Britain mulls taxing Ipod users
To pay for Channel 4
BRITAIN’S BROADCASTING regulator and competition authority, Ofcom, says people could soon have to pay an "Ipod tax" to pay for crappy, yet expensive, programmes on ITV and Channel 4.
The tax wouldn’t just be restricted to Ipods and other MP3 players though. Anyone with a Sky satellite dish, an Internet connection and even a Freeview box will purportedly have to cough up to save shows like My Goldfish is Evil and London Tonight.
Desperately looking for even more ways to wring money out of already overtaxed Brits, Ed Richards, Ofcom’s CEO, reckons people should also be taxed for computers, blank CDs and DVDs. The Ofcom jury is still out on whether or not Brits should be taxed for breathing.
The ridiculous proposal is apparently just one of a plethora of "funding options" Ofcom is suggesting in its review for the future of public service broadcasting.
As ad revenue plummets while punters switch to digital TV instead, Ofcom says ITV, Channel 4 and Channel five would need between £145 million and £235 million of public British taxpayer funding if they are to continue spewing out their current level of junk.
But taxing people for Internet usage is a little bit contradictory to Gordon Brown’s current plan to help poor families buy broadband subscriptions.
Still, as Richards points out in a nightmarish scenario: "If we don't start making tough choices we are going to end up with the BBC being the only provider of public service programmes." Cash in the attic anyone? µ
Comments
hmmm?
this is outrageous!!! the only solution is to cut into the license fee instead........ wait a minute, wasn't the the idea all along?
lol
If
S**t was expensive the government would tax our backsides! thats all I can say.I understand how digital TV effects these 3 channels it's because they show the same crap every year. Take ITV2 & 3 Jurrassic Park 1, 2 & 3 this alone must have been on 10+ times this year.
No-one cares about Jordon & Peter's life it's like a spin off of big brother but following 2 people play little games ???? thats entertainment is it.
You shouldnt let bad services survive!
If folks arent watching it anymore, what does that tell you?Dont make us pay for stuff we dont want. We as a household hardly watch much TV and what we do watch, very little is homegrown as that tends to just appeal to those with an IQ of lower than 65.
The TV networks only have themselves to blame. They got greedy thinking that more channels meant more revenue. Well that wont happen when a finite viewing audience is stretched across not 5 channels but 50.
My solution? Go back to a maximum of 8 channels (5 as per before plus a news/sports and something else channel), that way we would also have enough bandwidth for proper high quality HD transmissions in digital too. Program quality would hopefully improve as well.
If folks wont watch it either change the plan or switch it off totally. Dont keep the dinosaur alive when we dont need him anymore.
Will never happen though.
Get real
Great way to save an economy by taxing us more to pay for half baked reality shows, If they want the ad revenues to go up why dont they just stop turning out the same crap so people might actually want to tune in for a change.tax on breathing?
well, isn't a carbon tax essentially a tax on breathing? we all have to exhale don't we?Pay license tax because I have internet?
Pay license because I have internet?I don't have a TV license; I don’t have a TV (or a TV card for my PC).
The BBC are threatening me for not paying their tax simply because I have an internet connection (even on my crappy phone); now it seems like ITV and CH4 could go the same way.
I should create a free access web page so I can charge all you UK internet users simply because you could stumble upon my web page.
I cunningly won't encrypt the web page such that only subscribers can decrypt it, nor will I prevent access of non-subscribers to it.
I will target only the UK population to pay the fee, even though all users around the world can access the web page; that seems fair, it’s not racist at all.
I will use the fee to pay my, say, £6m annual costs (a la Mr Ross), costs that I won’t let the fee payers have a say about.
I think everyone should do that, yeah, that should f*** things up nicely!
Make no mistake; they are attempting to force us all into a position where it is impossible to not have to pay their fee/tax, what could be more anti-competitive than that?
So as Douglas adams once wrote...
When people visit GB, what they eat will be weighed. What they pee and poop will be weighed, and when they leave the difference will be either surgically removed from their body weight or more probably used to adjust their tax code.Q:How would would like to pay?
A: Through the nose please.
umm
This takes the piss. We already pay £140 year tax so the government can force the BBC to spew their propaganda, and last time I checked we already pay tax when we purchase goods like mp3 players, and blank media, as well as tax on services like Sky and internet access, so why the hell should we pay EVEN more tax to support yet another failing corporate model unable to cope in the digital age. I'm sick of the UK, and the idiots that run it.no way....
lm not paying more for crap l do not watch, nor am l paying the government any more just so l can earn a days living, they already tax needed necessities that l need to eat and live l already pay VAT for my internet connection and l sure as hell dont want to pay to just own a computer, nor do l want to pay to listen to mp3s (because lets face it most of todays music is drivel spewed by tone deaf morons)if things go ahead unlikely as it sounds then lm going to be one of the first thats part of the moment to remove defunct companies like ofcom who arent there to help the customer but the companies who run this country who can be likened to a child with a hammer and a toy (eventually it will be in pieces!! just like my finances already)
UK more evil than US?
We only killed 3K for the benefit of our entire population, how could Ofcom possibly justify these lamer taxes? Besides, who watches ITV? Nevermind the buzzcock, go go go!Why?
Why should we bail them out? The programming standard has been steadily dropping for decades due to assinine decisions by brain dead commissioning editors and TV has become dumbed down beyond saving, a grotesque parody of itself like some kind of creepy circus. That is why people think its not worth watching, it isnt.Let them fold. Producers with a feel for programme making can look for a digital distribution and revenue model via the internet.
& The BBC needs to stop trying to be something it isnt and concentrate on making educational programmes which serve the national interest. As long as they feel obliged to chase after the failing formats of failing TV companies we all suffer from the results of the myth of audience stupidity and the dogma of lowest common denominators which rule the fantasy worlds in which commissioning editor's seem to live.
I wouldn't mind paying IF...
There was something decent to watch for all us blokes, at the moment it's boring housewife telly all the time, a plethora of DIY house makeover shows, loads of crappy soaps, cooking programs, reality TV shows, need i go on?The only things us blokes seem to get is the Formula 1, Top Gear and Match of the Day, all 3 of which will be on the BBC next year when F1 makes the switch.
That leaves the rest of the channels with crappy housewife programs, why should i pay?
Ofcourse they should be taxed for breathing
... eventually they are producing CO2 by doing that.Axe the channels then!
I think it's just plain stupid that any government anywhere would even think about taxing the owners and users of consumer electrical equipment such as portable media players.The TV license is a tax which pays for the BBC which in it's own right is to a certain degree is linked to the government. Theres the Value added tax which you pay to buy luxury items (Hang on....that's on everything these days isn't it) then there's VAT on your ISP contract and on everything you buy from Itunes or other providers. I think we get taxed enough. If these TV channels can't get by on advertising revenue, why don't they just increase the amount they charge? If they all increase their charges, it's not as if adverts won't get shown. The big players would just start paying it so that their products and services get air time. If the end of the day result is that products get a little more expensive, so be it...half of it is tat I wouldn't even buy anyway. JML Nicer Dicer anyone? Nah didn't think so!
WTF
I world where we consider it a fine line if we have the right to end someone's life, why then do they think it's ok to request essentially mandatory payments off people who own what is now a basic aspect of life (TV computer etc). The current TV licence can be understood as to ensure unbiased reporting. However, that's what the BBC are, they're not a competing channel, they ARE there just for that purpose. Just because ITV and C4 wanted to start up business doesn't mean we HAVE to pay them. The idea is unethical.We already pay 17.5% tax on all this stuff.
We pay tax when we earn our wages.We pay tax when we buy our goods, even though we already paid tax on our wages.
The shopkeeper we buy from pays tax on this same money, even though we already paid tax on it.
Many of the goods we buy have extra tax on them, such as petrol. Petrol prices are approx 85% tax in UK.
We keep on paying tax, and they keep on making up new ones.
Admiral Bubbles Calling
We upset about being taxed $700B to pay for lipstick on pit bulls, golden parachutes and pussy bow red satin dresses for Catwalk Queens. Lord knows they don't just grow on stilettos.Oh well, it is not as if I'll be needing the dosh to pay for me cremation, let some other survivor do. Now let's see who's got talent_ and the band banged on.
Idiots.....
So.....ITV and C4 are doing badly yet they keep starting up more bloody channels showing rubbish. How does this make sense? If you are a big business and start doing badly you should start by getting rid of any excess that is not working out and concentrate on those things that are popular or you do very well. Get this working and profitable and then expand. You sure don't find yourself struggling then throw money at more junk trying to expand without the means.Can't run a business? Not our fault, not our problem, don't make us pay for your mistakes.
oh no!
How would I copy without another banal instalment of Katie & Peter - The Next Chapter?Aren't we already paying a tasty 17.5% VAT on blank media, MP3 players etc anyway?
Has it really come to this?
So, with the MAFIAA already demanding royalties from the sales of blank CDs and DVDs just in case they *might* be used to store copyrighted material, now Ofcom want to tax anyone who has an internet connection - even if it is not used to watch TV shows.I use my internet connection for email and telecommuting. At no point do I feel the urge to watch ITV online (or on a TV screen, for that matter). Taxing all internet users regardless of actual use, just because they have the *option* to watch TV online, is ludicrous.
Maybe they could produce some decent shows for a change, in order to make advertising revenue more viable. Just a thought. If broadcasters want viewers to be able to watch online or download shows for free, they should cover that cost themselves instead of imitating the BBC's iPlayer and expecting a bailout.
Tax Revolt
We Yanks got pissy when the King taxed our tea...you guys need to tell them to piss off when the King taxes your TV.(Yes, I know it isn't the King, per se, but that wouldn't be as funny, would it?)
And I thought the US of A was bad
My god,no wonder the Brits are so irritable these days! Has the PM been reading George Bushes memos! Lets just tax the livng hell out of the very people that keep the economy afloat. Next thing will be a tax on the ability to reproduce, a tax on your first-born and a year of servitude for the crime of being in born in the UK. Next there will be a pecker tax which will tax you coming and going! Ah the irony of it all. My heartfelt thanks goes out to those who have put up with this withoput going over the edge and restoring the Tower of London to it formal "Glory" and have the elite members of your govt there for a vacation that never ends!Money making scheme
That is already reality in Germany. People actually pay for the daily dose of propaganda, whether they want it or not. Any excuse will do to rip them off. About 70EUR per year. Even Goebbels did not charge that much. Search the web, use keywords like GEZ, Verbrecher, and Internet.Tv License outdated.
I can't believe the gov't is still charging a license fee for a service that the rest of the world receives basically for free. Here in Canada, yes, the CBC is publicly funded, but as part of our income tax. I'm quite certain the BBC earns a LOT more money than the CBC does, and therefore isn't really in dire need of the licensing fee--it's a Dodo awaiting extinction, more people just have to get fed up and contact their MP's.