TV Tax

Cornucopia

The UKTV channels are:-

Dave, Watch, Gold, Yesterday, Good Food, Alibi, Eden, Really, Home, Blighty.

Since they are part-owned by the BBC with the express purpose of exploiting the back-catalog for advertising and subscription revenue, it's hardly surprising that they do this.

Some of the other programmes you mention were originally shown on the BBC, but the BBC does not own the rights. Therefore Sony TV shows Hustle. For the time being, they will be in the minority.

However, the BBC has over the past couple of years changed the way it deals with copyright of independent productions, and it'll be interesting to see if this triggers a wider dispersion of this content.

Either way, to assume that the licence fee "pays for" this content in full at its first showing is not correct. The longer-term rights will be taken into account in terms of budgeting for the programme.

MiserlyMartin

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

I'm not wishing to go off topic too much, but if people were able to opt out of paying specific taxes in the way that you describe it would lead to a situation where only the rich could afford education and health care. Should you also be able to opt out of paying towards the Defence Budget because you aren't a soldier?

I do agree with your point about blind people having to pay for a TV license.

No of course I'm happy to pay for state run schools, the NHS and the defence budget as they all in some way benefit everyone. I wouldn't like the country to turn into an defenceless nation of uneducated and sick people.! But the tax system benefits those with children massively and penalises the single person.

MiserlyMartin

Norman_Castle wrote: »

Motoring taxation is made up of two elements, vehicle excise duty (VED), which can be considered a tax on ownership, and fuel duty, which is a tax on use. Although historically the road fund tax was considered a hypothecated tax to pay for the building and maintenance of the road network, this has not been so since 1937 and it is now a general revenue raising tax. Changes to the rates and coverage of the duty are made in the Finance Acts. The Labour Government introduced a new system of VED, based primarily on carbon dioxide emissions, for cars registered on and after 1 March 2001

So if its now a general revenue raising tax this is why the roads are in such a poor state of repair. Potholes all over the place here! Its like dodgems driving these days. Fuel duty is a tax on use, so there's no need for new pay as you drive schemes, we already have it in fuel duty!

MiserlyMartin

Cornucopia wrote: »

The UKTV channels are:-
Either way, to assume that the licence fee "pays for" this content in full at its first showing is not correct. The longer-term rights will be taken into account in terms of budgeting for the programme.

Nevertheless, the programme budget would still be a lot lower if it were not bolstered by the licence fee in order to make the programme in the first place.

brewerdave

Wail wrote: »

It is very easy to get angered at the TV Licence fee for some but I should point out that we are only talking just over £12 per month. My Council is taking £96 per month from me and that annoys me more. Have you seen the state of the roads?

...and I wish I was only paying £96 pm:eek:

Cornucopia

MiserlyMartin wrote: »

Nevertheless, the programme budget would still be a lot lower if it were not bolstered by the licence fee in order to make the programme in the first place.

I think that's true in certain cases. In others the BBC is as interested in cheap TV as anyone else.

But it's very much a double-edged argument - why do we need to bolster entertainment programming with public funds? Would the masses revolt if Eastenders appeared with a couple of minutes of ads half way through?

Cornucopia

Kurtis_Blue wrote: »

No, but the theory is that if earnings relied on advertising then the only thing that mattered would be ratings, and if you look at what the "masses" seem to want to watch it would not be for the greater good.

Is there a greater good when we are talking about TV, though? Is it that programmes should be made that very few people watch so that they are "there just in case"?

I like the BBC its not faultless but produces a higher standard of programming and includes much wider subjects then any of the ITV channels.

Isn't comparing it with ITV a false comparison, though. Surely you need to compare it with (at least) all FTA commercial channels?

And if we are talking low-audience niches, then why not include every channels that is available in the UK, in which case that beats the BBC in virtually every area.

Nada666

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

I think there was more than a hint of sarcasm in Penrhyn's post.;)

Sorry, wasn't paying too much attention. Attach it then to whichever apologists there are. Must be some.

I am always confused by the anti-licence lobby. Have they really not experienced other countries' atrocities? (Yes, I know the best of the best is brilliant and knocks the BBC out of the park - but look at the rest!)

john1

For interest

This week we went to the pictures to see Trance, absolutely brilliant by the way.

Entrance fees cost around £9 each for 1hr 40min. of entertainment.

In December, I paid £145.50 for 366,912 hours of entertainment, covering BBC National Radio and TV services this does not include all other UK free to view/ listen TV and Radio services.

This to me does seem to put the Licence fee into prospective

Lest we forget part of the Licence fee went to fund the TV digital switch-over, is now providing £300 million towards digital Britain broadband roll out. Also the licence fee is now funding BBC World Service radio and TV .

Has anybody seen many of the private broadcaster helping out by at least paying, whats due, their full UK Taxes

Cornucopia

JoshuaLewis1 wrote: »

A television licence (or broadcast receiving licence) is official permission required in many countries for the reception of television broadcasts, or the possession of a television set.

Yes.

But why would one need official permission to operate a TV?

If we believe the hype, a washing machine or dishwasher ought to be subject to greater official scrutiny.