SiriusXM has been struck with a class action lawsuit. The suit is being pursued over the claim that the company has allegedly been adding a deceptive “royalty fee” on consumers bills, allegedly earning them billions in revenue.

According to Billboard, attorneys representing four subscribers filed the complaint last week. They claim that the fee is allegedly 21.4% of the advertised price, and that the service was allegedly presented at a lower price than what the subscribers have paid. The lawyers elaborate, claiming, “SiriusXM intentionally does not disclose the fee to its subscribers. SiriusXM even goes so far as to not mention the words ‘U.S. Music Royalty Fee’ in any of its advertising, including in the fine print.”

The lawsuit claims that SiriusXM allegedly goes to great lengths to keep this under wraps. The subscribers claim that “SiriusXM’s sign-up process, automatic renewal process and policy of not sending monthly or ongoing billing notices or invoices are deliberately designed to prevent subscribers from learning of the U.S. Music Royalty Fee.” The attorneys representing the subscribers have clarified that they are not asking for SiriusXM to get rid of this alleged fee, they only want the company “to include the [fee] in the music plan prices it advertises to the general public.” (via Billboard)

The complaints in this lawsuit echo the sentiments in a suit filed by New York’s Attorney General, Letitia James, back in December. James accused SiriusXM of allegedly making the subscription cancellation process very difficult, claiming that they have allegedly designed it in that manner on purpose, which James reminds us is illegal. She elaborates, “Sirius deliberately wastes its subscribers’ time even though it has the ability to process cancellations with the click of a button. The only reason Sirius requires cancelling subscribers to interact with a live agent at all is to maximize its opportunity to retain them as subscribers.”

SiriusXM has yet to comment on the recent lawsuit, but they vehemently denied James’ claims in December, stating that they will “vigorously defend against these baseless allegations.” They shared in the same statement that they believe James had “grossly mischaracterize[d]” the company and their practices.