European Commission wants to increase taxes on still digital cameras...

[Ian]

...which have video clip recording modes

We have the story in full on the News section of the site.

Ian

[Stephen]

Re: European Commission wants to increase taxes on still digital cameras...

Will this also apply to Mobile phones Ian? The implications are interesting.

[Ian]

Re: European Commission wants to increase taxes on still digital cameras...

Looking into this, but the initial feedback seems to be that camera phones are not affected. This might be because the primary function of a phone is for telecoms, whereas a camera is for imaging.

Ian

[lumix]

Re: European Commission wants to increase taxes on still digital cameras...

Looking into this, but the initial feedback seems to be that camera phones are not affected. This might be because the primary function of a phone is for telecoms, whereas a camera is for imaging.

Ian

That's a fine line. Primary function of a camera is to take stills. Seems like and old argument has raised it's head again. IE camcorders had their record input disabled to avoid tax. Wonder if this is what will happen to the video function on cameras. Then we get all the gizmo's to unlock the function after you have purchased them.

[JSR]

Re: European Commission wants to increase taxes on still digital cameras...

It's already barmy in this country as it is. If you buy a computer or a graphics card that happens to have a connection for recording video or TV, you'll get a bill from the BBC for the TV license the next day.

It's totally bonkers. We have a TV license at this address (obviously), pay by direct debit, do all the right things... but one day I bought a graphics card from Dabs to upgrade my old computer. A couple of days later I get a nasty letter from the BBC (whooops, I mean from "TV licensing") saying that they don't have a record of a TV license at this address with my specific name on it and to pay up immediately. Then you have to go through hoops to explain to them that you're already covered because you do have a TV license. They believe that you're guilty until you proove yourself innocent.

They'll do the same with mobile phones soon. If you buy one that's capable of connecting to the internet and showing streaming TV, you'll get a demand for payment of a TV license. Or you'll end up not being able to take your mobile phone with you because the TV license only covers you for your address, not at a friend's house or for "public broadcast" because you and your friends are watching a videoclip at a cafe. You'd have to buy specific "non-mobile" mobile phones to avoid this.

There needs to be a little less of this attitude of trying to squeeze every last penny out of the consumer just because they happen to buy an electronic item that happens to incorporate other features that they may or may not want to use. Are they trying to stifle innovation and progress? It's no wonder people laugh at all the scientific and technological advances shown on futuristic sci-fi films - because they know that, in such a world, no one would ever be able to afford the taxes!

"Beam me up, Scotty" would be delayed as you pay for your "atom broadcast license" from the BBC, the VAT from the country you're beaming out of, the VAT from the country you're beaming into, the import and export customs duty, etc... One "beam" would leave you bankrupt!

[Ian]

Re: European Commission wants to increase taxes on still digital cameras...

I think the EC issue is quite different from the TV licensing one. I can't see how taxing imports of digital camera more will benefit me, but I'm very much in favour of preserving the TV license fee in the UK as it represents outstanding value for money. People in the UK don't realise what they have - go abroad and watch all the commercial TV there and then it hits home. The BBC's online offerings are also among the best.

Granted, it must be very frustrating to be billed and treated as a license fee evader when you'r obviously not. Unfortunately there are hundreds of thousands of people out there that do purposely avoid paying the TV licence - at the expense of all of the rest of us. The same kind of people that drive while speaking to a mobile phone held to their ear, who thoughtlessly drop litter, etc.

Mind you, if an increase in tax on digicams might result in better tackling of law breakers.... hmmmm?

Ian

[lumix]

Re: European Commission wants to increase taxes on still digital cameras...

I agree with you that the TV service in this country is probably the best there is, but choice is something we must not lose site of. That's to say the choice to view or not to view the broadcast. I have the right to buy and keep a car in my garage and only have to pay road-fund tax if I use it. Same should apply to other equipment. Licenses/tax should only apply for use not ownership. The law now insist that all shop keepers report sales of goods that require a license, so there's no escape or choice anymore. Not wanting to rant on and on as this could get very heated, I'll end now, but boy I feel better now I've said my bit.

[Patrick]

Re: European Commission wants to increase taxes on still digital cameras...

It's already barmy in this country as it is. If you buy a computer or a graphics card that happens to have a connection for recording video or TV, you'll get a bill from the BBC for the TV license the next day.

It's totally bonkers. We have a TV license at this address (obviously), pay by direct debit, do all the right things... but one day I bought a graphics card from Dabs to upgrade my old computer. A couple of days later I get a nasty letter from the BBC (whooops, I mean from "TV licensing") saying that they don't have a record of a TV license at this address with my specific name on it and to pay up immediately. Then you have to go through hoops to explain to them that you're already covered because you do have a TV license. They believe that you're guilty until you proove yourself innocent.

They'll do the same with mobile phones soon. If you buy one that's capable of connecting to the internet and showing streaming TV, you'll get a demand for payment of a TV license. Or you'll end up not being able to take your mobile phone with you because the TV license only covers you for your address, not at a friend's house or for "public broadcast" because you and your friends are watching a videoclip at a cafe. You'd have to buy specific "non-mobile" mobile phones to avoid this.

There needs to be a little less of this attitude of trying to squeeze every last penny out of the consumer just because they happen to buy an electronic item that happens to incorporate other features that they may or may not want to use. Are they trying to stifle innovation and progress? It's no wonder people laugh at all the scientific and technological advances shown on futuristic sci-fi films - because they know that, in such a world, no one would ever be able to afford the taxes!

"Beam me up, Scotty" would be delayed as you pay for your "atom broadcast license" from the BBC, the VAT from the country you're beaming out of, the VAT from the country you're beaming into, the import and export customs duty, etc... One "beam" would leave you bankrupt!

[Patrick]

Re: European Commission wants to increase taxes on still digital cameras...

I agree with you that the TV service in this country is probably the best there is, but choice is something we must not lose site of. That's to say the choice to view or not to view the broadcast. I have the right to buy and keep a car in my garage and only have to pay road-fund tax if I use it. Same should apply to other equipment. Licenses/tax should only apply for use not ownership. The law now insist that all shop keepers report sales of goods that require a license, so there's no escape or choice anymore. Not wanting to rant on and on as this could get very heated, I'll end now, but boy I feel better now I've said my bit.

[JSR]

Re: European Commission wants to increase taxes on still digital cameras...

I think the EC issue is quite different from the TV licensing one. I can't see how taxing imports of digital camera more will benefit me, but I'm very much in favour of preserving the TV license fee in the UK as it represents outstanding value for money. People in the UK don't realise what they have - go abroad and watch all the commercial TV there and then it hits home. The BBC's online offerings are also among the best.

Although I agree with the concept of the TV license, there's a lot about it I disagree with.

To start with is it's name. It's called the "TV license" but it is clearly the "BBC license" as only the BBC benefit from it. We pay the TV license but almost every channel, bar the BBC ones, have more commercials that you can wave a stick at and some ruin programmes by putting commercials on the screen while you're watching the programme itself.

Suggesting that the TV license is a way to avoid US-style commercial TV is wrong because most channels do have US-style commercials.

Also, despite being a "TV" license, a good proportion of the money goes towards their online website and radio stations. Where's the "TV" in radio? Where's the "TV" in their website? If you don't have a radio, why are you paying for the radio stations with your "TV license"? If you don't have a computer, why are you paying for the BBC website with your "TV license"? And if you do have a computer but don't have a TV, why are you forced to pay a TV license just because it happens to have a chip on the graphics card that you can't remove?

The license is allegedy about having a TV in the house, yet people from outside the UK can view the BBC website (funded by the UK TV license), but they don't have to pay a TV license. People may benefit from the radio stations but, if they don't have a TV, they're not paying for it - it's the owners of TVs that are paying for it. This is just unfair.

And a lot of the TV license goes towards BBC3, BBC4 etc. If you only have a terrestrial aerial, you can't even watch what you're paying for!

The "TV" license is solely for the benefit of the BBC, it should have nothing to do with owning a TV or computer/electrical equipment that's capable of receiving broadcasts. The BBC could operate a "commercial free" channel by abolishing the TV license and, instead, operate a system similar to cable channels - buy a "BBC license" to watch BBC content. If you don't want to watch BBC content, you don't need to buy the license. Surely that would work?

It's almost as bad as the debacle of "Freeview". They say it's "free" but you have to buy a box before you can view. If you've got to pay money, it's not free. If I want to watch, for example, ITV4, I have to (i) buy a TV license, (ii) buy a freeview box, (iii) pay by watching ITV's adverts. How many times do we have to pay to watch the TV? This situation is barmy.

[JSR]

Re: European Commission wants to increase taxes on still digital cameras...

you can’t tell me you buy a television to watch a blank screen.

But that's just the point. If you don't own a TV but you do have a computer, and you upgrade your graphics card to one that happens to have a video/TV capture facility, you'll get a demand to pay the TV license.

A relative of a friend had this happen when he moved home. He didn't have a TV in his flat so he didn't have a TV license. He bought a home PC from Dell so he could play computer games, do email/internet, and chat to his mates on IM. A few days later received a demand to pay a TV license - because it turns out the graphics card had one of those tv/video capture sockets (that he had no intention of using). He had to go through hoops to convince them that he shouldn't need to pay the TV license. Eventually he won, but it's this assumption that you're guilty until you can prove that you're innocent that is wrong. And it's this that turns the TV license into a tax.

The TV licence is terrific value for money, particularly when compared with Sky/Cable for which you pay more per month to watch the very programs you have already enjoyed on terrestrial TV, many made with that very licence money.

That's not a reasonable argument. If I want to watch ITV1, Sky don't force me to buy a Sky license to do it with. Yet I have to pay the BBC their "TV license". Paying Sky/cable is an option, it's your choice. Paying the BBC their TV license is not a choice, it's compulsory, it's a tax.

[Patrick]

Re: European Commission wants to increase taxes on still digital cameras...

But that's just the point. If you don't own a TV but you do have a computer, and you upgrade your graphics card to one that happens to have a video/TV capture facility, you'll get a demand to pay the TV license.

A relative of a friend had this happen when he moved home. He didn't have a TV in his flat so he didn't have a TV license. He bought a home PC from Dell so he could play computer games, do email/internet, and chat to his mates on IM. A few days later received a demand to pay a TV license - because it turns out the graphics card had one of those tv/video capture sockets (that he had no intention of using). He had to go through hoops to convince them that he shouldn't need to pay the TV license. Eventually he won, but it's this assumption that you're guilty until you can prove that you're innocent that is wrong. And it's this that turns the TV license into a tax.


That's not a reasonable argument. If I want to watch ITV1, Sky don't force me to buy a Sky license to do it with. Yet I have to pay the BBC their "TV license". Paying Sky/cable is an option, it's your choice. Paying the BBC their TV license is not a choice, it's compulsory, it's a tax.

can watch TV by whichever method available, we should pay the licence, after that the choice remains ours.

Patrick

[Ian]

Re: European Commission wants to increase taxes on still digital cameras...

That's not a reasonable argument. If I want to watch ITV1, Sky don't force me to buy a Sky license to do it with. Yet I have to pay the BBC their "TV license". Paying Sky/cable is an option, it's your choice. Paying the BBC their TV license is not a choice, it's compulsory, it's a tax.

Yes it is a tax, but it's an exceptional one for many reasons. First of all, every penny goes in to the cause it represents, which is more than can be said, for example, the road fund tax. And how about this, if you don't own a car and so don't pay for a tax disc every year, does that mean you shouldn't be able to use road transportation at all?

If subscribing to Sky or being able to watch ITV meant not being able to watch BBC, I wonder how many viewers those channels would have?

There are millions of people who voluntarily and gladly pay their TV Licence each year because they know it's worth it - it is a national institution.

Saying that the TV Licence doesn't prevent commercial TV is also missing the point. Having non-commercial TV is precious and it's great that we have both types.

Our commercial TV is actually of a better standard than other countries as well. The standards set by the BBC affect the quality of many of the more popular commercial stations. Take away the BBC and the standards of the likes of ITV and C4 will plummet.

I'm genuinely sorry that innocent people are being harrassed for TV Licence payments they don't owe, but it's thankfully a very rare situation.

By the way, the association with TV goods sales with licence payment demands is nothing new. When I moved to a new house back in 1989 and bought a new TV at the same time I was contacted regarding my TV licence within a week.

Ian

[JSR]

Re: European Commission wants to increase taxes on still digital cameras...

I believe if we can watch TV by whichever method available, we should pay the licence, after that the choice remains ours.

Actually, on those grounds it could be said that as soon as we enter a shop we can shoplift so we should all be fined as though we have shoplifted. We have a choice whether to enter the shop or not.

Yes it is a tax, but it's an exceptional one for many reasons. First of all, every penny goes in to the cause it represents, which is more than can be said, for example, the road fund tax. And how about this, if you don't own a car and so don't pay for a tax disc every year, does that mean you shouldn't be able to use road transportation at all?

I'm not sure that's true. The TV license doesn't make buying a TV any cheaper. I have to pay a TV license (as well as a subscription) to watch NTL, but NTL don't get the money from the TV license.

Our commercial TV is actually of a better standard than other countries as well. The standards set by the BBC affect the quality of many of the more popular commercial stations. Take away the BBC and the standards of the likes of ITV and C4 will plummet.

That argument would only work if ITV and C4 were producing quality programmes now, which they're not. Are you suggesting that without the TV license fee we wouldn't get the likes of "Big Brother" and "Ant and Dec"? That sounds like another reason to abolish the license fee, then! (Actually, I'm not an advocate for abolishing the TV license fee - just that it shouldn't be treated as a criminally enforceable compulsory tax.)

There would be less animosity towards the TV license fee if it was fairer. For example, as a "TV license" it should benefit all TV stations (thus reducing the price charged to watch satellite/cable); or, it should be turned into a BBC subscription fee and they arrange the BBC like satellite/cable in which you can't receive BBC content unless you've paid the subscription. At least that'd be fair.

Still, as said by a previous poster, nothing is solved by ranting. So long as the vast majority don't see a problem with this tax, it'll never change. I'll shut up now.

[Patrick]

Re: European Commission wants to increase taxes on still digital cameras...

Actually, on those grounds it could be said that as soon as we enter a shop we can shoplift so we should all be fined as though we have shoplifted. We have a choice whether to enter the shop or not.


I'm not sure that's true. The TV license doesn't make buying a TV any cheaper. I have to pay a TV license (as well as a subscription) to watch NTL, but NTL don't get the money from the TV license.


That argument would only work if ITV and C4 were producing quality programmes now, which they're not. Are you suggesting that without the TV license fee we wouldn't get the likes of "Big Brother" and "Ant and Dec"? That sounds like another reason to abolish the license fee, then! (Actually, I'm not an advocate for abolishing the TV license fee - just that it shouldn't be treated as a criminally enforceable compulsory tax.)

There would be less animosity towards the TV license fee if it was fairer. For example, as a "TV license" it should benefit all TV stations (thus reducing the price charged to watch satellite/cable); or, it should be turned into a BBC subscription fee and they arrange the BBC like satellite/cable in which you can't receive BBC content unless you've paid the subscription. At least that'd be fair.

Still, as said by a previous poster, nothing is solved by ranting. So long as the vast majority don't see a problem with this tax, it'll never change. I'll shut up now.