[TillE]

It's basically a whole parallel tax collection system, which is truly nuts. Like the administrative overhead alone surely outweighs any abstract concerns about independence from government, which doesn't really exist in the UK anyway.

[owisd]

This gets raised every charter renewal and they always find the administrative overhead of e.g. collecting Netflix subscriptions, etc. is pro rata higher than the overhead for the licence fee.

[stickfigure]

I interpreted the parent as suggesting "just pay for it out of general tax revenue", which makes a lot of sense to me. No additional administration and enforcement required.

[satori99]

This is how Australia's public broadcaster is funded. But it means politicians directly decide its budget, which makes it a political football.

[account42]

Politicians also decide on the license fees even where they are oficially not a tax.

[cooper_ganglia]

The lines that really got me in this post were:

> A Licensing officer may call at your property not to collect the letters but to check that you are not watching a TV.

and

>...Cas Scott has said that the letters are not sought by TVL/BBC agents who make street visits.

Like, they show up at your home and ask to physically view your TV to make sure you aren't watching TV! It's so incredibly bonkers to me, I'm laughing out loud at work at the mental image!

Never change, UK, never change.

[madeofpalk]

It’s weird. They don’t have any actual authority, so if they turn up you can just say “No”.

In my seven years of living in the UK, I’ve paid the TV licence for two years, and had one visit (who I shut the door on).

[bpfrh]

depends on the system, austria for example used to say if you don't have a radio or tv you do not need to pay.

As of 2024 you pay even if you have no tv, which means the overhead is probably near zero, as you already have lists of where people live.

[fwsgonzo]

Same here in Norway.

[Guthur]

What's when more mental is that they are essentially all funding state propaganda agencies and so you're literally paying to be propagandised.

Not that much of none state media is really that much better to be honest.

[coliveira]

We all pay to receive propaganda, be it governmental or not. A private TV channel will spread the ideology of their owners, and it is usually an ideology that is useful to them.

[account42]

With private channels you can choose which ones to fund. Not so much with forced TV license fees for state broadcasters.

[carlosjobim]

The purpose is psychological to attach a monetary value to the government TV channels, which makes the viewer consider them valuable and therefore trustable.

[andybak]

No. It really isn't.