Andy wrote:
Brian Butterworth wrote:
There is quite a reasonable argument that the TV License, which is
used to fund BBC television and radio, is a regressive tax, so someone
on benefits pays the same as a millionaire.
Or to put it another way "The less you earn, the more you pay as a
percentage of your income".
Someone who earns 14K per annum pays 1% of their income in TV Licensing,
someone who earns 140K pays only 0.1%, (assuming both own a colour
television), (figures not exact).
Anyone else think that is a little bit unfair? Wouldn't a proportional
or progressive tax be fairer?
Depends on your definition of fair. :-) Leaving aside politics though,
it's worth noting that making the TV license progressive would only be
practical if the BBC's funding was folded into general taxation, and
collected by HMRC. I mean, let alone the cost of dealing with the
additional information, how many people would be happy to give TV
Licensing verifiable details of their employment status and income?
S
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
