Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
TV licence excuses include postman affairs and sunlight 
Author Message
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:10 pm
Posts: 5490
Location: just behind you!
Reply with quote
Amnesia10 wrote:
HeatherKay wrote:
It would also mean the Government could decide to siphon off the money to strangle the BBC...

I would have longer rolling contracts that the government could not change. Though if there was a rule that if the government changed its budget by more than 10% it no longer had to comply with political balance rules and could stop them getting their fair share of coverage.

Thus ensuring its death. :roll:

_________________
johnwbfc wrote:
I care not which way round it is as long as at some point some sort of semi-naked wrestling is involved.

Amnesia10 wrote:
Yes but the opportunity to legally kill someone with a giant dildo does not happen every day.

Finally joined Flickr


Wed Sep 21, 2011 11:17 am
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 3:29 pm
Posts: 7173
Reply with quote
Amnesia10 wrote:
As it is a tax and nearly everyone benefits from it why not just scrap it and roll the costs into the tax system. So reduce everyones personal allowance by £100 or so. That would mean we still give free TV licences for pensioners unless they were very rich and paid tax still and would mean no fines and clogging up courts with non payment etc. I

For basic rate taxpayers, reducing the Personal Allowance by £100 would only raise £20 for the coffers. To raise the £145 you'd have to reduce the Personal Allowance by £725.

_________________
timark_uk wrote:
That's your problem. You need Linux. That'll fix all your problems.
Mark


Wed Sep 21, 2011 12:14 pm
Profile
Legend
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:02 am
Posts: 29240
Location: Guantanamo Bay (thanks bobbdobbs)
Reply with quote
Yes but the license fee is expensive to administer, and was until recently responsible for as much as 12% of all women being in gaol. It is not a good tax because it is not fair and is expensive to collect and administer. Subscription TV would also be damaging to the BBC, it would have to chase ratings and would either destroy ITV in the process or have advertising. Either way ITV would suffer. A simple transfer from government to the BBC could fall victim to political interference, but what that is what we have now with the government imposing huge cuts on the BBC and dumping the responsibility for rural internet investment on the BBC budget. Do not forget the forced sale of BBC divisions because they compete with private business, that was politically motivated. Then add the cost of the World service onto the BBC. This should remain a Foreign Office remit as it is far more to the Governments advantage than the BBC. Hence the BBC slashed or eliminated various language output. The problem is that governments feel that they have to meddle to justify their existence, hence how they have totally screwed up the education system over the last 40 years.

_________________
Do concentrate, 007...

"You are gifted. Mine is bordering on seven seconds."

https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTg5MzczNTk

http://astore.amazon.co.uk/wwwx404couk-21


Wed Sep 21, 2011 12:17 pm
Profile
Legend
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:02 am
Posts: 29240
Location: Guantanamo Bay (thanks bobbdobbs)
Reply with quote
Linux_User wrote:
Amnesia10 wrote:
As it is a tax and nearly everyone benefits from it why not just scrap it and roll the costs into the tax system. So reduce everyones personal allowance by £100 or so. That would mean we still give free TV licences for pensioners unless they were very rich and paid tax still and would mean no fines and clogging up courts with non payment etc. I

For basic rate taxpayers, reducing the Personal Allowance by £100 would only raise £20 for the coffers. To raise the £145 you'd have to reduce the Personal Allowance by £725.

Yes but the current collection costs may be 25% of the license fee, so you would only need to raise just over £108 instead. Then allow for the fact that it would be collected from far more people as many house holds have multiple earners. Otherwise two earner households would lose far more. Also it would hit higher rate tax payers at 40% or 50% so would not need to be a reduction of £725. Add in the fact that it would eliminate the cost of the pensioner subsidy. It would also clear the courts of people for non payment of TV license, and so effectively save hundreds of millions for custody of women and the support of families while they are in custody.

_________________
Do concentrate, 007...

"You are gifted. Mine is bordering on seven seconds."

https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTg5MzczNTk

http://astore.amazon.co.uk/wwwx404couk-21


Wed Sep 21, 2011 12:23 pm
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 3:29 pm
Posts: 7173
Reply with quote
Well obviously higher and additional rate taxpayers would need a lower reduction (assuming they have a personal allowance at all), but I did specifically say the reduction for basic rate taxpayers would be £725.

_________________
timark_uk wrote:
That's your problem. You need Linux. That'll fix all your problems.
Mark


Wed Sep 21, 2011 12:34 pm
Profile
Legend
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:02 am
Posts: 29240
Location: Guantanamo Bay (thanks bobbdobbs)
Reply with quote
Linux_User wrote:
Well obviously higher and additional rate taxpayers would need a lower reduction (assuming they have a personal allowance at all), but I did specifically say the reduction for basic rate taxpayers would be £725.

Why should higher rate tax payers get a bigger reduction? They can surely afford to pay more?

_________________
Do concentrate, 007...

"You are gifted. Mine is bordering on seven seconds."

https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTg5MzczNTk

http://astore.amazon.co.uk/wwwx404couk-21


Wed Sep 21, 2011 3:30 pm
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 3:29 pm
Posts: 7173
Reply with quote
Amnesia10 wrote:
Linux_User wrote:
Well obviously higher and additional rate taxpayers would need a lower reduction (assuming they have a personal allowance at all), but I did specifically say the reduction for basic rate taxpayers would be £725.

Why should higher rate tax payers get a bigger reduction? They can surely afford to pay more?

To raise £145 from a higher or additional rate taxpayer, you wouldn't need to reduce the Personal Allowance by as much as you would for a basic rate taxpayer.

_________________
timark_uk wrote:
That's your problem. You need Linux. That'll fix all your problems.
Mark


Thu Sep 22, 2011 11:15 am
Profile
Spends far too much time on here
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 8:38 am
Posts: 2967
Location: Dorchester, Dorset
Reply with quote
I'm not really following this, but surely a higher rate taxpayer is already paying it out of taxed earnings anyway.

_________________
I've finally invented something that works!

A Mac User.


Thu Sep 22, 2011 2:17 pm
Profile
Legend
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:02 am
Posts: 29240
Location: Guantanamo Bay (thanks bobbdobbs)
Reply with quote
Linux_User wrote:
To raise £145 from a higher or additional rate taxpayer, you wouldn't need to reduce the Personal Allowance by as much as you would for a basic rate taxpayer.

Yes but you do not need to raise £145 or its equivalence from every tax payer. There are far more tax payers than households so it can be lower. Also dropping £400 from everyones allowance would raise £80 from basic rate tax payers and £160 from 40% tax payers and £200 from highest rate tax payers. Though the cost savings of collection will also reduce the actual amount of the allowance reduction as well.

_________________
Do concentrate, 007...

"You are gifted. Mine is bordering on seven seconds."

https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTg5MzczNTk

http://astore.amazon.co.uk/wwwx404couk-21


Thu Sep 22, 2011 3:10 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 24 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software.