C—Partially remove the discount (2)

Type Cost per subscription

Cost per wash

Discount %

Change in fees

Type A $40 $0.0080 n/a  400%Type B $110 $0.0055 0% 39%Type C $500 $0.0050 -9% 35%Type D $4,300 $0.0043 -22% 34%Type E $38,900 $0.0039 -29% 44%Type F $65,500 $0.0033 -40% 46%Type G $99,000 $0.0020 -64% 47%Type H $137,000 $0.0014 -75% 52%

Larger users will bear a higher percentage increase in fees but less than under Option B—a 52 per cent increase modelled for Type H users, compared to 37 per cent for Type B, C, D and E users.

5.7 Other optionsThe ACMA proposes to finalise the 2017–18 CRIS with one of the proposed options, as delaying an increase in fees risks compounding the forecasted under-recovery in the medium and longer term.

However, the ACMA welcomes industry suggestions of alternate fee pricing structures (see Issues for comment). These can be thoroughly investigated by the ACMA and industry in the next 12 months, prior to the 2018–19 CRIS being certified and approved for 1 July 2018.

It should be noted that this may involve developing new forecasting models to test suggested pricing structures and potentially amending the current outsourced financial system (the cost of which is recoverable from industry).

5.8 Issues for commentComments are sought on the options identified above to cost recover the direct costs of the register, including:> Do you have a preference for one of the options identified in this paper? If so,

please provide details that support adoption of your identified option.

acma | 13

> Are there other option(s) for setting new charges to recover the direct costs of the register that could be considered? If so, please provide details and rationale for why it should be used.

> Are there any other matters the ACMA should consider in setting amended fees to recover the direct costs of the register, including in relation to future demand?

Comment is also invited on the draft CRIS, which is available on the landing page on the ACMA website.

14 | acma

6. Proposed changes to the determinations

6.1 Application of determinationsThe Fees determination sets out the fees payable by access-seekers to access the register and how those fees are to be paid.

The Access determination provides information on how access-seekers may submit numbers for checking against the register and other matters relating to accessing the register.

The Administration determination supports the operation of the register and includes requirements for placing numbers on the register and removing ineligible numbers from the register.

6.2 Proposed amendmentsNo major amendments are proposed to the determinations. Minor and machinery changes are proposed to:> rationalise and clarify the requirements > update the determinations to reflect current processes> make other minor drafting improvements.

As noted earlier, the Fees determination will be remade to reflect the new subscription fee (listed in column 3 of the table of fees).

All proposed amendments to the determinations are outlined in the following attachments to this paper: > Attachment A —Proposed amendments to the Fees determination > Attachment   B — Proposed amendments to the Access determination> Attachment   C — Proposed amendments to the Administration determination.

The draft determinations can be accessed from the consultation landing page on the ACMA’s website: > Draft Do Not Call Register (Access Fees) Determination 2017 > Draft Do Not Call Register (Access to Register) Determination 2017 > Draft Do Not Call Register (Administration and Operation) Determination 2017.

6.3 Issues for commentComments are sought on the proposed amendments to the determinations outlined at attachments A–C. See Section 7, Invitation to comment for details about making a submission.

acma | 15

7. Invitation to comment7.1 Making a submissionThe ACMA invites comments on the matters set out in this consultation paper or any other issues relevant to the recovering the register’s direct costs and matters covered by the determinations. Submissions should be made:> Online submissions —submissions can be made via the comment function or by

uploading a document. The online consultation page provides further details.> Submissions by post can be sent to:

The ManagerCommunications Projects and Services SectionAustralian Communications and Media AuthorityPO Box 13112 Law CourtsMelbourne VIC 8010

The closing date for submissions is COB, Wednesday 19 April 2017.

Electronic submissions in Microsoft Word or Rich Text Format are preferred.

Enquiries> Consultation enquiries can be emailed to [email protected]> Media enquiries can be directed to Emma Rossi on 02 9334 7719 or by email to

[email protected].

Effective consultation The ACMA is working to enhance the effectiveness of its stakeholder consultation processes, which are an important source of evidence for its regulatory development activities. To assist stakeholders in formulating submissions to its formal, written consultation processes, it has developed Effective consultation—a guide to making a submission. This guide provides information about the ACMA’s formal written public consultation processes and practical guidance on how to make a submission.

Publication of submissionsIn general, the ACMA publishes all submissions it receives, including any personal information in the submissions (such as names and contact details of submitters). The ACMA prefers to receive submissions that are not claimed to be confidential. However, the ACMA accepts that a submitter may sometimes wish to provide information in confidence. In these circumstances, submitters are asked to identify the material (including any personal information) over which confidentiality is claimed and provide a written explanation for the claim.

The ACMA will consider each confidentiality claim on a case-by-case basis. If the ACMA accepts a claim, it will not publish the confidential information unless authorised or required by law to do so.

Release of submissions where authorised or required by lawAny submissions provided to the ACMA may be released under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (unless an exemption applies) or shared with various other government agencies and certain other parties under Part 7A of the Australian Communications and Media Authority Act 2005. The ACMA may also be required to release submissions for other reasons including for the purpose of parliamentary processes or where otherwise required by law (for example, under a court subpoena). While the ACMA seeks to consult submitters of confidential information before that

16 | acma

information is provided to another party, the ACMA cannot guarantee that confidential information will not be released through these or other legal means.

PrivacyThe Privacy Act 1988 imposes obligations on the ACMA in relation to the collection, security, quality, access, use and disclosure of personal information. These obligations are detailed in the Australian Privacy Principles.

The ACMA may only collect personal information if it is reasonably necessary for, or directly related to, one or more of its functions or activities.

The purposes for which personal information is being collected (such as the names and contact details of submitters) are to:> contribute to the transparency of the consultation process by clarifying, where

appropriate, whose views are represented by a submission > enable the ACMA to contact submitters where follow-up is required or to notify

them of related matters (except where submitters indicate they do not wish to be notified of such matters).

The ACMA will not use the personal information collected for any other purpose, unless the submitter has provided their consent or the ACMA is otherwise permitted to do so under the Privacy Act.

Submissions in response to this paper are voluntary. As mentioned above, the ACMA generally publishes all submissions it receives, including any personal information in the submissions. If a submitter has made a confidentiality claim over personal information that the ACMA has accepted, the submission will be published without that information. The ACMA will not release the personal information unless authorised or required by law to do so.

If a submitter wishes to make a submission anonymously or through use of a pseudonym, they are asked to contact the ACMA to see whether it is practicable to do so in light of the subject matter of the consultation. If it is practicable, the ACMA will notify the submitter of any procedures that need to be followed and whether there are any other consequences of making a submission in that way.

Further information on the Privacy Act and the ACMA’s privacy policy is available at www.acma.gov.au/privacypolicy. The privacy policy contains details about how an individual may access personal information about them that is held by the ACMA, and seek the correction of such information. It also explains how an individual may complain about a breach of the Privacy Act and how the ACMA will deal with such a complaint.

acma | 17

Attachment A—Proposed amendments to the Fees determinationNew provision

Current provision Proposed amendment Rationale

Name of Standard1

1 Change name to:Do Not Call Register (Access Fees) Determination 2017

To reflect year the determination will be remade

Commence2

2 This instrument commences 1 July 2017

Align with Cost Recovery Implementation Statement

Authority 3

n/a This instrument is made under subsection 21(1) of the Do Not Call Register Act 2006

Clarify the authority for making the determination

Repeal 4

n/a Repeal of the Do Not Call Register (Access Fees) Determination 2007

Repeal current determination

6 Other instruments

Other instruments 6 6(a)

n/a Sets out that reference to other legislative instruments ‘is a reference to that other legislative instrument as in force from time to time’.

Ensures that where there is a reference to another legislative instrument, that other legislative instrument applies as in force from time to time as opposed to the time of making the determination

6(b) n/a Include ‘a reference to any other kind of instrument or writing is a reference to that other kind of instrument or writing as in force from time to time’

Ensures that where the instrument provides that a requirement relates to another instrument or writing, that other instrument or writing applies as in force from time to time as opposed to the time of making the determination

7 4 Fees

7(1) 4(1) The subscription fees listed in column 3 of the table of fees amendedXXX (TBC after consultation)

Reflect fees in place from 1 July 2017

7(3) 4(3) Change the fees listed in Example 1 and Example 2XXX (TBC after consultation)

Reflect fees in place from 1 July 2017

Note 3 4(4) Move clarification from a subsection to a Note

Update to align with current legislative drafting conventions

18 | acma

Attachment B—Proposed amendments to the Access determination New provision

Current provision Proposed amendment Rationale

Name of Standard1

1 Change name to:Do Not Call Register (Access to Register) Determination 2017

To reflect year the determination will be remade

Commence2

2 This instrument commences at the start of the day after it is registered on the Federal Register of Legislation

Align with protocol for registering instruments

Authority 3

n/a This instrument is made under subsection 20(1) of the Do Not Call Register Act 2006

Clarify the authority for making the determination

Repeal 4

n/a Repeal of the Do Not Call Register (Access to Register) Determination 2007

Repeal current determination

Definitions5

3 Definition inserted: terms and conditions means the terms and conditions referred to in subsection 7(4) of this instrument.

Support simplification of section 7 (previously s.4)

6 n/a Other instruments

6(a) n/a Sets out that reference to other legislative instruments ‘is a reference to that other legislative instrument as in force from time to time’.

Ensures that where there is a reference to another legislative instrument, that other legislative instrument applies as in force from time to time as opposed to the time of making the determination

6(b) n/a Include ‘a reference to any other kind of instrument or writing is a reference to that other kind of instrument or writing as in force from time to time’

Ensures that where the instrument provides that a requirement relates to another instrument or writing, that other instrument or writing applies as in force from time to time as opposed to the time of making the determination

7 4 Manner in which submission under section 19 of the DNCR Act is to be made

7(2) 4(2) Numbers commencing with the Australian international dialling code (61) can be submitted

Update to reflect current processes

acma | 19

New provision

Current provision Proposed amendment Rationale

7 (4) 7 (5)7(6)

4(3)(a) 4(3)(b)4(3)(c)4(3)(d)

Simplified drafting of existing sections. No changes to substance of the affected subsections

Clarification

n/a 3(4)3(5)

Delete reference to use of CD ROMs to submit a list

Redundant process that is not used. Update to reflect current processes.

7(7)7(8)

4(6)(b)4(7)(b)

Change the paragraphs to include ‘… if the Do Not Call Register is kept by the contracted service provider’

Update to reflect current processes.

8 5 Informing about numbers registered or not registered

8(2) 5(2)(a) Change to ‘… paragraph 7(6)(a), the ACMA must inform the access-seeker by making the information to be provided to the access-seeker available for download on a secure path in Comma Separated Variable (CSV) format from the ACMA’s website.’

Clarify which party has the obligation

8(3) 5(2)(b) Change to:‘… paragraph 7(6)(b), the contracted service provider … on a secure path in Comma Separated Variable (CSV) format from the contracted service provider’s website.’

Clarify which party has the obligation

n/a 5(3) Delete subsection on returning information via CD-ROM

Redundant process that is not used. Update to reflect current processes.

8(4) 5(4) Change to :‘… paragraph 7(7)(a), the ACMA must inform the access-seeker by displaying the information to be provided to the access-seeker on the ACMA’s website as soon as practicable after the numbers are entered.’

Clarify which party has the obligation

8(5) 5(4) Change to:‘… paragraph 7(7)(b), the contracted service provider must inform the access-seeker by displaying the information to be provided to the access-seeker on the contracted service provider’s website as soon as practicable after the numbers are entered.’

Clarify which party has the obligation

20 | acma

New provision

Current provision Proposed amendment Rationale

8(6) 5(5) Change to:‘… paragraph 7(8)(a), the ACMA must …’

Clarify which party has the obligation

8(7) 5(5) Change to:‘… paragraph 7(8)(b), the contracted service provider must …’

Clarify which party has the obligation

9 7 Return of list

9(1) 7(2) Change to’… the party to whom the list was submitted must return the list in a way that shows’

Clarifies which party has the obligation

9(1)(a) 7(2)(a) Change to ‘… which numbers in the list are registered.’

Clarification

9(1)(b) 7(2)(b) Change to‘… which numbers in the list are not registered.’

Clarification

9(2) 7(3) Change to‘A person who is obliged to return a list under section 8 …’

Clarifies which party has the obligation

9(2)(c) 7(3)(c ) Change to ‘… at the time the list was checked against the Do Not Call Register’.

Clarification

9(2)(c) 7(3)(d) Change to ‘… at the time the list was checked against the Do Not Call Register”.

Clarification

acma | 21

Attachment C—Proposed amendments to the Administration determinationNew provision

Current provision Proposed amendment Rationale

Name of Standard1

1 Change name to:Do Not Call Register (Administration and Operation) Determination 2017

To reflect year the determination has been remade

Commence2

2 This instrument commences at the start of the day after it is registered on the Federal Register of Legislation

Align with protocol for registering instruments

Authority 3

n/a This instrument is made under subsection 18(1) of the Do Not Call Register Act 2006

Clarify the authority for making the determination

Repeal 4

n/a Repeal of the Do Not Call Register (Administration and Operation) Determination 2007

Repeal current determination

6 n/a Other instruments

6(a) n/a Sets out that reference to other legislative instruments ‘is a reference to that other legislative instrument as in force from time to time’.

Ensures that where there is a reference to another legislative instrument, that other legislative instrument applies as in force from time to time as opposed to the time of making the determination

6(b) n/a Include ‘a reference to any other kind of instrument or writing is a reference to that other kind of instrument or writing as in force from time to time’

Ensures that where the instrument provides that a requirement relates to another instrument or writing, that other instrument or writing applies as in force from time to time as opposed to the time of making the determination

7 4 Applications for registration and applications to check entries on the Register

7(2)(f)7(3)(a)7(4)(a)7(5)(a)7(6)(a)7(7)(a)

4(2)(f)(i)4(3)(a)4(4)(a)4(5)(a)4(6)(a)4(7)(a)

Each clause amended to change the ‘and’ to ‘or’

Removes requirement for notices or information to be located on both the ACMA and the register operator’s websites

8 5 Applications for correction of entries made on the Do Not

22 | acma

New provision

Current provision Proposed amendment Rationale

Call Register

8(2)(f)(i)8(3)(a)8(4)(a)8(5)(a)

5(2)(f)(i)5(3)(a)5(4)(a)5(5)(a)

Each clause amended to change the ‘and’ to ‘or’

Removes requirement for notices or information to be located the both the ACMA and the register operator’s websites

9 6 Correction of the Do Not Call Register

9(2)(a) 6(2)(i) ‘make reasonable efforts to inform’ Improves administration as enables corrections to be made if accountholder cannot be identified or was unable to be contacted

10 7 Removal of entries from the Do Not Call Register

10(2)(f)(i)10(3)(a)10(4)(a)10(5)(a)10(6)(a)10(7)(a)

7(2)(f)(i)7(3)(a)7(4)(a)7(5)(a)7(6)(a)7(7)(a)

Each clause amended to change the ‘and’ to ‘or’

Removes requirement for notices or information to be located on both the ACMA and the register operator’s websites

11 8 Removal of ineligible numbers from the Do Not Call Register

11(2) 8(2) ‘make reasonable efforts to inform’ Improves administration as enables corrections to be made if accountholder cannot be identified or was unable to be contacted

acma | 23