Victor wrote: » I'm saying they know the properties and the residents, not the TV owners. And while they don't ask for it, they have the power to get the Sky / Virgin Media data.
icdg wrote: » They don't I'm afraid:http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/plan-to-use-sky-upc-data-to-collect-licence-to-be-rejected-1.2380084
JTMan wrote: » The remit of RTE needs to be scaled back with a concurrent reduction in the license fee. - 2FM should be privatised. - RTEs campus in Donnybrook should be sold. - The remit of RTE's broadcasting should be narrowed. No Home and Away or Neighbours. A strict narrow public service broadcasting remit.
Elmo wrote: » The licence should be replaced with a new small tax on telecommunications bills. It would amount to 0.02% ~ 200m per year. RTÉ2, 2FM and associated Digital radio stations should become a new company with no funding, sold by government when suitable. RTÉ should consist of RTÉ one, rte gold (replacing +1), rte news now, rte oirechtas, radio 1, lyric fm and associated digital radio stations (including radio one international). It would be give 42.5% of the licence. TG4 would take control of RTe jr and jr radio, the Irish film channel, rnag, radio rira, they would also provide a part time youth channel and cula4. They would also get 42.5% of the licence. Both TG4 and RTÉ would share repeats and news coverage. TG4 would no longer get exchequer fund. RTÉ music groups would become part of the national concert hall and receive 7.5% of the licence. The BAI would get 7.5% for the sound and vision fund. 2rn would take control of RTÉ studios and become the national broadcasting network and studio, they could choose to move a set up a media centre in another part of the country. Sports and imports would be divided between the new broadcasters depending on their business plan e.g soaps go to RTÉ2, GAA split between TG4 and RTÉ, champions league to RTÉ, docs to RTÉ and so on. The BAI and comreg would set the level of the tax. The BAI would control advert minutes. Government would not be involved in deciding on new services or that rate of the fee. No political pressure.
The Parish Priest. wrote: » I Like most of your ideas, not sure about the tax on telecommunications, I would say that a household charge of €150.00 collected by the revenue commissioners would be the way to go.
Victor wrote: » When the licence was introduced, TVs were very much a luxury, available to few. As usage grew, people knew they were buying into a luxury. It is also avoidable - just don't get a TV.
The fees for a licence for the possession of wireless receiving apparatus or to establish a wireless receiving station shall be as follows :— (a) Ordinary Licence 10s. a year. ... A separate ordinary licence shall be necessary to cover the private use of a wireless receiving set on a motor car or other conveyance.
Capt'n Midnight wrote: » TBH it should be taken out of the fees paid by the telco's for the frequencies taken out of the TV band.
Capt'n Midnight wrote: » The big inefficiencies with TV licences are the cut An Post takes to collect licences and the evasion rate. Lumping it on the electricity bill would save millions and you could reduce the licence fee at the same time. TBH it should be taken out of the fees paid by the telco's for the frequencies taken out of the TV band.
Sam Russell wrote: » If the Licence fee was put on the electricity and reduced to €10 per month it would cost €120 per year. Since evasion and non-liability is at 15%, and An Post take about 6%, then the net take on the current regime is €126.90. €1 per month on broadband would certainly make up the difference, particularly if it was also put on mobile data services. I would also be in favour of a small levy on pay TV services to pay for transmission charges for Saorview, which would be less than €1 per month - possibly 50c. All in all, it is small money for the service we get.
Avada wrote: » Why not just add it to the local property tax? Revenue already collect that.
Sam Russell wrote: » Local Property Tax is not collected from commercial premises that are currently liable for the TV licence (if they have a TV).
doolox wrote: » If they don't cough up they are jailed for non payment.
NIMAN wrote: Is this not one of our great urban legends?
NIMAN wrote: Has anyone actually done jail time for non-payment of the TV licence? I doubt it.
In a move that could generate an extra €5m a year for cash-strapped RTÉ, Communications Minister Denis Naughten is devising plans to broaden the reach of the licence fee. Almost one in 10 households no longer has a traditional television set, but many are still accessing content over the internet. Sources say proposals being finalised by officials would see the €160 annual charge applied to electronic devices with screen sizes above 11 inches. This would ensure mobile phones and standard tablets are exempt but would see most desktop computers, laptops and large iPads targeted. Full details of the change have yet to be worked out, including how it would be enforced.
political analyst wrote: » http://www.independent.ie/business/now-laptop-ipad-and-pc-users-will-have-to-buy-a-tv-licence-35567457.html
He has also ruled out the imposition of a so-called 'Broadcasting Charge' which would result in every household in the country receiving a bill regardless of whether they access public service broadcasting.
nhunter100 wrote: » No 411 people went to prison for non payment in 2013. Serving between a few hours and a couple of days. Can't link it but the article was carried in the Indo in May 2014. Check Google.
Johnboy1951 wrote: » So he shot down the FF idea of a general household tax to essentially replace the licence ...... So how does what he proposes differ exactly? Is it only those who actually "access public service broadcasting" who will pay? Of course not, so he is in fact changing the licence to a general tax on owning a personal computer and such devices. This is not a licence to receive a PSB as implied above. It is a general tax on technology, regardless the use of that technology. Why not be up front about it and scrap the 'licence' as it surely could not be termed a licence in future. Call it what it is ..... a technology tax which is used primarily to support PSB. I would have no objection to such a tax, but why continue with this misnomer of a 'licence'? Because 'tax' is a dirty word to a lot of people? Call a spade a spade and be done with it!
political analyst wrote: » At least those people who have no internet access in their homes and do not bother with TV won't be expected to pay a licence fee or broadcasting charge. Motor tax is so-called because people need motor vehicles to get around. However, people can get by without the internet and TV. Therefore, the licence fee/broadcasting charge is not a tax.
The BBC's Nick Thorpe in Budapest writes: Viktor Orban does not often back down, but he has done so on this occasion for several reasons. He saw how unpopular the tax was. He managed with one stroke to do something which opposition leaders had tried and failed to do for five years: unify his opponents He took on the best-organised community in the country - internet users - and lost The government's communication methods failed again - as they have with almost every major decision since Fidesz came to power "We are not Communists. We don't go against the will of the people," he said - a sign that growing comparisons between Fidesz and the old Hungarian Socialist Workers' Party are hitting the mark.
Deleted User wrote: » I don't have a car but I get around ok. I do however depend on the internet for my income.
political analyst wrote: » In what way do you depend on the internet for your income?
Johnboy1951 wrote: » How does that impact on the subject under discussion?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wa.vanillicon.com/v2/ae95441af6570c932058bb1c78524df6.svg)