TV Licence Super Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ken
  • Start date Start date
There’s already zero logic to the TV licence because even if you don’t make any use of BBC’s services, you still have to pay it if you watch any “live” content. That realistically already puts the requirement on the vast majority of households (whether people admit and pay it or not). Expanding it to include streaming services would almost guarantee that every single household would need to have one. At that point, what is the purpose of having a separate tv licence, it just cements the fact that the tv licence is a form of general taxation. Therefore, they may as well take it from our pay and save the millions it must cost to administrate the TV licence.
 
Last edited:
I’m in favour of the BBC. We need a public broadcaster that isn’t influenced by commercial interests.

But taxing those who only stream Netflix is insane. That would be like paying Tesco a tenner a month because you shop at ASDA. Or paying Samsung a tenner a month because you use an iPhone. Or giving Ford a tenner a month because you use a Vauxhall.
 
Shadowness said:
I had another red letter the other day, but nothing since. Apparently I'm down for a visit from my local agent.
Click to expand...
Same here. The legal occupier of my house received a letter saying they have started an investigation into my address, an enforcement officer has been scheduled and the only way to avoid prosecution is to get "correctly licenced".

I am correctly licenced because I don't need one anymore.
 
I don't know why people are even engaging in discussion on the "Change it to include streaming apps" topic.

I refuse to believe it's even seriously on the table for debate, it's preposterous. There's absolutely no way it would fly. Sadly the article, while it looks like a decent source, is rubbish. Over-reporting of a suggestion that fails all common sense checks so didn't need reporting.
 
Just because you (or I) refuse to believe it’s on the table doesn’t make it so.
Do not underestimate the idiocy of those in charge.
In all seriousness, someone in gov has probably leaked it to gauge a reaction.
They’ll certainly get one.
 
LuckyBenski said:
I refuse to believe it's even seriously on the table for debate,
Click to expand...
Oh i can totally see it been up for discussion, It would be a case of "who you know" to get it discussed in parliament.

If the articles are true that half a million households cancelled the licence last year, just shows you a lot of people don't want to pay for their so called service or simply cannot afford it on top of everything else so i can totally see BBC clutching at straws to keep the money rolling in by pulling moves like this.

I do find those videos of the licence goons been told to swiftly jog on hilarious.
 
Well, fortunately I don't have any subscriptions. But I think it is disgraceful if they force people who do have a subscription to another service to pay for a licence. I really wish they would just **** *** over this. It is so insanely stupid. A antiquated and unfair system that has not been relevant for decades and once again the government kick the can down the road and when they do make a decision it's completely nonsensical. What the hell is wrong with these people? Why do they struggle with decisions that other countries sorted out decades ago?
The BBC is already making money with adverts in the USA. They simply need subscriptions and adverts like any other company. As of today they can stop all TV Licence increases and in fact reduce the price by £X per year, until it disappears in Y years time. Simple. Oh, but no, the government take decades to miss that obvious one and continue to kick the can down the road. They are infuriating.
And I am so sick and tired of getting threatening letters from the licensing people!!!

I might add that, as I understand it, no decision has been made. This was just ONE of the options they have been looking at. Hopefully, sense will prevail. Maybe now is the time to start those petitions?
 
Last edited:
LuckyBenski said:
I don't know why people are even engaging in discussion on the "Change it to include streaming apps" topic.

I refuse to believe it's even seriously on the table for debate, it's preposterous. There's absolutely no way it would fly. Sadly the article, while it looks like a decent source, is rubbish. Over-reporting of a suggestion that fails all common sense checks so didn't need reporting.
Click to expand...

What's the common sense to require a TV license to watch live sports via amazon prime video?
 
I can see the confusion though.....if you're paying Amazon to use their service to watch live TV, but also have to pay the BBC. Presumably Amazon have bought the rights to that live event. So what does the BBC have to do with it?
 
platinum87 said:
What's the common sense to require a TV license to watch live sports via amazon prime video?
Click to expand...
It's pretty clean cut for live sports - if it's being broadcast live on TV then a TV license applies however you're viewing it.

I think that is a reasonably sensible setup, though people might argue they've already paid for the content without a TV license. Sport is difficult because of the money changing hands in many directions.
 
LuckyBenski said:
I don't know why people are even engaging in discussion on the "Change it to include streaming apps" topic.

I refuse to believe it's even seriously on the table for debate, it's preposterous. There's absolutely no way it would fly. Sadly the article, while it looks like a decent source, is rubbish. Over-reporting of a suggestion that fails all common sense checks so didn't need reporting.
Click to expand...
It wouldn't surprise me if one lower-tier bods threw the idea in but similarly, i doubt it's being taken seriously as it would essentially boil down to 'pay us (government) otherwise we block your service in the UK' which would cause a complete **** storm amongst the streaming providers and it's just not a practical solution.

I think Lisa Nandy was a bit too quick on not using national tax but, it'll be interesting to see what happens either way although my gut thinks they'll kick the can down the road for the next government to deal with.

Cob said:
I’m in favour of the BBC. We need a public broadcaster that isn’t influenced by commercial interests.
Click to expand...
Most countries have a PSB, so it would be odd to scrap ours and allow further outside influence, especially with news, into our broadcast media.
 
Last edited:
Nevakonaza said:
REALLY wouldn't surprise me if its totally true.

Out of all the issues we have within the UK right now that needs immediate action from our shoddy government, They seem to love discussing things that are NOT a problem.

Of course got to keep their friends at the BBC in a job.

All people will do is sack off Netflix and other streaming apps, And go back down the whole "dodgy box" route again. (Which i don't support btw, But can see why people do it)
Click to expand...
REALLY wouldn't surprise me if it was faked to attack BBC and government. How would this even be policed?
 
How many years ago did they change the rules (or redefine them) to cover "live" on YouTube, so I wouldn't be surprised if they did start it on all streaming services
 
Btone said:
How many years ago did they change the rules (or redefine them) to cover "live" on YouTube, so I wouldn't be surprised if they did start it on all streaming services
Click to expand...
It doesn't cover all live content on YouTube. It only covers the situation where people were watching TV on YouTube instead of on TV and using it as an excuse not to get a TV licence, the loophole got closed.
 
My bet is still on this ending up in national tax. Maybe council tax. Maybe broadband.
Anything that means no one can escape it.

Which means 200-300 a year more per household ish for all of us who don't pay it. And means the BBC can just waste money as they have a captive audience and no accountability.

I hope we keep the TV licence system we have now as long as possible due to the above.


The only options are keep it as is or roll it into one of the taxes above. Because I don't think any government will let the BBC fail. And all. Other options result in the BBC failing.
 
Last edited:
413x said:
The only options are keep it as is or roll it into one of the taxes above. Because I don't think any government will let the BBC fail. And all. Other options result in the BBC failing.
Click to expand...
Or evolving so that their expenses are covered by their revenue. All the other streaming services manage it.
 
413x said:
My bet is still on this ending up in national tax. Maybe council tax. Maybe broadband.
Anything that means no one can escape it.

Which means 200-300 a year more per household ish for all of us who don't pay it. And means the BBC can just waste money as they have a captive audience and no accountability.

I hope we keep the TV licence system we have now as long as possible due to the above.


The only options are keep it as is or roll it into one of the taxes above. Because I don't think any government will let the BBC fail. And all. Other options result in the BBC failing.
Click to expand...
Adverts. And make them more accountable, they must be wasting so much money.
 
413x said:
Which means 200-300 a year more per household ish for all of us who don't pay it.
Click to expand...
Have you got any data to back up your repeated statement that it'll cost us £200-300 per year?
Cig packet maths puts it at £100*, at least provide us something other than 'because'.

* To add, this is based on the current budget against the current number of (active) tax payers in the UK.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom