Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

New Irish Internet Tax?

Posted by samzenpus on from the new-pot-of-gold dept.

MarkDennehy writes "The Broadcasting Bill 2009 (currently in the last stages of becoming the Broadcasting Act 2009 and then being commenced into law in Ireland) has thrown up a rather unpleasant little nugget for broadband users in Ireland. It now defines a television set as being an electronic apparatus able to receive TV signals or 'any software or assembly comprising such apparatus' which would mean that even if you haven't got a television set, even if you don't watch streaming content from RTE.ie (the state broadcaster's website), you'd still have to pay 160 euro a year for a television license for your iPhone, or netbook, or laptop or desktop if you have fixed or mobile broadband."

12 of 242 comments (clear)

  1. Ok I'll Bite... by Umuri · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So what you're saying is that since the state provides a service, if you could use that service you should pay for it?

    How is this different from, oh, say EVERY OTHER STATE SPONSORED SYSTEM IN EXISTENCE for broadcasting.

    Yes, you may not use it, but most people don't use all the roads either.

    I applaud them for making the technological leap to being able to provide it online and REALIZE that online is the same effective use.

    Now, i do have two questions.

    Is the cost to distribute online around the same as the TV cost? If so, sure go nuts with it.

    Is the license per household like a lot of other state TV licenses. If it's not, i see an issue with it.

    IF it's per household and it reflects the cost to run it, i say more power to them.

    We should be applauding efforts like this to adapt technologically and that are put forth by people who apparently have a grip on the actual issue.

    Not just getting mad because it's a tax. Taxes have purposes. I return to my earlier car analogy of driving on all roads.

    --
    You never realize how much manually made unmanaged "linked" lists suck, till you have src.link.link.link.link...
    1. Re:Ok I'll Bite... by omar.sahal · · Score: 5, Insightful
      • Is the cost to distribute online around the same as the TV cost?
      • Is the license per household like a lot of other state TV licenses. If it's not, i see an issue with it.

      fuck you, pay me
      The govenment

    2. Re:Ok I'll Bite... by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How is this different from, oh, say EVERY OTHER STATE SPONSORED SYSTEM IN EXISTENCE for broadcasting.

      It's one thing to say that if someone owns a TV, they're probably watching TV. Here, they're saying if you have a computer and broadband, you're watching TV. Bit more of a reach. Sort of like those jurisdictions that place uniform taxes on CD media with the presumption being you're using them for music piracy and not, say, linux ISOs or something.

    3. Re:Ok I'll Bite... by rolfwind · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yes, you may not use it, but most people don't use all the roads either.

      Gas tax on gasoline to support roads is a generally fair excise tax, you pay what you use. Heavier vehicles do more damage to the roads but also get less mpg in general.

      Depending on the country, even if you never watch state subsidized channels, you still have to pay "TV tax". Also demanding a TV tax on a computer seems akin to demanding a newspaper tax on computers (since the newspaper industry is suffering).

      Either sell advertising to cover the cost and charge people who do watch it online through the website.

    4. Re:Ok I'll Bite... by rolfwind · · Score: 4, Informative

      Because when I buy gas to run my lawnmower, I'm clearly damaging the roads.

      You can buy gasoline for those applications where they are not used for the road. It is dyed (taxed gasoline is undyed, so they can do a quick tank check) and farmers buy it all the time for their tractors.

      At least that's how it used to be.

    5. Re:Ok I'll Bite... by Malc · · Score: 4, Informative

      Your TV would have to be a monitor with no ability to tune in to a signal before you could argue exemption for TV licenses, at least in the UK, and Ireland sounds like it has a similar system. Owning a TV and claiming it's not connected to an aerial/cable/satellite/etc is not sufficient. It has been this way for decades. So really, this is just the same: if you have an internet connection, you have the ability to tune in.

      160 euros is considerably less than what I used to pay for basic cable in Canada. Having 10 times as many channels gave me close to zero times more content to watch. Speaking again for the UK, the BBC doesn't have to pander to advertisers and makes the viewing audience their primary customer. This raises the standard of TV across the board, and it's no wonder commercial broadcasters like Sky hate it as they have to spend more than they otherwise would.

    6. Re:Ok I'll Bite... by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Your TV would have to be a monitor with no ability to tune in to a signal before you could argue exemption for TV licenses, at least in the UK, and Ireland sounds like it has a similar system.

      That's reasonable since 99.99% of TVs are used as...TVs.

      So really, this is just the same: if you have an internet connection, you have the ability to tune in.

      Except for one massive difference: watching TV is NOT the primary use of broadband. Seems to me there's a 'presumptive use' argument missing that should be applied before taxing something. Especially for freaking TV. Really, we need a tax for *entertainment* that needs to be broadly applied not just to people using it, but to anyone using the internet? That's getting your priorities a bit out of order.

      Let's apply your argument to other arenas: if my town enacts a tax on erotica, should Target have to apply the tax if I want to buy candlesticks? See how it's kind of silly to apply a tax blindly because people *might* use it for entertainment? Find a better way to target the tax. Or make it a subscription service with a decoder card, easy and done.

    7. Re:Ok I'll Bite... by beav007 · · Score: 5, Funny

      And a pretty picture: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:EM_spectrum.svg/

      Link is incorrect. Correct link.

  2. Learn to read your own Bills by Wild+Wizard · · Score: 5, Informative
    The bill in Question Page 12

    "broadcasting service" means a service which comprises a compilation of programme material of any description and which is transmitted, relayed or distributed by means of an electronic communications network, directly or indirectly for simultaneous or near- 20 simultaneous reception by the general public, whether that material is actually received or not, and where the programmes are provided in a pre-scheduled and linear order, but does not include:

    (a) a service provided for viewing in a non-linear manner where each viewer chooses a programme from a cata- 25 logue of programmes, or

    (b) other audio and audiovisual services provided by way of the Internet;

    1. Re:Learn to read your own Bills by Nekomusume · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In other words, hook up a TV tuner card to your PC, and it'll be taxed as a TV. Download your TV programs and it won't be.

  3. Re:More of the same? by shaitand · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yup, it goes hand in hand with other people paying taxes for things don't want, need, or use that you do.

    If you wanted fair you shouldn't have joined a society. Society is about the weak banding together to take from the strong and prevent the strong from taking from them. Whether the strong are the physically strong, militarily strong, intellectually strong, or economically strong.

  4. This has long been the case in Switzerland by ivec · · Score: 4, Informative

    An internet-connected multimedia computer (pretty much anything nowadays) counts as a TV+radio set.
    Which means that even if you do not have any other apparatus (no TV...), you have to pay quarterly fee of CHF 115.50 - about 300 Euros per year.

    And yes, this is to sponsor contents and broadcasts from the Swiss television and radio stations.

    Allows us to have less advertisement time than in the USA, and to have some "quality programs" that are not always maket-/audience-driven.

    Not always a bad thing... like all taxes ... although one might disagree with how the money is used.