Bowing to pressure from jails and companies, FCC raises phone rate caps
The agency has voted to raise rate caps to accommodate complaints made by companies and facilities, saddling low-income families with higher costs.
by Wanda Bertram, October 30, 2025
This post was updated on November 7, 2025 to include a link to the FCC’s order, and updating the table of rate caps, which changed slightly between the FCC’s proposed order and the final order.
On Tuesday, the Federal Communications Commission voted to increase phone and video calling rate caps for incarcerated people, changing the rules that it adopted last July and then suspended earlier this year. The new rate caps hike prices by as much as 83% compared to the rates announced last year.
Phone and audio calling rates
| 2024 Rate Cap | 2025 Rate Cap | Percent Change | Rate Change | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prisons | $0.06 | $0.11 | 83% | $0.05 |
| Large Jails (1,000+) |
$0.06 | $0.10 | 67% | $0.04 |
| Med. Jails (350-999) |
$0.07 | $0.12 | 71% | $0.05 |
| Small Jails (100-349) |
$0.09 | $0.13 | 44% | $0.04 |
| Very Small Jails (50-99) |
$0.12 | $0.15 | 12% | $0.03 |
| Extremely Small Jails (0-49) |
$0.12 | $0.19 | 58% | $0.07 |
Video calling rates
| 2024 Rate Cap | 2025 Rate Cap | Percent Change | Rate Change | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prisons | $0.16 | $0.25 | 56% | $0.09 |
| Large Jails (1,000+) |
$0.11 | $0.19 | 72% | $0.08 |
| Med. Jails (350-999) |
$0.12 | $0.19 | 58% | $0.07 |
| Small Jails (100-349) |
$0.14 | $0.21 | 50% | $0.07 |
| Very Small Jails (50-99) |
$0.25 | $0.25 | 0% | -$0.00 |
| Extremely Small Jails (0-49) |
$0.25 | $0.44 | 76% | $0.19 |
The FCC issued rules last year — as required by the Martha Wright-Reed Fair and Just Communications Act — bringing unprecedented relief to families who, all too often, were forced to choose between the cost of communicating with their loved ones behind bars and meeting basic everyday needs. After issuing the rules, the FCC received complaints from phone companies, sheriffs, and state attorneys general. Bowing to this pressure, the agency suspended its 2024 ruling and calculated new rate caps, which inflate the rates and impose new costs on families.
Phone companies and sheriffs challenged the 2024 rules, claiming that they made it unprofitable for companies to serve certain very small jails, as well as to offer call monitoring technology — previously given to jails as a kickback. Neither the companies nor the FCC have ever published any data to back up these claims.1 Nevertheless, the FCC adjusted its calculations to:
- Incorporate all “safety and security” costs (such as call monitoring and surveillance services) into rate caps;
- Add a 2¢ “facility fee” to all rate caps;
- Create a new tier of “extremely small jails” with fewer than 50 people, where rate caps will be higher.
The FCC also added, at the eleventh hour, a 6.7% “inflation factor,” which increased most of the rates in its proposed order from October by one or two cents per minute.
The final rate caps are much higher than those passed in 2024. However, in a rare piece of good news, the FCC will reinstate two parts of its 2024 ruling: the ban on site commissions (kickbacks that companies give to facilities) and on ancillary fees, both of which had had the effect of inflating the final costs families paid.
Ultimately, these higher rate caps further burden incarcerated people and their families, while lining the pockets of companies and facilities.
Facilities still have a choice
The new rate caps are set to go into effect as soon as the order is published in the Federal Register, although facilities will have 120 days to come into compliance.
It’s worth noting that the rate caps instituted by the FCC represent the legal maximum that prisons and jails can charge for phone service. The new rate caps are higher than what many facilities were charging even before the 2024 rules, and in the few months when those rules were in effect, thousands of facilities across the country implemented them successfully.
It is up to each individual jail and department of corrections to decide whether it will keep these lower rates — which guarantee more family contact and thus reduced recidivism — or choose to raise them, imposing the cost of call monitoring technology and other perks from companies onto families struggling to stay connected.
Footnotes
-
The FCC has only been able to cite one example — out of Baxter County, Arkansas — of a sheriff actually ending phone service because of the 2024 rules. Phone provider PayTel claims that the 2024 rules made it cost-prohibitive to serve a handful of small jails in New Mexico, but attorney Stephen Raher dug into these claims and found shaky evidence to support them, as described in an FCC filing. ↩