Slashdot Mirror


British Government Considers Tax on Computers

Jumbo Jimbo writes "A story in the UK Times talks about the UK government's proposals to tax personal computers, as a replacement for the television license currently paid by every household with a TV. These are proposals and aren't intended for a few years yet, but due to the growth of computer ownership, this would probably amount to a tax on nearly everybody. Hope it's not per computer, or those people with a pile of old 286s in the shed could be in for a shock."

34 of 638 comments (clear)

  1. Hmmm by gowen · · Score: 5, Informative

    I know its better than old news, but are you aware that this is just one of many possible schemes, and that none of them are due to take effect before 2017.

    --
    Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
    1. Re:Hmmm by onion2k · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'd wager a large sum that there'll be no new tax per se, but the television license will be changed to say you need one if you have "any device capable of receiving programme broadcasts". By 2017 that'll include your brain. Maybe.

    2. Re:Hmmm by TiggsPanther · · Score: 3, Insightful
      ...and that none of them are due to take effect before 2017.

      Good. Another 12 years before I risk trying to evade certain taxes.

      I'm sorry, but on this one they can go jump. VAT already means that over a hundred quid of a decent computer goes towards absolutely nothing to do with the manufacture or sale fo the actual equipment. That's more than the cost of some of the components, and almost as much as a retail copy of Windows.

      Yes, I know that governments have to get their money somewhere. It just seems wrong to me that, for example, if going for a 12" iBook with a 60GB drive, 512MB RAM and Bluetooth module the cost of the upgrades is 3GBP less than the cost of the tax incurred.
      (And that's with upgrades that some people class as being overpriced compared to third-party alternatives)

      --
      Tiggs
      "120 chars should be enough for everyone..."
    3. Re:Hmmm by FinestLittleSpace · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nope, the law is if you're USING the device to recieve broadcasts. IF you're using it for other purposes (Camcorder, DVD player etc) you don't have to pay.

    4. Re:Hmmm by geordie_loz · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I can see where they are coming from with this. I think that there are good reasons for this. There should not be an extra tax per-se, but the TV Licence to cover computers too would be a good thing overall. There may well be people who have computers and no TV, so that's increased revenue. If the BBC recieved revenue from another stream then their production will have to reflect that too.

      Ultimately this means that for my TV License fee the BBC will have to provide internet streams of those programs in a free and open way (ala direc codec?). This is pretty good, the BBC already make most stuff available (Radio) for the week after broadcast, and have some channels internet streamed (News 24), so a license fee would likely bring more of this.

      I pay for the BBC already, so expanding it to my computer (where I actually access it most) is fine by me.

    5. Re:Hmmm by MancDiceman · · Score: 4, Informative

      Incorrect.

      If you have a tuning crystal (or equivalent) you have to pay unless you can prove it has never been used for the purpose of receiving TV programs. So, unless you live in a Faraday cage and can prove you have no way of receiving the programs, you have to pay.

      Having a TV you never turn on does not exempt you. Not having an aerial does not exempt you. Using your TV for other things and never watching TV does not exempt you.

      The license is for capability, not use.

    6. Re:Hmmm by operagost · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's bad for the same reason that laws prohibiting devices capable of breaking encryption or sharing copyrighted works are bad.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  2. Total conjecture by tom+taylor · · Score: 5, Informative

    There is so much conjecture and guess work in this, that I don't know where to start. The BBC has only just had its charter renewed for the next 10 years, so imagining what will happen after that is total guess work.

  3. Not convinced by Richie1984 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm a big fan of the BBC's independence, and also of the license fee to pay for it, therefore I would like to continue seeing the BBC funded by the taxpayer for the forseeable future. Saying that, I'm not entirely convinced that a computer tax is the right way to go about this.

    If you buy a television, you're pretty likely to be watching tv shows on it, and therefore the license fee seems like a good idea. With PCs, the scope of activity is pretty much unlimited, so I can't really see the connection between computers and BBC funding. Although, this may all change in the future as no-one really yet knows how television will eventually integrate with computers. All we can do is speculate.

    --
    I'm not stressed. I'm just terribly, terribly alert.
  4. Yep, we sure did. by WindBourne · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We fought against taxation without representation. Now, we have representation without enough taxation (at least for our level of of spending). Makes me think about the line in the patriot when MG says, "A king 1000's of miles away can do as much as 1000 kings 1 mile away" (or something like that).

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  5. Fair point actually by mccalli · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Not to anaylse a joke too deeply but...

    If I am to be taxed for ownership of a PC, with the grounds being that I can use this to access BBC-produced broadcasts, then I better actually had be able to access that content.

    In other words, that content has to be accessible on a Mac, on Linux (any distro, my choice), on a PC, on some wondeful-but-yet-to-be-conceived-of OS that gets written in 2009...anything. If they're taxing me for it, then I must be able to receive the benefit the tax is actually on.

    Incidently, I'm not opposed to the license fee (I'm in the UK). I believe my money to be well spent on the Beeb, though not necesasrily on television so much as radio and the internet.

    Cheers,
    Ian

    1. Re:Fair point actually by Hognoxious · · Score: 3, Funny
      some wondeful-but-yet-to-be-conceived-of OS that gets written in 2009
      You mean the hurd?
      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  6. Some perspective by nagora · · Score: 5, Insightful
    This story should read: "a mid-grade civil servant in the UK's least powerful government department was asked to draw up a list of every possible way of funding the BBC. One of the two dozen or so ideas he and his friends came up with was that a tax covering any device that can display BBC programmes. This suggestion was then ignored by everyone except Rupert Murdoch who put it on the front page of his paper 'The Times' as a way of scaring people who will think this is unfair and therefore the BBC should be scrapped and leave the field to Sky (prop: Mr R. Murdoch)."

    TWW

    --
    "Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
  7. Re:Note for Americans by Ford+Prefect · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is how British politics works. In the UK, there is a knee-jerk reaction to like more taxes, however unfair and unwise, just as in the US there is an automatic tendency to like tax cuts, however unfair and unwise.

    British counter-example.

    --
    Tedious Bloggy Stuff - hooray?
  8. Random Debate, not laws in progress by POPE+Mad+Mitch · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Incase anybody didn't notice, this comment was made as part of a general debate on possible loop holes and issues that might exist when the 10 year renewal is up, it was not part of any formal law or decision making process.

    As an MP was rightly pointing out, there is a potential loophole where a household may not own any televisions at all, and only computers and monitors (without any tv tuner card, as thats already covered) through which they may be able to watch the increasing amount of tv programs the bbc make available over the internet, and thus avoid paying the tv license fee under the current rules.

    its pretty obvious that someone is going to suggest 'tax all computers instead then' as a solution to that loop hole, it doesnt mean thats sensible or will ever be seriously considered, its just media sensationalism on an otherwise dull topic.

  9. Re:Note for Americans by TwistedSquare · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I feel I should comment on some of your points... the reason that tax cuts are not reviled is not so much the warm fuzzy feeling, as the feeling that this money should make public services better. There is an understanding that you get what you pay for, and if the NHS (for example) is underfunded, then to make it better we need to fund it more. Because we can understand where the money is going, we feel (perhaps naively) that the tax rise is acceptable.

    Of course this generalisation applies more to the left than to the right, but then the left are in power at the moment... The Tories still try to win votes with tax cuts, but interestingly these days they focus on choice. As you note, tax cuts are not as popular as they once were. I would suggest this is because people realise that taking money away from public services is hardly going to improve them, but that's just my feeling.

    The public dental health issue is tricky, but for all other health areas the NHS is considering a lumbering dinosaur, but one that will still suffice for most people. Dental health is difficult because all the dentists are going private, and thus it is hard to actually find an NHS dentist. The quality of NHS dentists is considered by just about everyone to be equivalent to the quality of private, it's just the supply of them that is a problem.

    The tax on PCs appears (I haven't RTFA) to be a possible replacement for the TV licence. If this is the case, it would not be a new tax - just moving an old one onto new technology.

  10. tax on windows? by migloo · · Score: 3, Informative

    Once upon a time in Europe, there used to be a tax on windows (they were considered a sign of wealth)

  11. What does a TV licence give you? by Blowfishie · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I grew up in the UK and enjoyed watching TV as most folk do. We'd mutter and grumble about the damn TV license and existence of detector vans, but paid for it and carried on with life.

    I've since emigrated to Australia and here is where you see what effect the TV licence has: the BBC stations provide a benchmark of quality that the commercial stations have to match and they generally do. Well, compared to the Australian stations, they do.

    Australian commercial stations treat the audience like a numbers game. They won't make a commitment to a series unless it keeps getting great ratings, and by 'commitment', I mean that they won't keep a series in prime time long enough for it to the story to mature and to catch on (examples: Farscape got booted to beyond midnight after about 4 episodes and you should have seen the backflip with The Sopranos series 4) or they'll decide to axe a show because the station owner doesn't like what he sees (example: Packer pulling the "Michallef" show because of a comment Michallef made).

    They show movies, but intersperse them with so many adverts, animated station ID's, "what's next" scrolling banners and the like that you lose any sense of the 'magic' that a good movie can bring. Maybe British TV has gone to hell since I left, but I doubt it can be as bad as commercial Australian TV.

    A solution for viewing sanity is the PVR and here's where I link back to the posted topic: by taxing PCs, the British government ministers are looking to the future (2017) when TVs are computers in their own right and internet broadcasting is a much, much bigger phenomenon. Provided that the tax keeps the quality of programming high, then you can't complain - the money is going where it should and you don't end up with a crappy viewing experience.

  12. Blanket license seems silly by Alioth · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A blanket license on computers instead of TVs seems a bit silly.

    What they can do is this. Keep the TV license as it stands. However, if you want to watch BBC TV content on the Internet, you must log into the BBC website, providing your TV license details. This shows you have a TV license, and then you can go and watch BBC TV on the Internet.

    This means people with TVs only are paying and people with no TV but a computer and broadband get to support the BBC too if they are using BBC content. And people with both a TV and a computer don't end up paying twice since they supply their TV license details to the BBC website when creating their account.

  13. Re:Note for Americans by BenjyD · · Score: 5, Informative

    The point is that the NHS was very badly underfunded in the past, so increased funding was clearly needed. British people want free health care: the National Insurance premiums are based on your ability to pay and available to everyone.

    Nobody in the UK *wants* to pay more taxes. However, people have made the logical connection between more funding and better services, so are prepared to pay higer taxes if it brings them a benefit. This happened back in 1997 when the right-wing Conservatives were thrown out after decades of heading towards a more US style small government, free market approach to government.

    Our taxes are still lower than much of Europe. On a £30,000 salary, you could expect to pay £5300 tax and £2800 National Insurance (health and state pension contributions)

    There is something of a warm and fuzzy feeling about the NHS - it was founded in the socialist reforms after world war 2 that aimed to create a more equitable society out of the incredibly poor state the war left the UK in.

    The NHS is good enough for most purposes: waiting times are down, staff recruitment is up. I went into my local hospital with a broken arm on a busy afternoon, was seen straight away and was on my way home within a couple of hours. The state of dental care is another matter, of course, and so is the whole MRSA/nursing staff not knowing how to wash their hands thing. I don't know many people with private health insurance.

  14. Re:Nope, you are wrong. by cowbutt · · Score: 4, Interesting
    If you have a TV, but just use it attached to a dvd player without a licence, you are breaking the law.

    No, you are wrong. A friend has a TV which he only uses as a display for retro consoles and home computers. A man from TV Licensing dropped by unannounced one day, observed that the aerial lead was disconnected and all channels detuned from those frequencies in use in his region, and declared that no license fee was payable.

  15. BBC Radio by Richard_J_N · · Score: 3, Informative

    No one has yet mentioned the greatest jewel of the BBC: BBC radio. Whether you are considering Radio 4 (news), Radio 3 (culture), or the World Service (international), these are all funded as part of the TV license fee.

    Also, I think that it is important that the BBC (especially radio) remains free to access. Personally, I'd like to see the BBC adopt a model such as Mandrake use, i.e. people who like it pay, in order to keep it free for everyone to use.

  16. Re:Nope, you are wrong. by c0p0n · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Are you saying that you're routinely visited by guys to check if you have a TV license?!? For air broadcast?!?!?!? What's the difference between that and inspecting your computer to check if you have illegal stuff in it? What kind of law allows that?!? In my country you need a judge to order it. Nobody can enter your house if you do not give your permission (or have a judge order to do so).

    --

    Your head a splode
  17. Sweden by isecore · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'll forego the option of moderating this discussion to tell anyone interested that Sweden is contemplating a very similar change.

    The TV-license is going to transform into a "media license" and everyone with access to a computer, TV or other "media"-item is going to have to pay for the use of it.

    Personally I'm not a fan of TV-licensing, and this is even less titillating to me.

    --
    I enjoy large posteriors and I cannot prevaricate.
  18. Re:Nope, you are wrong. by EricTheRed · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You'll be surprised.

    Here in the UK, the Police are not allowed to enter your property with out your permission or a warrant.

    However, not many people know that certain agencies are permitted, at any time.

    HM Customs & Excise can without notice, but even British Gas and the Post Office are permitted to enter your home.

    I was surprised when I found out about the Post Office - gas I can understand for gas leaks etc.

    There's another couple I can't remember off hand that have that permission, so I'm not sure about TV Licensing, but I'm pretty sure they can.

    --
    Java gaming nut - http://www.retep.org/ or for the rail http://uktra.in/
  19. Re:Nope, you are wrong. by beders · · Score: 4, Informative

    tosh! Have a look at:
    http://www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1995/Ukpga_19 95004 5_en_4.htm

    Gas Act 1995

    22.--(1) Where a public gas transporter has reasonable cause to suspect--

    (a) that gas conveyed by him is escaping, or may escape, in any premises; or

    (b) that gas so conveyed which has escaped has entered, or may enter, any premises,
    any officer authorised by the transporter may, on production of some duly authenticated document showing his authority, enter the premises

  20. Re:Cue.. by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 4, Informative

    The BBC is one of the more widely used public services in the UK.

    Try the world! The BBC's TV and Radio programs are widely watched and listened to around the world by alot more people than use the service in the UK. I don't think people in the UK are quite aware of just how big an international PR medium the BBC is. Other countries can only dream of having a state controlled TV network that is watched by this kind of an international audience. Furthermore, at least in so far as news reporting is concerned, the BBC commands alot more respect internationally than the big US networks do (Althoug to be fair there is a number of notable exceptions to this rule among the latter but it is depressingly small) recent reporting scandals not withstanding.

    --
    Only to idiots, are orders laws.
    -- Henning von Tresckow
  21. Re:Nope, you are wrong. by ayjay29 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I always thought the law was "If you have equipment capable of receiving..."

    But the BBC says this:

    "If you use a TV or any other device to receive or record TV programmes (for example, a VCR, set-top box, DVD recorder or PC with a broadcast card) - you need a TV Licence. You are required by law to have one."

    Looks like using one for a DVD player, or your old Commadore 64 would be OK without a licence, the key is "If you use", not "If you have".

    You DO need one "If you use" a tuner card in your PC to watch TV, but not if you use it for digitising home movies.

    --
    Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated up.
  22. You have options! by Asprin · · Score: 3, Funny


    There's no reason why you hard-working UK citizens should have to put up with this crap. Unplug your telly/pc/whatever, drive it right on down to the Thames or whatever your nearest waterhole is and TOSS IT IN!

    Let "the man" in parliament know you ain't gonna pay no taxes what you ain't got been done voted fer yet. No more.

    Hey, it worked for us!

    Sincerely,
    USA

    --
    "Lawyers are for sucks."
    - Doug McKenzie
  23. Re:Nope, you are wrong. by rpjs · · Score: 4, Informative

    The TV licencing people work by writing to all the residential addresses in the country that don't have licences telling them that they'll be in big trouble if they have a TV and no licence. They will usually follow that up by sending an inspector round. There's no obligation to let the inspector in, but if you do so voluntarily and the inspector is satisfied you don't have a telly, the threatening letters will stop, but only for a few years.

    If you don't let the inspector in, they can only gain entry to search for an illegal telly by providing evidence that you have one to a court - typically this will be done by using TV detector equipment, or observing the glow of a TV through the curtains from the street at night. Not sure if they use that one so much today seeing as it could be a PC monitor and not a telly.

    However, if you don't have a telly and you don't let the inspectors in to have a look around, they will keep pestering you with letters and doorstepping until you give in. From the TV licencing people's PoV it makes sense as only something like 1% of the population genuinely don't own a TV, but it does royally piss off the people who don't and keep getting pestered.

    A few years ago they ran an advertising campaign where they displayed randomly selected street signs from around the country with the slogan "we know that X households in this street are watching television illegally" but they had to drop it after complaints from the residents in those streets who felt they were being unfairly accused.

  24. Re:Nope, you are wrong. by Seehund · · Score: 3, Funny

    (a) that gas conveyed by him is escaping, or may escape, in any premises;

    "I'm conveying gas. May I use your bathroom? Oh, step aside, of course I may!"

    --
    Help savingAmigaOS and a free PowerPC market
  25. Re:Note for Americans by technogogo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Don't forget that the UK endures 17.5% VAT (sales tax) on almost all purchases made with already-taxed-once income. Not to mention additional tax (duty) on a range of other goods such as fuel and alcohol.

  26. Re:Nope, you are wrong. by senatorpjt · · Score: 3, Funny

    But, if you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to hide!

  27. I've been paying InterNet and TV tax in the US by peter303 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The annual taxes on my cable bill are about $48.
    The various taxes and mandatory "fees" on my various phone lines is $132 a year.
    This is about half what the Brits pay, but not insiginificant.