AIBU to propose this idea for replacing the BBC Licence Fee?

[BuanoKubiamVej]

The BBC is brilliant, and those who are against it are either swallowing the propoganda of media outlets who know they could make more money if the BBC is overthrown, or simply don't realise the huge global benefits that the BBC creates. But that's not my AIBU so please don't vote on the basis of whether or not you believe this.

However, it's true that the current licence fee is effectively a regressive tax - it is a significant amount of money to the poorest households, but is a negligible amount for the comfortably off.

A subscription or opt-in version isn't the solution, because the universal accessibility of BBC services needs to be maintained. The BBC does a huge amount more than just make TV programmes and even those who never watch TV are getting a lot of benefit from it.

So here's my idea for creating a progressive replacement for the TV licence - tie it in to the Council Tax, putting it on the same bill and collecting it at the same time.

There can then be bands for TV licence payments according to the Council Tax band of each residence. Families on a low income occupying a high-band property would get relief under the same structure as normal council tax relief, meaning that broadly those of us with larger and more comfortable homes and lifestyles pay more, and those who are on the lowest incomes pay the least.

The table in the attached image shows in the 4th column the revenue that would be generated if 100% of properties liable for council tax paid the new progressive TV licence fee in the 3rd column. The total raised this way would be significantly more than the amount that is currently generated by the TV licence fee - there would be plenty of flex to (a) use some of the exess income for the reasonable costs of administering the new scheme and (b) have a system for exempting some properties, according to whatever criteria are necessary to ensure that all situations where it would be unfair for the TV Fee.to be applied could be given a zero rate.

Data for the number of properties in each Council Tax band got from here: on gov.uk

Please vote - YANBU = "This is a good idea" (you can vote YANBU if you think it's a good idea but would never be implemented because of the machinations of those who just want the BBC dead - that doesn't stop it from being a good idea)

YABU = "This is seriously flawed and I will post below as to why."

NB this is specifically about how to address the regressive nature of current BBC funding whereby the poor and the rich pay the same. If your gripe is with the existence of the BBC at all, please use a different thread for that.

No. The licence fee is opt in now. In as as you don’t have to pay it if you don’t use the content - the fact you have to periodically ‘prove’ that and the intrusive means by which the BBC are allowed to operate that is a different matter however. How would you opt out of you don’t use the content if it was tied to your council tax? And who would administer the new way of collecting/checking etc? What changes to the IT systems of local authorities would have to be made, and what cost? If you propose local councils would then be responsible for all of that they would need more money, their finances are already ridiculously stretched. How would you raise the money? Make the licence fee more expensive? No, not a viable proposal.

Fuck that.

We never watch live TV in this house, so I won't be paying extra council tax so anyone else can.

No.

Council Tax bands are already ridiculously archaic and unfair. That system itself needs a complete overhaul before you start adding anything else on it.

I agree with everyone else I'm afraid OP, your suggestion assumes that everyone not only is using the BBC but also has to use the BBC atm. They don't. I've never had a TV license because it's only in the last 3 years that I've actually had a TV, and even now the only thing we use it for is watching Netflix occasionally. I don't agree with dismantling the BBC, although I would strongly support changes to how they enforce the license fee, but I also don't understand why so many people are acting like it's compulsory to have a TV license. If you don't like the content then you should be able to choose not to pay for it, just like any other optional service. Rolling it up in council tax is completely absurd.

It’s not a terrible idea, but does seem a bit unfair. A lone person with a great income might own a small home in a low band.
While a large family on a low income might rent a home in a higher band.

No it's an awful idea.

There should never be a compulsion to pay for the bloated & bad value BBC - simply scrapping the ability to send people to prison for non payment would save MILLIONS if not more a year on prison costs alone as almost third of all women prisoners are there for not paying for a TV licence.
That's a lot of families no longer split up due to the BBC wanting their slice, some of those children having to be placed in care, or placed with abusive ex partners, pregnant women risking their lives & their babies lives whilst in prison over £150.

Why would it be better if they were in prison for £26?
Food bank users don't have a spare 50p a week.

There is no model which includes the TV licence being compulsory that is good.

No. I watch BBC a lot. I think the dramas, the nature programmes, science programmes, Bitesize learning, news- are good quality and I like that there’s no adverts. I can’t imagine only watching Netflix. Netflix shows me the same sort of stuff I have watched before, so I stay in my comfort zone which makes my brain lazy!
However, linking to council tax is unfair as you can be renting a Band D place and still be poor. I have always thought the licence fee should be phased though, along with taxes, so if you earn under 20 k or whatever as a household it should be free.

Council tax is already a faulty system. It assumes the occupiers of expensive houses are rich and can afford to pay more tax, which isn’t always the case! Lots of high earners live alone in small cheap properties, and lots of big families bankrupt themselves to afford expensive houses that offer the space they need. I inherited my house and certainly couldn’t afford to buy it, my household income is very low and I’m sick of being treated like I have loads of money just because I live in an expensive house.

@Narutocrazyfox

I really don't understand why anyone pays it. I stopped watching any kind of live TV a while ago, and stopped paying for the TV licence. I was warned (threatened...?) someone would come round and check but as yet no one has. I'm not sure the BBC could create any content I'd deem to be worth that amount of money.

Also OP linking it yo the council tax banding is a terrible idea. Whilst I'm certainly not against the idea of those on lower incomes paying less, the squeeze on those in the middle would be deeply unpopular.

You have to pay for it to watch i player now, not just live TV. I only had a laptop, but still paid to access i player.

@Alayalaya

Council tax is already a faulty system. It assumes the occupiers of expensive houses are rich and can afford to pay more tax, which isn’t always the case! Lots of high earners live alone in small cheap properties, and lots of big families bankrupt themselves to afford expensive houses that offer the space they need. I inherited my house and certainly couldn’t afford to buy it, my household income is very low and I’m sick of being treated like I have loads of money just because I live in an expensive house.

You have assets, even if you don't have cash. You could sell the house and downsize if you really think you're so poor in your big house.

I think that if it is to continue as a public broadcasting service it should be funded out of income tax. Not council tax which is for local authorities.
If it is to be paid by licence or subscription I am happy to pay for the bbc as I watch it. I think that people shouldn't automatically get it free due to age as some older people have a lot of money and some young people have little money and often don't even watch it.

@Lillyhatesjaz

I think that if it is to continue as a public broadcasting service it should be funded out of income tax. Not council tax which is for local authorities. If it is to be paid by licence or subscription I am happy to pay for the bbc as I watch it. I think that people shouldn't automatically get it free due to age as some older people have a lot of money and some young people have little money and often don't even watch it.

The problem with that is people who don't use it isn't it? I know people on social media have been saying thinks like 'I don't have children, but pay for education, I'm not ill, but pay for health', but TV really isn't the same kind of thing.

Awful idea, why would I want to pay even more money for something that I don't use.

No thanks. I have not watched live TV for years. I boycotted the BBC when all the information started to emerge about the regressive TV licence and how prosecutions tend to unfairly impact on women. It has not been a loss.

A subscription model is the only fair route. They could ditch some of the channels and radio stations too.

@BuanoKubiamVej

The BBC does a huge amount more than just make TV programmes and even those who never watch TV are getting a lot of benefit from it.
Please tell us about these benefits OP?

[quote daimbarsatemydogsbone]@BuanoKubiamVej

The BBC does a huge amount more than just make TV programmes and even those who never watch TV are getting a lot of benefit from it.
Please tell us about these benefits OP?[/quote]
Nope.

I specifically laid out in the OP that this thread is specifically about how to fairly fund the BBC given that it is a good thing. If you want to snipe about the BBC then this isn't the thread for that, and I have no intention of engaging in that debate. not my job.

Thanks to those who have contributed thoughtfully. I don't think I had appreciated the extent to which the Council Tax banding system is urgently in need of an overhaul - I thought it was basically an existing reasonably good measure of how comfortable a lifestyle one has, with basic and modest homes generally being band A and luxurious mansions being band H and everything else being categorised evenly along the scale. But if that's not the case then yes this idea won't work until the council tax scale is fixed. It should be that the average family in a fairly bog-standard home and with an average sort of income pay about the same as now, but there are steep discounts for the least well off and a gradual hike up for those who enjoy more comfortable lifestyles for whom the extra is relatively negligible.

But the various objections on the basis of specific examples where someone is a low income but in a higher band property for good reasons - I did actually address that in my OP, there is plenty of flex in the system for there to be numerous exemptions for those on a lower income to pay less or nothing if the system places them in a band they can't easily afford.

I did actually address that in my OP, there is plenty of flex in the system for there to be numerous exemptions for those on a lower income to pay less or nothing if the system places them in a band they can't easily afford.

But these exemptions never work well enough to help everybody.

It's always the people who earn slightly too much who suffer most.

@BuanoKubiamVej You haven't even touched on why you think people who don't use the BBC's services should pay for it in their council tax - thus making them WORSE off than they are currently.

@BuanoKubiamVej
So you make an assertion and the aren't prepared to offer even a single suggestion in support of it?
YABVU.

Bonkers. The main issue is the fact lots of people don’t watch/listen to BBC content yet they’re still forced to pay for it. My DC like CBeebies and I like radio 4 so I pay for it but it’s expensive compared to Netflix and prime. It should just be an optional subscription service.

I think it needs to be slimmed down. Elements which are for the 'good of the nation' e.g. world service (important reputational benefit) or educational value (e.g BBC Bitesize) should come out of general taxation. Drama, comedy etc needs to be commercially funded.

Council tax is highly regressive and needs reform so should not have additional elements included under it.

‘ You have assets, even if you don't have cash. You could sell the house and downsize if you really think you're so poor in your big house.’

If we downsized then we’d be cramped. The space is worth more than a chunk of cash that will be quickly spent. We do without other things to afford the upkeep of the house. My point is that a big house doesn’t correlate to a higher income or more disposable income. Also some people (not me personally) are benefits claimants so if they downsized the government would just stop their benefits until they spent the money from downsizing. It’s not that simple.

Nope. I end up paying more when I can only just about afford to live now

There is no reason at all they can’t obtain sponsorship via commercials, sponsorship of programmes or anything else just like ITV, Channel 4 etc. And the ‘universal accessibility of BBC services’ can be maintained

And your response to the question @daimbarsatemydogsbone is just lazy as smacks of not being able to answer which makes your question void

What benefits other than tv?

Serious journalism, mainly on radio 4.

World class orchestra and choirs. The Proms.

New comedy commissions, new writers competitions.

Soft power projection, World Service.

@Alayalaya

‘ You have assets, even if you don't have cash. You could sell the house and downsize if you really think you're so poor in your big house.’

If we downsized then we’d be cramped. The space is worth more than a chunk of cash that will be quickly spent. We do without other things to afford the upkeep of the house. My point is that a big house doesn’t correlate to a higher income or more disposable income. Also some people (not me personally) are benefits claimants so if they downsized the government would just stop their benefits until they spent the money from downsizing. It’s not that simple.

Agreed, I'm in a similar situation. It's a pretty average semi though, and moving anywhere cheaper would bring its own raft of problems - my transport costs here are practically zero for example, and I can fit work round school drop offs for DS - it's also an excellent school, so I'd rather not move him.

And the sort of places where we'd have to move, any money left over would probably have to be spent doing work on the house to get it acceptable.

As for the OP - I couldn't afford the amount added to the Council Tax right now, and certainly not if the proposed 7% CT rise goes ahead alongside the looming increases in gas & electric. I'm already sitting here bundled up in a duvet and blankets to avoid having the heating on for more than an hour and a half a day.