4 ms·

In the UK there's a tax for viewing live TV, and more recently for a subset of on-demand content (specifically from the BBC). Yes, it's a tax. Another bit of c

by IanCal 3y ago

In the UK there's a tax for viewing live TV, and more recently for a subset of on-demand content (specifically from the BBC). Yes, it's a tax. Another bit of context that's important is that at the relevant times for this, you're looking at almost certainly 4 possible channels for most of the population of the UK. There's a few ways of viewing some of this One is simply that it's a lie and a deterrent. Not so interesting on the technical level. Most likely true but a dead end for fun tech ideas. The more interesting is to think about how this could work - certainly some of the people in BBC R&D have. I'm sure someone will mention Van Eck phreaking, which is extremely cool but more than you need. A much simpler approach, and one that actually seems easiest is > it was thought that they operated by detecting electromagnetic radiation given off by a TV, looking at the diffuse light through windows/curtains. You then simply need to have a live TV feed tuned to each channel and see if there's a direct match between the changing light and your own blurred monitor tuned to the same channel. You can make this even easier by doing it at certain times, when Eastenders or Coronation Street is on, as a vast amount of the population would watch these.

wrexx0r 3y ago
Hackaday did a breakdown of the methods and how they worked, and one of the more modern methods was optical comparison to a live broadcast https://hackaday.com/2021/01/18/tv-detector-vans-once-prowled-the-streets-of-england/ https://hackaday.com/2021/01/18/tv-detector-vans-once-prowle...
LeoPanthera 3y ago
> Yes, it's a tax. It's is very specifically not a tax, primarily because if you choose not to consume public service broadcasting, you do not have to pay it.
- DarkmSparks 3y ago
  so wage tax is also not actually a tax, because if you dont have a wage you do not have to pay it? Hmmmm, not convinced that logic works tbh.
- blackfawn 3y ago
  How does that make it not a tax? You can choose not to buy goods and not pay sales tax, choose not to own a home and pay real estate taxes, choose to not have a job and pay income tax, etc...
  - LeoPanthera 3y ago
    Taxes tax something. A purchase, your income, something. The license fee is just a fee. You pay it. You get the BBC. (And other national broadcast services, which also benefit from it.) The clue may, perhaps, be in the name. It isn't called the "license tax".
    - gryn 3y ago
      if it's anything like what's done in france and other european countries then it's a tax on the ownership of TVs.
      - JoshTriplett 3y ago
        In the UK, if you own a TV but do not watch broadcast/cable television, you specifically do not owe the fee. There are plenty of stories from the early days of the Internet before widespread adoption of streaming services, where saying you don't watch TV programmes would get funny looks and insistent claims that you couldn't possibly have another use for a TV, but the fee was in fact tied to BBC, not to the ownership of a TV.
        IanCal 3y ago
        Just to be clear it was tied to live TV broadcasts not only BBC content. The point that it's not about owning a device is very important though.
    - IanCal 3y ago
      Other broadcasters don't benefit from it. Channel 4 doesn't get a cut for example. You need to pay it if you never watch the BBC and only non public service broadcasting. You also get public things for free without paying for it. > Taxes tax something. A purchase, your income, something. This taxes watching live TV or on demand things from the BBC.
- yreg 3y ago
  More importantly, the fees collected directly fund the public broadcaster. Slovakia had a similar system, then the politicians decided to cancel the fees and make it so the public broadcaster is funded out of ministry of culture budget instead. Now it's a year later and surprise, surprise, the new government which has gripes with the press has just cut the public broadcaster budget by 33%. If it was still funded by “tv licences” it would be much harder to do that.
- IanCal 3y ago
  It is a tax, I'm going to lean on the ONS for this one. (Edit the relevant quote is "In January 2006, the Office of National Statistics classified the licence fee as a tax") https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldselect/ldbbc/128/128i.pdf https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldselect/ldbb... > if you choose not to consume public service broadcasting, you do not have to pay it. That is absolutely not true. You need to pay it to view live TV, regardless of who produces it.

by IanCal 3y ago

wrexx0r 3y ago

Hackaday did a breakdown of the methods and how they worked, and one of the more modern methods was optical comparison to a live broadcast https://hackaday.com/2021/01/18/tv-detector-vans-once-prowled-the-streets-of-england/ https://hackaday.com/2021/01/18/tv-detector-vans-once-prowle...

LeoPanthera 3y ago

> Yes, it's a tax. It's is very specifically not a tax, primarily because if you choose not to consume public service broadcasting, you do not have to pay it.

DarkmSparks 3y ago
so wage tax is also not actually a tax, because if you dont have a wage you do not have to pay it? Hmmmm, not convinced that logic works tbh.
blackfawn 3y ago
How does that make it not a tax? You can choose not to buy goods and not pay sales tax, choose not to own a home and pay real estate taxes, choose to not have a job and pay income tax, etc...
- LeoPanthera 3y ago
  Taxes tax something. A purchase, your income, something. The license fee is just a fee. You pay it. You get the BBC. (And other national broadcast services, which also benefit from it.) The clue may, perhaps, be in the name. It isn't called the "license tax".
  - gryn 3y ago
    if it's anything like what's done in france and other european countries then it's a tax on the ownership of TVs.
    - JoshTriplett 3y ago
      In the UK, if you own a TV but do not watch broadcast/cable television, you specifically do not owe the fee. There are plenty of stories from the early days of the Internet before widespread adoption of streaming services, where saying you don't watch TV programmes would get funny looks and insistent claims that you couldn't possibly have another use for a TV, but the fee was in fact tied to BBC, not to the ownership of a TV.
      - IanCal 3y ago
        Just to be clear it was tied to live TV broadcasts not only BBC content. The point that it's not about owning a device is very important though.
  - IanCal 3y ago
    Other broadcasters don't benefit from it. Channel 4 doesn't get a cut for example. You need to pay it if you never watch the BBC and only non public service broadcasting. You also get public things for free without paying for it. > Taxes tax something. A purchase, your income, something. This taxes watching live TV or on demand things from the BBC.
yreg 3y ago
More importantly, the fees collected directly fund the public broadcaster. Slovakia had a similar system, then the politicians decided to cancel the fees and make it so the public broadcaster is funded out of ministry of culture budget instead. Now it's a year later and surprise, surprise, the new government which has gripes with the press has just cut the public broadcaster budget by 33%. If it was still funded by “tv licences” it would be much harder to do that.
IanCal 3y ago
It is a tax, I'm going to lean on the ONS for this one. (Edit the relevant quote is "In January 2006, the Office of National Statistics classified the licence fee as a tax") https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldselect/ldbbc/128/128i.pdf https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldselect/ldbb... > if you choose not to consume public service broadcasting, you do not have to pay it. That is absolutely not true. You need to pay it to view live TV, regardless of who produces it.