TV License in the UK

[clinscheid]

Checkout this excerpt from an article on the BBC website:

TV Licensing spokeswoman Jessica Ray said: "Being caught red-handed by TV Licensing isn't most people's idea of a funny situation, but some people will always try to bluff their way out of it."

But, she added: "There is a serious punchline to these jokes. If you get caught, you risk a trip to court and a possible £1,000 fine."


WOW! You gotta be kidding me!

 

[Joe Capitano]

Nope. They're not. There is no such thing as "Free TV" in Britain. It costs £126.50 (US$216.50 as of Nov. 25, 2005) a year to watch the BBC, etc. on a colo(u)r set and £42.00 (US$72) a year on a black and white one - just to watch anything at all. Rates vary for special circumstances - for instance, if you're blind you pay half price.

The money mostly funds the commercial-free BBC - all of it. There used to be radio licenses as well, but those are no more. This is over and above any costs for satellite or cable TV, or the cost of your TV or PC card.

So how do they know if you're legal? They ask Big Brother, of course. Every TV manufactured there has this little oscillator which sends out a signal that can be picked up by detectors in specially-equipped vans, and hand held ones the inspectors carry around. If they detect a TV set that isn't in their database, someone's paying you a visit - and they've no interest in having some tea and crumpets.

Click here to find out more, and be glad TV here in the States doesn't require a viewing license.

 

[markfp-1]

I just recently read, in a British newspaper, that there's a move afoot in the parliament to increase the fee to 300 pounds and eliminate the difference between b/w and colour. Boy, am I glad they don't do that here, although it wouldn't surprise me if they tried. It sounds like it would be something they'd do here in New York State. I think they're working on a way to tax breathing.

 

[navychop]

And they continue the tax, even though there is some evidence that it reduces TV sales and actually costs the economy more than the tax brings in.

 

[Joe Capitano]

...there's a move afoot in the parliament to increase the fee to 300 pounds and eliminate the difference between b/w and colour

Yikes! That's equivalent to the basic cable bill (sans premiums) for many of us. Ludicrous. Just lopping off the fee for black and white sets should suffice. How many of those do you even see these days in a size suitable for the average family room, anyway.

Anyway, this fee will only go away if and when the BBC starts selling ads - which will be the very same day the shoe drops, hell freezes over, pigs fly, etc.

One wonders if there might be enough public scorn out there to change the minds of those MPs. In a country where taxes are enough of a concern, a whopping TV license fee could be enough to make things very interesting at the next Election.

 

[navychop]

Which, under "First Past the Post" means, even if the current ruling party loses the popular vote, but barely so, they stay in power anyway, unless it's a Tuesday, or err..... the Mad Hatter wins?

The populace supports the TV tax. Increasing it will probably result in complaints, but nothing serious. Does ANY other country have a TV tax/license? Have Britons EVER had a major revolt against taxes since the Magna Carta?

 

[Derwin0]

Boy, am I glad they don't do that here, although it wouldn't surprise me if they tried.

They already do, it's the PBS Funding portion that's in the Federal/State budgets, that's paid by income and/or sales taxes.

 

[Foxbat]

I wonder how they feel about Internet TV? Or would the computer be taxed separately?

On the other hand, to not be inundated with four minutes of commercials every six minutes might be worth $300/yr...

 

[navychop]

The BBC might be without "commercials" (open to discussion), and that's what the tax is for, but the other, non-BBC channels have commercials.

 

[markfp-1]

They already do, it's the PBS Funding portion that's in the Federal/State budgets, that's paid by income and/or sales taxes.

Well, I guess you're correct about that, but it's part of something else and isn't a stand-alone tax. Not to say that it still doesn't come out of our pockets.

 

[rkrenicki]

and the BBC doesnt have fund drives like PBS does

 

[techpuppy]

PBS funding

If you check out PBS funding you'll find that various government programs pay only about 63.5 million a year. That works out to only about 22 cents a year per U.S. citizen.

Also I've been reading that BBC plans to make much of it programming available for download free of charge. It's still controversial, but may be a great source for some good programming.