This annual report includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "Securities Act"“Securities Act”), and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"“Exchange Act”), regarding, among other things, our plans, strategies and prospects, both business and financial including, without limitation, the forward-looking statements set forth in Part I. Item 1. under the heading "Business – Company Focus,"“Business” and in Part II. Item 7. under the heading "Management’s“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations"Operations” in this annual report. Although we believe that our plans, intentions and expectations reflected in or suggested by these forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot assure you that we will achieve or realize these plans, intentions or expectations. Forward-looking statements are inherently subject to risks, uncertainties and assumptions, including, without limitation, the factors described in Part I. Item 1A. under the heading "Risk Factors"“Risk Factors” and in Part II. Item 7. under the heading, "Management’s“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in this annual report. Many of the forward-looking statements contained in this annual report may be identified by the use of forward-lookingforward‑looking words such as "believe," "expect," "anticipate," "should," "planned," "will," "may," "intend," "estimated," "aim," "on“believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “should,” “planned,” “will,” “may,” “intend,” “estimated,” “aim,” “on track," "target," "opportunity"” “target,” “opportunity,” “tentative,” “positioning,” “designed,” “create,” “predict,” “project,” “initiatives,” “seek,” “would,” “could,” “continue,” “ongoing,” “upside,” “increases” and "potential,"“potential,” among others. Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements we make in this annual report are set forth in this annual report and in other reports or documents that we file from time to time with the SEC, and include, but are not limited to:

We and our parent companies have a significant amount of debt and may (subject to applicable restrictions in our debt instruments) incur additional debt in the future. As of December 31, 2008,2016, our total principal amount of debt was approximately $11.8 billion, our member's deficit was approximately $813 million and the deficiency of earnings to cover fixed charges for the year ended December 31, 2008 was $1.5$60.0 billion.

BecauseOur significant amount of debt could have consequences, such as:

Additionally, the Charter Operating credit facilities require Charter Operating to comply with a maximum total leverage covenant and a maximum first lien leverage covenant. The breach of any covenants or obligations in our or our parent companies’ indentures or credit facilities, not otherwise waived or amended, could result in a default under the applicable debt obligations and could trigger acceleration of those obligations, which in turn could trigger cross defaults under other agreements governing our and our parent companies’ long-term indebtedness. In addition, the secured lenders under our notes and the Charter Operating credit facilities the holders of the Charter Operating senior second-lien notes, the secured lenders under the CCO Holdings credit facility, and the holders of the CCH I notes could foreclose on their collateral, which includes equity interests in our subsidiaries, and exercise other rights of secured creditors.  Any default under those credit facilities or the indentures governing our or our parent companies’ debt could adversely affect our growth, our financial condition, our results of operations and our ability to make payments on our notes and our credit facilities, and could force us to seek the protection of the bankruptcy laws.  See “Part I. Item 1.  Business – Recent Developments – Charter Operating Credit Facility” and “Risks Relating to Bankruptcy.”

We are dependent on our cash on hand and cash flow from operations to fund our debt obligations, capital expenditures and ongoing operations. Our ability to service our and our parent companies’ debt and to fund our planned capital expenditures and ongoing operations will depend on both our and our parent companies’ ability to continue to generate and grow cash flow and our and our parent companies’ access (by dividend or otherwise) to additional liquidity sources.sources at the applicable obligor. Our and our parent companies’ ability to continue to generate and grow cash flow is dependent on many factors, including:

Our primary assets are our equity interests in our subsidiaries. Our operating subsidiaries are separate and distinct legal entities and are not obligated to make funds available to ustheir debt issuer holding companies for payments on our notes or other obligations in the form of loans, distributions, or otherwise. Charter Operating’s ability to make distributions to us or the applicable debt issuers to service debt obligations is subject to its compliance with the terms of its credit facilities and indentures,the indenture that governs its secured notes and restrictions under applicable law. TWC, LLC’s and TWCE’s ability to make distributions to us or Charter Operating to service debt obligations

is subject to restrictions under applicable law. See Note 9 to the accompanying consolidated financial statements contained in “Part II. Item 7. Management’s Discussion8. Financial Statements and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Limitations on Distributions” and “— Summary of Restrictive Covenants of Our High Yield Notes – Restrictions on Distributions.Supplementary Data.” Under the Delaware Limited Liability Company Act we and(the “Act”), our subsidiarysubsidiaries may only make distributions if the relevant entity has “surplus” as defined in the act.Act. Under fraudulent transfer laws, we and our subsidiaries may not pay dividends if the relevant entity is insolvent or areis rendered insolvent thereby. The measures of insolvency for purposes of these fraudulent transfer laws vary depending upon the law applied in any proceeding to determine whether a fraudulent transfer has occurred. Generally, however, an entity would be considered insolvent if:

It is uncertain whether we will have, at the relevant times, sufficient surplus at theWe believe that our relevant subsidiaries to make distributions, including for payments of interestcurrently have surplus and principal on the debts of the parents of such entities, and there can otherwise be no assurance that we and ourare not insolvent, however, these subsidiaries will notmay become insolvent or will be permitted to make distributions in the future in compliance with these restrictions in amounts needed to service our and our parent companies’ indebtedness.future. Our direct or indirect subsidiaries include the borrowers and guarantors under the Charter Operating credit facilities.  Charter Operating is also an obligorfacilities and guarantornotes and under senior second-lienthe TWC, LLC and TWCE notes. As of

In the event of bankruptcy, liquidation, or dissolution of one or more of our subsidiaries, that subsidiary'ssubsidiary’s assets would first be applied to satisfy its own obligations, and following such payments, such subsidiary may not have sufficient assets remaining to make payments to its parent company as an equity holder or otherwise. In that event:

We and our parent companies may not have the ability to raise the funds necessary to fulfill our obligations under our and our parent companies' notes and our credit facilities following a change of control. Under the indentures governing our and our parent companies'the CCO Holdings’ notes, upon the occurrence of specified change of control events, the applicable notedebt issuer is required to offer to repurchase all of its outstanding notes. However, we and our parent companies may not have sufficient access to funds at the time of the change of control event to make the required repurchase of the applicable notes, and all of the notes issuers areCharter Operating is limited in theirits ability to make distributions or other payments to their respective parent companyany debt issuer to fund any required repurchase. In addition, a change of control under the Charter Operating credit facilities would result in a default under those credit facilities.facilities, which would trigger a default under the indentures governing the CCO Holdings’ notes, the Charter Operating notes and the TWC, LLC and TWCE notes. Because such credit facilities and the Charter Operating notes are obligations of our subsidiary,Charter Operating and its subsidiaries, the credit facilities and the Charter Operating notes would have to be repaid bybefore Charter Operating before theirOperating’s assets could be available to us or our parent companiesCCO Holdings to repurchase our or our parent companies’their notes. Any failure to make or complete a change of control offer would place the applicable issuer or borrowerCCO Holdings in default under its notes. The failure ofOur or our subsidiaries failure to make a change of control offer or repay the amounts accelerated under their or our notes and credit facilities would place them or us in default.default under such agreements.

The industry in which we operate is highly competitive and has become more so in recent years. In some instances, we compete against companies with fewer regulatory burdens, easierbetter access to financing, greater personnel resources, greater resources for marketing, greater and more favorable brand name recognition, and long-established relationships with regulatory authorities and customers. Increasing consolidation in the cable industry and the repeal of certain ownership rules have provided additional benefits to certain of our competitors, either through access to financing, resources, or efficiencies of scale.

Our principal competitors forresidential video service faces competition from a number of sources, including direct broadcast satellite services, throughout our territory are DBS providers.  The two largest DBSas well as other companies that deliver movies, television shows and other video programming over broadband Internet connections to TVs, computers, tablets and mobile devices. Our residential Internet service faces competition from the phone companies’ DSL, FTTH and wireless broadband offerings as well as from a variety of companies that offer other forms of online services, including wireless and satellite-based broadband services. Our residential voice service competes with wireless and wireline phone providers, are DirecTVas well as other forms of communication, such as text messaging on cellular phones, instant messaging, social networking services, video

conferencing and Echostar.email. Competition from DBS,these companies, including intensive marketing efforts with aggressive pricing, exclusive programming and increased high definitionHD broadcasting has hadmay have an adverse impact on our ability to attract and retain customers. DBS has grown rapidly over the last several years.  DBS companies have also recently announced plans and technical actions to expand their activities in the MDU market.  The cable industry, including us, has lost a significant number of video customers to DBS competition, and we face serious challenges in this area in the future.

In order to attract new customers, from time to time we make promotional offers, including offers of temporarily reduced price or free service.  These promotional programs result in significant advertising, programming and operating expenses, and also requireOur services may not allow us to make capital expenditurescompete effectively. Competition may reduce our expected growth of future cash flows which may contribute to acquire and install customer premise equipment.  Customers who subscribe to our services as a result of these offerings may not remain customers following the end of the promotional period.  A failure to retain customers could have a material adverse effect on our business.

We are exposed to risks associated with the economic conditions of our current and potential customers, the potential financial instability of our customers and their financial ability to purchase our products. If there were a general economic downturn, we may experience increased cancellations by our customers or unfavorable changes in the mix of products purchased, including an increase in the number of homes that replace their video service with Internet-delivered and/or over-air content, which would negatively impact our ability to attract customers, increase rates and maintain or increase revenue. In addition, providing video services is an established and highly penetrated business. Our ability to gain new video subscribers is dependent to a large extent on growth in occupied housing in our service areas, which is influenced by both national and local economic conditions. Weak economic conditions may also have a negative impact on our advertising revenue. These events have adversely affected us in the past, and may adversely affect our cash flow, results of operations and financial condition if a downturn were to occur.

In addition, we are susceptible to risks associated with the potential financial instability of the vendors and results of operations.

Increased demands by owners of some broadcast stations for carriage of other services or payments to those broadcasters for retransmission consent are likely to further increase our programming costs. Federal law allows commercial television broadcast stations to make an election between “must-carry” rights and an alternative “retransmission-consent” regime. When a station opts for the latter, cable operatorsretransmission consent regime, we are not allowed to carry the station’s signal without the station’s permission. In some cases, we carry stations under short-term arrangements while we attempt to negotiate new long-term retransmission agreements. If negotiations with these programmers prove unsuccessful, they could require us to cease carrying their signals, possibly for an indefinite period. Any loss of stations could make our video service less attractive to customers, which could result in less subscription and advertising revenue. In retransmission-consent negotiations, broadcasters often condition consent with respect to one station on carriage of one or more other stations or programming services in which they or their affiliates have an interest. Carriage of these other services, as well as increased fees for retransmission rights, may increase our programming expenses and diminish the amount of capacity we have available to introduce new services, which could have an adverse effect on our business and financial results.

We operate in a highly competitive, consumer-driven and rapidly changing environment. Our businesssuccess is, characterized by rapidto a large extent, dependent on our ability to acquire, develop, adopt, upgrade and exploit new and existing technologies to address consumers’ changing demands and distinguish our services from those of our competitors. We may not be able to accurately predict technological change andtrends or the introductionsuccess of new products and services. If we choose technologies or equipment that are less effective, cost-efficient or attractive to customers than those chosen by our competitors, if we offer services some of whichthat fail to appeal to consumers, are bandwidth-intensive.  We cannot assure younot available at competitive prices or that do not function as expected, or we will beare not able to fund the capital expenditures necessary to keep pace with technological developments, or that we will successfully anticipate the demandour competitive position could deteriorate, and our business and financial results could suffer.

The ability of some of our customers forcompetitors to introduce new technologies, products and services requiring newmore quickly than we do may adversely affect our competitive position. Furthermore, advances in technology, decreases in the cost of existing technologies or bandwidth beyondchanges in competitors’ product and service offerings may require us in the future to make additional research and development expenditures or to offer at no additional charge or at a lower price certain products and services that we currently offer to customers separately or at a premium. In addition, the uncertainty of our expectations.ability, and the costs, to obtain intellectual property rights from third parties could impact our ability to respond to technological advances in a timely and effective manner.

The implementation of our network-based user interface, Spectrum Guide may ultimately be unsuccessful or more expensive than anticipated. Our inability to maintain and expand our upgraded systems and provide advanced services such as a state of the art user interface in a timely manner, or to anticipate the

We depend on a limited number of third party service providers, suppliers and licensors to supply some of the services, hardware, software and operational support necessary to provide some of our services.  We obtain these materials from a limited number of vendors, some of which do not have a long operating history or which may not be able to continue to supply the equipment and services we desire. Some of our hardware, software and operational support vendors, and service providers represent our sole source of supply or have, either through contract or as a result of intellectual property rights, a position of some exclusivity. If any of these parties breaches or terminates its agreement with us or otherwise fails to perform its obligations in a timely manner, demand exceeds these vendors’ capacity, or if these vendorsthey experience operating or financial difficulties, they significantly increase the amount we pay for necessary products or services, or they cease production of any necessary product due to lack of demand, profitability or a change in ownership or are otherwise unable to provide the equipment or services we need in a timely manner, at our specifications and at reasonable prices, our ability to provide some services might be materially adversely affected, or the need to procure or develop alternative sources of the affected materials or services might delay our ability to serve our customers. These events could materially and adversely affect our ability to retain and attract customers, and haveIn addition, the existence of only a material negative impact on our operations, business, financial results and financial condition.  A limited number of vendors of key technologies can lead to less product innovation and higher costs. For these reasons,These events could materially and adversely affect our ability to retain and attract customers and our operations, business, financial results and financial condition.

Our cable systems have historically been restricted to using one of two proprietary conditional access security systems, which we generally endeavorbelieve has limited the number of manufacturers producing set-top boxes for such systems. As an alternative, we developed a new conditional access security system which can be downloaded into set-top boxes with features we specify that could be provided by a variety of manufacturers. We refer to our specified set-top box as our Worldbox. Additionally, we are developing technology to allow our two current proprietary conditional access security systems to be software downloadable into our Worldbox. In order to realize the broadest benefits of our Worldbox technology, we must now complete the support for the downloadable proprietary conditional access security systems within the Worldbox. We cannot provide assurances that this implementation will ultimately be successful or completed in the expected timeframe or at the expected budget.

We rely on patent, copyright, trademark and trade secret laws and licenses and other agreements with our employees, customers, suppliers and other parties to establish alternative vendors for materialsand maintain our intellectual property rights in technology and the products and services used in our operations. Also, because of the rapid pace of technological change, we consider critical, butboth develop our own technologies, products and services and rely on technologies developed or licensed by third parties. However, any of our intellectual property rights could be challenged or invalidated, or such intellectual property rights may not be sufficient to permit us to take advantage of current industry trends or otherwise to provide competitive advantages, which could result in costly redesign efforts, discontinuance of certain product or service offerings or other competitive harm. We may not be able to establishobtain or continue to obtain licenses from these relationshipsthird parties on reasonable terms, if at all. In addition, claims of intellectual property infringement could require us to enter into royalty or licensing agreements on unfavorable terms, incur substantial monetary liability or be ableenjoined preliminarily or permanently from further use of the intellectual property in question, which could require us to obtain required materials on favorable terms.

Our high-speed Internet customers utilizeNetwork and information systems technologies are critical to our network to access the Internet and, as a consequence, we or they may become victim to common malicious and abusive Internetoperating activities, both for our internal uses, such as peer-to-peer file sharing, unsolicited mass advertising (i.e., “spam”)network management and supplying services to our customers, including customer service operations and programming delivery. Network or information system shutdowns or other service disruptions caused by events such as computer hacking, dissemination of computer viruses, worms and other destructive or disruptive software.  These activitiessoftware, “cyber attacks,” process breakdowns, denial of service attacks and other malicious activity pose increasing risks. Both unsuccessful and successful “cyber attacks” on companies have continued to increase in frequency, scope and potential harm in recent years. While we develop and maintain systems seeking to prevent systems-related events and security breaches from occurring, the development and maintenance of these systems is costly and requires

Any of these events, if directed at, or experienced by, us or technologies upon which we depend, could have adverse consequences on our network, our customers and our customers,business, including degradation of service, service disruption, excessive call volume to call centers, and damage to our or our customers'customers’ equipment and data. Significant incidentsLarge expenditures may be necessary to repair or replace damaged property, networks or information systems or to protect them from similar events in the future. Moreover, the amount and scope of insurance that we maintain against losses resulting from any such events or security breaches may not be sufficient to cover our losses or otherwise adequately compensate us for any disruptions to our business that may result. Any such significant service disruption could leadresult in damage to our reputation and credibility, customer dissatisfaction and ultimately a loss of customers or revenue, in addition to

As of December 31, 2008, Charter had approximately $8.7$11.2 billion of federal tax net operating losses,loss carryforwards resulting in a gross deferred tax asset of approximately $3.1$3.9 billion expiringas of December 31, 2016. These losses resulted from the operations of Charter Communications Holdings Company, LLC ("Charter Holdco") and its subsidiaries and from loss carryforwards received as a result of the TWC Transaction. Federal tax net operating loss carryforwards expire in the years 20092018 through 2028.2035. In addition, Charter also hashad state tax net operating losses,loss carryforwards resulting in a gross deferred tax asset (net of federal tax benefit) of approximately $325$304 million generally expiring in years 2009 through 2028.  Due to uncertainties in projected future taxable income and the bankruptcy filing, valuation allowances have been established against the gross deferred tax assets for book accounting purposes, except for deferred benefits available to offset certain deferred tax liabilities.  Currently, suchas of December 31, 2016. State tax net operating losses can accumulate and be used to offset most of Charter’s future taxable income.  However, anloss carryforwards generally expire in the years 2017 through 2035.

In the past, Charter has experienced “ownership change”changes” as defined in Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended would place significant(the “Code”). In general, an “ownership change” occurs whenever the percentage of the stock of a corporation owned, directly or indirectly, by “5-percent stockholders” (within the meaning of Section 382 of the Code) increases by more than 50 percentage points over the lowest percentage of the stock of such corporation owned, directly or indirectly, by such “5-percent stockholders” at any time over the preceding three years. As a result, Charter is subject to an annual limitationslimitation on the use of such net operating lossesits loss carryforwards which existed at November 30, 2009 for the first “ownership change,” those that existed at May 1, 2013 for the second “ownership change,” and those created at May 18, 2016 for the third “ownership change.” The limitation on Charter's ability to use its loss carryforwards, in conjunction with the loss carryforward expiration provisions, could reduce Charter's ability to use a portion of its loss carryforwards to offset future taxable income, Charter may generate.  Most notably, the bankruptcy filing will generate an ownership change upon emergence from Chapter 11 and Charter’s net operating loss carryforwards will be reduced by the amount of any cancellation of debt income resulting from the Proposed Restructuring that is allocable to Charter.  A limitation on Charter’s ability to use its net operating losses, in conjunction with the net operating loss expiration provisions,which could reduce its ability to use a significant portion of Charter’s net operating losses to offset any future taxable income which may result in Charter being required to make material cash tax payments. Charter’sCharter's ability to make such income tax payments, if any, will depend at such time on its liquidity

or its ability to raise additional capital, and/or on receipt of payments or distributions from Charter Holdco and its subsidiaries, including us.  See Note 19

If Charter were to the accompanying consolidated financial statements contained in “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”

As part of Legacy TWC’s separation from Time Warner Inc. (“Time Warner”) in March 2009 (the “Separation”), Time Warner received a private letter ruling from the IRS and Time Warner and TWC received opinions of tax counsel confirming that the transactions undertaken in connection with us.

Additionally, in connection with any acquisitions we complete, including the recently completed Transactions, we may not achieve the growth, synergies or other financial and operating benefits we expected to achieve, and we may incur write-downs, impairment charges or unforeseen liabilities that could negatively affect our operating results or financial position or could otherwise harm our business. Even if we are able to integrate the business operations obtained in such transactions successfully, it is not possible to predict with certainty if or when these cost synergies, growth opportunities and benefits will occur, or the extent to which they actually will be achieved. For example, the benefits from such transactions may be offset by costs incurred in integrating new business operations or in obtaining or attempting to obtain regulatory approvals, or increased operating costs that may be experienced as a result of the transactions. Realization of any benefits and cost synergies could be affected by the factors described in other risk factors and a number of factors beyond our control, as applicable, including, without limitation, general economic conditions, increased operating costs, the response of competitors and vendors and regulatory developments. Further, contemplating or completing an acquisition and integrating an acquired business, product or technology, individually or across multiple opportunities, could divert management and employee time and resources from other matters.

Liberty Broadband currently owns a significant amount of Charter Class A common stock and is entitled to certain governance rights with respect to Charter and us. A/N currently owns Charter Class A common stock and a significant amount of membership interests in our parent company, Charter Holdings, that are convertible into our Charter Class A common stock and is entitled to certain governance rights with respect to Charter. Members of the Charter board of directors include directors who are also officers and directors of Liberty Broadband and directors who are current or former officers and directors of A/N. Dr. John Malone is the Chairman of Liberty Broadband, and Mr. Greg Maffei is the president and chief executive officer of Liberty Broadband. Steven Miron is the Chief Executive Officer of A/N and Michael Newhouse is an officer or director of several of A/N’s affiliates. As of December 31, 2016, Liberty Broadband beneficially held approximately approximately 19% of Charter’s Class A common stock (including shares owned by Liberty Interactive over which Liberty Broadband holds an irrevocable voting proxy) and A/N beneficially held approximately approximately 13% of Charter’s Class A common stock, in each case assuming the conversion of the membership interests held by A/N. Pursuant to the stockholders agreement between Liberty Broadband, A/N and Charter, Liberty Broadband currently has the right to designate up to three directors as nominees for Charter’s board of directors and provides strategic guidanceA/N currently has the right to designate up to two directors as nominees for Charter’s board of directors with one designated director to be appointed to each of the audit committee, the nominating and corporate governance committee, the compensation and benefits committee and the Finance Committee, in each case provided that each maintains certain specified voting or equity ownership thresholds and each nominee meets certain applicable requirements or qualifications.

In connection with the TWC Transaction, Liberty Broadband and Liberty Interactive entered into a proxy and right of first refusal agreement, pursuant to which Liberty Interactive granted Liberty Broadband an irrevocable proxy to vote all Charter Class A common stock owned beneficially or of record by Liberty Interactive, with certain exceptions. In addition, at the closing of the Bright House Transaction, A/N and Liberty Broadband entered into a proxy agreement pursuant to which A/N granted to Liberty Broadband a 5-year irrevocable proxy (which we refer to as the “A/N proxy”) to vote, subject to certain exceptions, that number of shares of New Charter Class A common stock and New Charter Class B common stock, in each case held by A/N (such shares are referred to as the “proxy shares”), that will result in Liberty Broadband having voting power in Charter equal to 25.01% of the outstanding voting power of Charter, provided, that the voting power of the proxy shares is capped at 7.0% of the outstanding voting power of Charter. Therefore, giving effect to the Liberty Interactive proxy and the A/N proxy and the voting cap contained in the stockholders agreement, Liberty Broadband has 25.01% of the outstanding voting power in Charter. The stockholders agreement and Charter’s amended and restated certificate of incorporation fixes the size of the board at 13 directors. Liberty Broadband and A/N are required to vote (subject to the applicable voting cap) their respective shares of Charter Class A common stock and Charter Class B common stock for the director nominees nominated by the nominating and corporate governance committee of the board of directors, including the respective designees of Liberty Broadband and A/N, and against any other nominees, except that, with respect to the unaffiliated directors, Liberty Broadband and A/N must instead vote in the same proportion as the voting securities are voted by stockholders other than A/N and Liberty Broadband or any group which includes any of them are voted, if doing so would cause a different outcome with respect to the unaffiliated directors. As a result of their rights under the stockholders agreement and their significant equity and voting stakes in Charter, Liberty Broadband and/or A/N, who may have interests different from those of other stockholders, will be able to exercise substantial influence over certain matters relating to the governance of Charter and us, including the approval of significant corporate actions, such as mergers and other services to Charter.  If Charter were to lose his services, our growth, financial condition, and results of operations could be adversely impacted.business combination transactions.

Regulation of the cable industry has increased cable operators'operators’ operational and administrative expenses and limited their revenues. Cable operators are subject to amongvarious laws and regulations including those covering the following:

Legislators and regulators at all levels of government frequently consider changing, and sometimes do change, existing statutes, rules, regulations, or interpretations thereof, or prescribe new ones. Any future legislative, judicial, regulatory or administrative actions may increase our costs or impose additional restrictions on our businesses. For example, with respect to our retail broadband Internet access service, the FCC has (1) reclassified the service as a Title II service, (2) applied certain existing Title II provisions and associated regulations to it, (3) forborne from applying a range of other things:existing Title II provisions and associated regulations, but to varying degrees indicated that this forbearance may be only temporary, and (4) issued new rules expanding disclosure requirements and prohibiting blocking, throttling, paid prioritization, and unreasonable interference with the ability of end users and edge providers to reach each other. The order also subjected broadband providers’ Internet traffic exchange rates and practices to potential FCC oversight for the first time and created a mechanism for third parties to file complaints regarding these matters. These FCC actions were upheld on appeal in June 2016, although additional appeals remain pending.

Congress is considering new cable and telecommunications taxeslegislation that could increase costs on the company, including (1) the adoption of new data security and cybersecurity legislation that could result in additional network and information security requirements for our business, (2) a change in corporate tax laws that could eliminate some of our current deductions, and (3) broadband subsidies to rural areas that could result in subsidized overbuilding of our more rural facilities.

It remains uncertain what rule changes, if any, will ultimately be adopted by Congress and the FCC and what operating expenses.or financial impact any such rules might have on us, including on our programming agreements, customer privacy and the user experience. In addition, the FCC’s Enforcement Bureau has been actively investigating certain industry practices of various companies and imposing forfeitures for alleged regulatory violations.

Our cable systems generally operate pursuant to franchises, permits, and similar authorizations issued by a state or local governmental authority controlling the public rights-of-way. Many franchises establish comprehensive facilities and service requirements, as well as specific customer service standards and monetary penalties for non-compliance. In many cases, franchises are terminable if the franchisee fails to comply with significant provisions set forth in the franchise agreement governing system operations. Franchises are generally granted for fixed terms and must be periodically renewed. Franchising authorities may resist granting a renewal if either past performance or the prospective operating proposal is considered inadequate. Franchise authorities often demand concessions or other commitments as a condition to renewal. In some instances, local franchises have not been renewed at expiration, and we have operated and are operating under either temporary operating agreements or without a franchise while negotiating renewal terms with the local franchising authorities.  Approximately 10% of our franchises, covering approximately 11% of our video customers, were expired as of December 31, 2008.  On January 1, 2009, a number of these expired franchises converted to statewide authorization and were no longer considered expired.  Approximately 4% of additional franchises, covering approximately an additional 4% of our video customers, will expire on or before December 31, 2009, if not renewed prior to expiration.

We cannot assure you that we will be able to comply with all significant provisions of our franchise agreements and certain of our franchisorsfranchisers have from time to time alleged that we have not complied with these agreements. Additionally, although historically we have renewed our franchises without incurring significant costs, we cannot assure you that we will be able to renew, or to renew as favorably, our franchises in the future. A termination of or a sustained failure to renew a franchise in one or more key markets could adversely affect our business in the affected geographic area.

Our cable system franchises are non-exclusive. Consequently, local and state franchising authorities can grant additional franchises to competitors in the same geographic area or operate their own cable systems. In some cases, local government entities and municipal utilities may legally compete with us without obtaining a franchise fromon more favorable terms. Potential competitors (like Google) have recently pursued and obtained local franchises that are more favorable than the local franchising authority.  In addition, certain telephone companies are seeking authority to operate in communities without first obtaining a localincumbent operator’s franchise.  As a result, competing operators may build systems in areas in which we hold franchises.

In a series of recent rulemakings, theThe FCC has adopted new rules that streamline entry for new competitors (particularly those affiliated with telephone companies) and reduce franchising burdens for these new entrants. At the same time, a substantial number of states recently have adopted new franchising laws.  Again, these new laws, were principally designed to streamline entry for new competitors, and they often provide advantages for these new entrants that are not immediately available to existing operators.  As

Broadband delivery of video content is not necessarily subject to the same franchising obligations applicable to our traditional cable systems. The FCC administers a resultprogram that collects Universal Service Fund contributions from telecommunications service providers and uses them to subsidize the provision of these new franchising lawstelecommunications services in high-cost areas and regulations, we have seen an increaseto low-income consumers and the provision of Internet and telecommunications services to schools, libraries and certain health care providers. A variety of regulatory changes may lead the FCC to expand the collection of Universal Service Fund contributions to encompass Internet service providers. The FCC already has begun to redirect the expenditure of some Universal Service Fund subsidies to broadband deployment in the number of competitive cable franchises or operating certificates being issued, and we anticipateways that trend to continue.could assist competitors.