• shinratdr
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      It’s just a way of funding the BBC that was devised before a TV was something that essentially everyone had. Since it’s delivered OTA it seemed easier to tax the device itself then it was to tax everyone unfairly. So calling it a “license” is fairly outmoded, it’s really a tax. You also don’t have to pay it if you don’t actually receive TV channels.

      It should just be rolled into regular taxes now, but who is going to propose and approve a new tax in this day and age? So it’s easier not to touch it.

      • SpaceCowboy
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        I wish we had a TV tax in Canada. The funding of the CBC is a political football, so I sometimes feel like CBC News has to walk a tightrope to avoid having the government slash the budget.

        It’s probably better that there’s just a tax on the device. Sure the UK government could meddle with that tax to cut the budget of the BBC, but it feels like it would be less likely since people would rightly ask why they’re meddling with it. People are less likely to ask questions if the government is cutting a budget because “gotta pay off the national debt!”