Talk:Television licence

List of Things To Do

Opinions of TV Licencing

A proper dicussion on the advantages and disadvantages of using a TV Licence. Perhaps comparing this to other methods of funding public television. User:Pit-yacker 14:01, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Independent Media

I feel like there may be a big point missing here. I was always led to believe that the main reason for the TV Licence, is to ensure that TV Programmes 'for the public good' are to be created, above and beyond what's just necessary for commercial interests.

In addition, that the reason that it's not handled through general taxation is that makes it a lot harder for the government to meddle with. Thus, creating a media platform that's A) more independent from government influence and B) more independent from commercial biases than either Media Sources that are funded directly by government or purely commercial means.

I'm trying to find some good discussions on this before writing a summary of it. Could anyone help? User:multikev 22:38, 17 February 2014 (GMT)

Countries with TV Licences

Countries to Add

When adding Czech Rep, which I was sure had a licence fee, did some digging on Other nations. Problem is a lot of public broadcasters dont have English versions of websites. However I have found two reports that may be of use. HOWEVER, these are 2000 figures, of course these will have undoubtly changed, in some cases nations may have scrapped their licences. So we need to get uptodate figures!:

1. According to http://www.obs.coe.int/about/oea/pr/service_public.html the following countries also have a TV licence:

• Belgium €189 (But abolished in the Flemish community)
• Hungary €28 (Abolished 2002)
• Iceland €236 (€338 inc Radio)
• Macedonia€49
• Poland €35
• Portugal - No TV Licence (abolished) but it appears to have a €16 "radio licence" instead. http://www.ero.dk/documentation/docs/doc98/official/pdf/ECCREP084.PDF says a combined radio/tv licence of €19.56
• Romania €13
• Slovenia €126
• Slovakia €20

2. Another Document written in 2000 (http://www.obs.coe.int/oea_publ/iris/iris_plus/focus6_2000.pdf.en states that:

• Bulgaria: 1998 Broadcasting Act instituted a TV licence but this wasnt due to start until 2003. The fee was fixed at 0.6 of the minimum wage and collected by the National Electricity Company under the presumption that everyone has a TV. Waived for deaf and blind. [1] appears to suggest it is still not active.
• Poland:Waived for over 75s.

Also:

• Bosnia: Added
• Serbia [2] appear to have legislated for a licence fee, but it is not yet active.
• Malta - According to the German Version of this article. No figures given. EDIT: [3] gives details for Feb 2003 However no amount and cant verify it def still exists. Also this from 2000 http://www.circom-regional.org/crdocs/european-benchmarking2002.pdf
• Turkey - According to [4] In Turkey TRT receives funding from a 2.0% tax on electricity bills and 16% sales tax on TV and radio receivers. IMHO it isnta "TV Licence" as such, however since it is a hypothecated tax the principle is exactly the same.
• Egypt Egypt has a TV Licence as part of electricity bills. http://www.panosparis.org/fichierProdGB/fichierProd1486.pdf
• Jordan [5] states that Jordan has a TV Licence. No details however or info whether it still exists. The site also says the Netherlands has one.
• Zimbabwe [6] Used to fund the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation.
• India - Prasar Bharati Act [[7]] which came into force in 1997 allows a TV Licence http://www.thehoot.org/story.asp?storyid=Web210214166177hoot11182002660&pn=1 More recent Story [8] talks about a sales tax licence on new tvs. Also http://www.digitalopportunity.org/article/view/120170/1/ talks about government support for reviving the licence fee. [9] says it was scrapped.
• Nigeria- Previous Link says Nigeria has one
• Faroe Islands According to [10] and [11], Sjónvarp Føroya is funded by a licence fee. No information on amount or mechanisms though.
• BangladeshFor Bangladesh Television plenty saying there is one e.g.[12]. Cant find an amount
• Sri Lanka scrapped one for Rupavahini in 1999.

http://www.mediasouthasia.org/Colomboworkshopforwebsite010604.htm

• Lesotho Abolished 2003 [13]
• Cameroon [14] CRTV is funded by a 1% tax on the income of all in employment.
• MalawiSection 56 of The Malawi Communications Act 1998 [15] allows for a licence fee to be levied. Cant find any thing to say the amount or if it ever started.
• Mauritius Mauritius Broadcasting Corporation is funded by a licence fee on the electricity bill of all homes own a television fee. The Licence fee makes up 60% of MBC's funding [16]

• Swaziland Used to fund the Swaziland Television Authority [17]
• Uganda Introduced to fund Uganda Broadcasting Corporation in the "Uganda Broadcasting Corporation Act, 2004". Collection started but was halted by President Yoweri Museveni. There is pressure to reinstate them to maintain UBC's independence from government.

[18]

• Zambia According to http://www.times.co.zm/news/viewnews.cgi?category=10&id=1085021391 a tv licence has been introduced in recent years to fund Zambia National Broadcasting Corporation (ZNBC)
• Indonesia (was having TV licences fee but abolished several years ago after most private broadcasters went live and several law practitioners complaints its lack of mandating law i.e. the TV licence fee in Indonesia was never mandated by any laws and consequently may not be enforced) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.164.74.120 (talk) 04:32, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

User:Pit-yacker 14:01, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

TBD

There should perhaps be something about U.S. views added to the "Opinions of television licensing systems" section, but it needs to be sourced, not based on someone's half-baked theory of American exceptionalism. I can well imagine that many Americans are amazed to learn that televisions must be licensed in most of Europe. It would be even more interesting to note whether there is anyone arguing for a reintroduction in those countries where the licence has been abolished. I was surprised to read that some Eastern European governments are considering introducing a TV licence; I would have thought licences were simply an anachronism from the age when TV was a luxury, which persists because of a ratchet effect.

There should also be more added about the history of radio/TV licences. While it may (or may not!) be the case that that licence fees are now used to fund public broadcasters, this was not always the case. In the UK, radio licences were introduced in 1904 at the behest of the Armed Forces, which wanted to maintain control of the new technology. The BBC was not government-funded (or even created) till the 1920s. --jnestorius^(talk) 14:31, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

All coutries listed

• How much is it? Either rate or percentage?
• What discounts are available?
• Is licence charged on per dwelling/household/tv basis
• What is it applicable to eg Internet, Radio etc,
• What does it fund?
• What proportion of public broadcasting funding does it represent?
• How is enforcement accomplished?

User:Pit-yacker 13:43, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Countries without TV Licences

Perhaps Philippines should fall here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4452:38C:CA00:F9BB:C4F:7912:3E2A (talk) 17:56, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

"Evasion"

The term "evasion" is POV. If every TV user has to pay for a license, and more and more people choose not to watch TV, it might be evasion or not, depending on the motivation. If someone who would otherwise watch TV refrains from doing so just to save money, it is evasion. If someone doesn’t watch TV because heorshe is not interested, it is not evasion. There is no way to find out the motivation, so the term "evasion" is an allegation. -- Sloyment (talk) 19:54, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Your argument is POV as well. Some countries like Germany force every household to pay a monthly fee even if they don't have a TV or Internet. Not paying is evasion and can lead to jail. The bigger issue with the article is that there's no easy list of countries that illustrates whether the fee is obligatory, only for people with TVs and what the fee actually covers.--2001:16B8:31FB:D200:35CC:DA2D:7D9:65F2 (talk) 18:18, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

The term “license” does not refer to a payment, but to an individual permit. In the UK, you have to pay for a TV license, in Germany you don’t. The contribution you have to pay in Germany has nothing to do with a license. So your remark is off topic. And it’s not a fee; it was a fee until 2012. And it’s not per household but per apartment. -- Sloyment (talk) 15:01, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

A licence is not a payment.

You confuse two different things. Should I explain why? 85.193.215.210 (talk) 00:29, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

No confusion - a licence is a licence. However, a television licence is a payment, as per the definition in the article: A television licence or broadcast receiving licence is a payment required in many countries for the reception of television broadcasts, or the possession of a television set where some broadcasts are funded in full or in part by the licence fee paid. Denisarona (talk) 13:07, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

A permit, not a payment. -- Sloyment (talk) 17:57, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Television licensing by country

I have made edits to try to improve this article. A very large proportion of the article is taken up by details of individual countries' licensing arrangements. I think this could be distracting for most readers who want more of an overview about television licensing. I also think that separating them according to whether they currently, formerly or never had a licence is unhelpful, especially as some countries' classifications are a little ambiguous. I would therefore suggest leaving a summary of licensing by country in this article (perhaps by expanding on the table in the Europe section), then moving the remaining detail to a separate Television licensing by country article. But I would like to see if there is a consensus before starting such a large change. Any feedback on the other changes I have made is, of course, very welcome. --Mgp28 (talk) 23:12, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

No TV license in Germany

The article lists Germany. However, in Germany there is no such thing as a TV license. While in the UK, watching TV is forbidden unless you pay for a license, i.e. your individual permit, receiving public broadcasts is a constitutional right in Germany, and no license is required whatsoever.

Until 2012, there was a TV fee that had to be paid if you owned a TV receiver. The idea behind it however, was not to pay for a license, but to pay for using the service of the public broadcasters, as the assumption was that anyone owning a TV receiver would watch their very good program 🙄. (This assumption is of course ridiculous.)

In 2013, the system was replaced by a broadcasting contribution that has to be paid by everyone living in an apartment, regardless whether they watch TV or not. Again, the idea behind it has nothing to do with a license. The idea is to pay for the mere ability to use the high quality program 🙄 of German public broadcasters. TV is usually consumed in apartments, so as long as you live in an apartment, even if you don’t own a TV, you could start watching at any time, and thus you benefit from that offer all the time. (Again, this assumption is of course ridiculous, but that is how the federal constitutional court has argued.)

As there is no TV license required, you won’t be in trouble for watching TV like in the UK, if you don’t pay. Instead, if you don’t pay the broadcasting contribution in Germany, you will be in trouble for not paying. Yo will be indebted and might be distrained after some time. Not paying it is also a contravention; so in theory, you might also be fined.

I think, the article Television license should cover only countries that really have a TV license. I don’t know if it’s just the UK, or if other countries use that model, too. Countries like Germany should go into a broader article, maybe called Financing of public broadcasting or similarly. -- Sloyment (talk) 14:49, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

I think the Germany section is now clear that it is a universal fee, not connected to owning or using a television. Is the problem that it is listed in a section with countries that have more traditional licences? There is an earlier comment about the ambiguity in classifying licences as present or abolished for countries that have public funding of this sort. I would suggest putting all countries in each continent together, rather than classifying as having television licences or not. (I would also suggest separating this list of countries on to a separate page.) --Mgp28 (talk) 17:15, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

You are missing the point:

• Don’t confuse license and fee. A license is a set of rights, and a fee is a payment for obtaining rights or using a service. If you pay a fee, you get a license, and the license allows you to watch TV. This is how it works in the UK, but not in Germany.
• There is no license required in Germany, so the question is not whether or not other countries have a “more traditional license”.
• Until 2012, there was a TV fee, but not a license fee, but a service fee.
• The new compulsive charge called “Rundfunkbeitrag” (literally “broadcasting contribution”) does not even meet the definition of a fee. Under German law, tax and fee and “contribution” are completely different categories.

As long as the article claims that in Germany a “TV license [is] required” and the “licence fee in Germany is €18.36”, the problem is not resolved. -- Sloyment (talk) 16:51, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Austria...

...intends to convert the current system ("GIS fee") to a fee per household in the near future. All households should pay this fee, regardless of whether there are receivers or not and whether they are classic devices or whether they receive on the Internet. So far, reception with computers has been excluded. In the future everyone will pay. A surcharge to support culture (determined by the federal states) should remain. All details about the new ORF law and the introduction of the new levy can be found at https://www.derstandard.at/story/3000000177611/neuer-orf-beitrag-ist-von-oevp-und-gruenen-beschlossen --H7 (talk) 16:06, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Israel is not in Europe

under the TV licenses for Europe, Israel is listed. Israel should be listed under Asia, as it technically is a Western Asian country. Chaoticdiva (talk) 05:23, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Israel is not listed in the 'Europe' section. Denisarona (talk) 06:03, 3 October 2023 (UTC)