What Countries Do You Need Pay For A TV License?

[Markxxx]

I believe you still do in the UK, correct me if I'm wrong?

What other countries?

Also any info would be appreciated. Like what are the fines if they catch you? Do computers with a TV tuner count as a TV? Is it just for free TV. If you have cable in the country is that included? Also how would they catch you?

I realize not everyone would have every answer, just throw in what you know.

 

[1069_KIFR]

the fee is included in the cable/satellite bill.

 

[BRNout]

Japan is another. All of the houses/apartments had an NHK sticker on the outside to indicate that the fee had been paid.

And yes, there absolutely is a TV tax in the UK to pay for the BBC's operations (something like $220/year). It is by household and by TV. There are rather stiff fines for non-compliance and your local appliance store has to rat you out to the government as soon as you buy a TV in the UK. So that they know that you need to pay the TV tax.

I've heard stories that the government in the UK used to cruise neighborhoods with a monitoring truck, looking for an IF signal coming from a house that had not paid the fee. Nowadays, they probably use a database to figure out which households in a given area haven't paid and then go and see if they're getting TV via antenna (don't forget, there is Freeview available there). If you have cable or satellite, it's like KIFR indicated - the fee is added in to your bill.

 

[Markxxx]

Does it apply to computers with TV tuners?

 

[azumanga]

Many European countries, as well as some Asian countries and Brazil, have a television license or some other type of fee. Collection also widely varies -- in some countries, it's a separate payment, while in others, it's part of another bill or tax.

More here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_licence

As for computers with tuners, UK regulations state that any device used to receive television signals is covered in the law, including computers and cell phones. See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_licensing_in_the_United_Kingdom

 

[FreddyE1977]

Japan is another. All of the houses/apartments had an NHK sticker on the outside to indicate that the fee had been paid.

And yes, there absolutely is a TV tax in the UK to pay for the BBC's operations (something like $220/year). It is by household and by TV. There are rather stiff fines for non-compliance and your local appliance store has to rat you out to the government as soon as you buy a TV in the UK. So that they know that you need to pay the TV tax.

I've heard stories that the government in the UK used to cruise neighborhoods with a monitoring truck, looking for an IF signal coming from a house that had not paid the fee. Nowadays, they probably use a database to figure out which households in a given area haven't paid and then go and see if they're getting TV via antenna (don't forget, there is Freeview available there). If you have cable or satellite, it's like KIFR indicated - the fee is added in to your bill.

So by process of elimination, anyone who has not paid the fee must be guilty?
Talk about "until proven innocent"!

I've heard as punishment if they catch you the government comes in and sabotages the tuner
so that it will only receive NBC programming.

 

[Bob1370]

It's true that in North America there's no such thing as a receiving license--put up an antenna and you can watch anything that reaches your set for free.

But in terms of quality of programming, some might argue that like in any other aspect of life, you get what you pay for....

 

[growler33]

"We know you've got a telly, we detected it." The tv detector truck guy from "The Young Ones", a British tv show.

 

[mjlarochelle]

It's true that in North America there's no such thing as a receiving license--put up an antenna and you can watch anything that reaches your set for free.

But in terms of quality of programming, some might argue that like in any other aspect of life, you get what you pay for....

We pay for the CBC in Canada, but that is simply funded out of general tax revenues.

 

[Markxxx]

Geez what do poor people do? Is there a food stamp like program for poor people that want to watch TV?

 

[BMR]

I've heard stories that the government in the UK used to cruise neighborhoods with a monitoring truck, looking for an IF signal coming from a house that had not paid the fee. Nowadays, they probably use a database to figure out which households in a given area haven't paid and then go and see if they're getting TV via antenna (don't forget, there is Freeview available there). If you have cable or satellite, it's like KIFR indicated - the fee is added in to your bill.

No it isn't. You still need to buy a licence however you watch TV.

Geez what do poor people do? Is there a food stamp like program for poor people that want to watch TV?

In a word, no.

What do poor people do? Struggle to pay it! The only exceptions from the TV licence is for the over 75s. You can pay in installments, but you still have to pay........

 

[BRNout]

No it isn't. You still need to buy a licence however you watch TV.

Thanks for the correction; I thought that the license fee was included in your bill.

What do poor people do? Struggle to pay it! The only exceptions from the TV licence is for the over 75s. You can pay in installments, but you still have to pay........

I know that one because my wife's aunt was telling me that she got a senior citizens discount. And, I was shocked that it wasn't much of a discount. 10 or 15 percent, if memory serves. Seemed like there were some other funny rules about what sort of TV you had. Crazy.

 

[BMR]

I'm just grateful I don't live in Switzerland. The TV licence there is a whopping 360 euros a year- that's 485 dollars.

I suppose Switzerland has to provide broadcasting in 3 languages but Denmark, Austria and Norway are all mono-lingual and also have TV licences in excess of 300 euros (400 dollars) a year. Ouch indeed

 

[PTBoardOp94]

I'm just grateful I don't live in Switzerland. The TV licence there is a whopping 360 euros a year- that's 485 dollars.

I suppose Switzerland has to provide broadcasting in 3 languages but Denmark, Austria and Norway are all mono-lingual and also have TV licences in excess of 300 euros (400 dollars) a year. Ouch indeed

Danish national TV produces 6 channels for $400. I pay $800 a year for 80-some channels -- and Internet.

Maybe we don't have it so bad.

 

[BMR]

I'm just grateful I don't live in Switzerland. The TV licence there is a whopping 360 euros a year- that's 485 dollars.

I suppose Switzerland has to provide broadcasting in 3 languages but Denmark, Austria and Norway are all mono-lingual and also have TV licences in excess of 300 euros (400 dollars) a year. Ouch indeed

Danish national TV produces 6 channels for $400. I pay $800 a year for 80-some channels -- and Internet.

Maybe we don't have it so bad.

We get 6 BBC channels for the equivilant of 225 dollars a year, so we don't do so bad either I guess.

BTW your cable prices are broadly in line with ours- a basic British cable package with 75 channels, evening and weekend phone calls and the internet comes in at around 765 dollars a year at current exchange rates, but we still have to pay the TV licence on top.

 

[FreddyE1977]

I'm just grateful I don't live in Switzerland. The TV licence there is a whopping 360 euros a year- that's 485 dollars.

I suppose Switzerland has to provide broadcasting in 3 languages but Denmark, Austria and Norway are all mono-lingual and also have TV licences in excess of 300 euros (400 dollars) a year. Ouch indeed

Danish national TV produces 6 channels for $400. I pay $800 a year for 80-some channels -- and Internet.

Maybe we don't have it so bad.

The private sector will outproduce government, and at a better price, every time it is tried.

 

[BMR]

I'm just grateful I don't live in Switzerland. The TV licence there is a whopping 360 euros a year- that's 485 dollars.

I suppose Switzerland has to provide broadcasting in 3 languages but Denmark, Austria and Norway are all mono-lingual and also have TV licences in excess of 300 euros (400 dollars) a year. Ouch indeed

Danish national TV produces 6 channels for $400. I pay $800 a year for 80-some channels -- and Internet.

Maybe we don't have it so bad.

The private sector will outproduce government, and at a better price, every time it is tried.

But is it better quality?

 

[BRNout]

I'm just grateful I don't live in Switzerland. The TV licence there is a whopping 360 euros a year- that's 485 dollars.

I suppose Switzerland has to provide broadcasting in 3 languages but Denmark, Austria and Norway are all mono-lingual and also have TV licences in excess of 300 euros (400 dollars) a year. Ouch indeed

Danish national TV produces 6 channels for $400. I pay $800 a year for 80-some channels -- and Internet.

Maybe we don't have it so bad.

The private sector will outproduce government, and at a better price, every time it is tried.

But is it better quality?

It can be. Usually, you get more variety from the private sector. And, "quality" is in the eye of the beholder.

Let's take the BBC as an example. Over the years, they've produced some brilliant programming. Wonderful stuff. But, often, they are airing programs that I find to be about as appealing as watching paint dry. Really dull stuff. To the elitists out there, my comment could be dismissed by commenting that I am somehow "uncultured" or "uncouth" or "unintelligent". Well, sorry, but it's just that I don't find a lot of that programming to be interesting and would prefer another choice.

Is something like The History Channel or Discovery of 'higher quality' than the BBC? This is debatable. However, given a choice, I like to have the option and - more often than not - would probably chose one of the first two over the third.

Yes, I'll admit, there's often nothing but crap on TV here. But, when you have a plethora of channels to choose from, the odds of finding something of interest do tend to increase. The British model of only a few basic channels, followed by others requiring Freeview, satellite or cable, seems to offer fewer choices.

Again, I guess it's in the eye of the beholder.

 

[FreddyE1977]

You could say the same about PBS here in the States.
They have produced some really excellent programming over the years.
But they have also produced things to appeal to their political benefactors,
or that would appeal to about fifteen people waiting for an elevator someplace
on the Upper East Side of Manhattan.

And whether the years and years of taxpayer investment was worth it is another matter.
Who's to say that the better ideas would not have been picked-up by some commercial broadcaster?

 

[ajc_trw]

You could say the same about PBS here in the States.
They have produced some really excellent programming over the years.
But they have also produced things to appeal to their political benefactors,
or that would appeal to about fifteen people waiting for an elevator someplace
on the Upper East Side of Manhattan.

And whether the years and years of taxpayer investment was worth it is another matter.
Who's to say that the better ideas would not have been picked-up by some commercial broadcaster?

True, but the main reason I've watched my local PBS station for is the BBC shows like MPFC, Coupling, Red Dwarf & other UK fare.