main
Report a problem

"Broadband Tax" could become UK law

David Corris   on 25 September 2009 - 15:55 · 49 comments & 4768 views

Advertisement (Why?)
Revealed this week, a tax increase of 50p may become law for UK taxpayers that will go towards a fund to fuel growing development for the infrastructure of Internet networks throughout Britain.

Appearing as part of the Digital Britain Report, the increase would be aimed at providing suitable internet connections across the United Kingdom to millions of homes, some which still have no viable connection. Stephen Timms, minister for "Digital Britain", will put forward the tax as part of the Finance Bill. It is said the new Tax would raise approximately £175 million a year that would be used to create and improve existing networks.

Adding to the report, Timms stated "We want to make high speed networks nationally available. The next-generation fund will help that and we will legislate for it this side of a general election," reaffirming the goals that would be set out for money that would be collected from the 50p tax.

Timms was also kind enough to set the record straight on the Digital Britain report that had been reportedly "derailed". Replying to BBC News, he states "Nothing has been derailed. It is full steam ahead."

However, it is expected that other parties will criticize the new bill. John Wittingdale, a Tory MP and part of the DCMS (Department for Culture, Media and Sport) committee stated "I'm confident the Conservative party will oppose it. I object to it on the basis that it is another tax and is aimed at people who are using old technology."

Lord Mandelson has also had a hand in building the report on Digital Britain, most noticeably on illegal file sharing, which is rumoured to include removing certain users who continue to download and share illegal copies of digital media.

Post a comment · Send to friend Comments · There are 49 additional comments
#1 Beaux on 25 Sep 2009 - 16:13
they need money for more CCTVs...
(5 replies) #2 iamwhoiam on 25 Sep 2009 - 16:14
Sure, why not. Might as well pay a broadband tax along with that TV tax.
#2.1 andrew_f on 25 Sep 2009 - 16:19
Except it's a TV Licence... and most Britons are happy to chip in to get better service for the whole country separate from commercial interests.
#2.2 iamwhoiam on 25 Sep 2009 - 17:41
Except the TV license IS a tax. The tax was enacted and enforced in November 1922 to support the BBC at a fee of 10 shillings. The BBC is a governmental agency that has the power to tax and enforce laws. Which is why people face prosecution for not paying the TV tax.

In the United Kingdom, citizens must pay a licence if they own a television set. That's right, a TV tax. For Americans, the whole idea of an annual tax to own a television borders on the absurd. However, in the UK, the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) is a government agency that has the power to tax and enforce laws. In order to obtain funding, the BBC requires that anyone using its services must pay for them. So, if you own a TV set and live in the UK, you could conceivably turn on the BBC broadcasts, so therefore you better pay.


The BBC was formed on October 18, 1922 in order to provide the UK with radio broadcasts of impartial and public-centered news and entertainment. From its inception the BBC was a public service, so a radio licence was enacted in November, 1922 of 10 shillings in order to provide funding. The BBC's first broadcast was in January, 1923 and throughout the next few years, the company worked to diversify its broadcasts. The BBC aired news, entertainment, sports, weather and even replayed some American broadcasts. By 1938 the BBC added foreign language services and then served as an important source of information during World War II. Though disrupted because of the war, the BBC's television service started in ernest in June, 1946 when the radio licence was raised to 1 pound and a combined radio and TV licence was introduced for 2 pounds. Throughout the next half-century, the BBC increased it's broadcasts and offerings worldwide. It also increased the TV licence for British citizens.
#2.3 +M2Ys4U on 25 Sep 2009 - 18:03
The BBC is certainly not a governmental agency. It's stated in its Royal Charter explicitly so.

The BBC also has no authority to tax and enforce laws. Whatever source you're quoting is wrong.
#2.4 WelshBluebird on 25 Sep 2009 - 18:51
iamwhoiam said,
Except the TV license IS a tax. The tax was enacted and enforced in November 1922 to support the BBC at a fee of 10 shillings. The BBC is a governmental agency that has the power to tax and enforce laws. Which is why people face prosecution for not paying the TV tax.


Your quote is a bit incorrect though.
Just owning a TV is not enough to have to pay the fee.
You have to actually use it to watch live broadasts.
#2.5 Julius Caro on 25 Sep 2009 - 19:50

The TV licence is kind of a tax for sure. And you britons don't complain too much, you probably get the best quality of TV in the world.
(1 reply) #3 mp1963 on 25 Sep 2009 - 16:19
From my experience the money will simply disappear into another government black hole, probably used to pay our MP's ridiculous expenses .. simply another legal government scam with total lack of accountability built in.
#3.1 Neoauld on 26 Sep 2009 - 14:12
mp1963 said,
From my experience the money will simply disappear into another government black hole, probably used to pay our MP's ridiculous expenses .. simply another legal government scam with total lack of accountability built in.


bingo
in a year everyone will forget about it and not even follow up on the matter
#4 Stup0t on 25 Sep 2009 - 16:22
Another stealth tax.

What's next ?

AIR!!!

It will happen.
(3 replies) #5 RanCorX2 on 25 Sep 2009 - 16:30
THIS COUNTRY STINKS. fkin taxes are g@y. The dumb a** gov should put money to better uses...
#5.1 +0sm3l on 25 Sep 2009 - 16:43
RanCorX2 said,
THIS COUNTRY STINKS. fkin taxes are g@y. The dumb a** gov should put money to better uses...


Probably because of people like you who don't know how to spell and use the word gay as insults. Then again, maybe not
#5.2 RAID 0 on 25 Sep 2009 - 16:50
I didn't know taxes were happy.
#5.3 Solid Knight on 26 Sep 2009 - 00:15
RAID 0 said,
I didn't know taxes were happy.


Oh they are. They are very happy. After all, they're made of money.
(6 replies) #6 Jonnoy on 25 Sep 2009 - 16:38
I would be more than happy to pay this for fibre-optic/better to be rolled out all over the UK.
#6.1 +mrbester on 25 Sep 2009 - 16:50
Only problem being that at £175m per year, that'll be about 2030 before enough was raised to do so. And that's without any being used for anything else and interest at 5%. So it's just another tax without any benefit to those who pay it.
#6.2 Tom Bonez on 25 Sep 2009 - 16:50
Jonnoy said,
I would be more than happy to pay this for fibre-optic/better to be rolled out all over the UK.


+1 to that, I don't know what everyone seems to be moaning about
#6.3 joemailey on 25 Sep 2009 - 16:55
Jonnoy said,
I would be more than happy to pay this for fibre-optic/better to be rolled out all over the UK.


I have Fibre Optic, It is Called Virgin Media.
They have paid to upgrade there network. Other providers should pay too.
Don't see why the Public should be paying for it.
#6.4 CaptainSlow on 25 Sep 2009 - 17:31
joemailey said,
I have Fibre Optic, It is Called Virgin Media.
They have paid to upgrade there network. Other providers should pay too.
Don't see why the Public should be paying for it.


That's all fine and well when you're in a Virgin Media cabled area, what are your options of your not aye?
#6.5 WelshBluebird on 25 Sep 2009 - 17:45
joemailey said,
They have paid to upgrade there network.


Yeah, and it nearly bankrupted them.
Also don't forget the virgin media network has many blackspots and areas where it doesn't cover. There is no way one company could fund a national fibre optic network.
#6.6 The Teej on 25 Sep 2009 - 19:41
joemailey said,
I have Fibre Optic, It is Called Virgin Media.
They have paid to upgrade there network. Other providers should pay too.
Don't see why the Public should be paying for it.


That's not what the tax is for, though...
#7 Digix on 25 Sep 2009 - 16:42
seems reasonable if it's put to a good purpose like fiber to each house and high quality infrastructure to manage the higher load which as we know is unlikely so probably a waste of time to spend money ****ing down drain on up holding copper wires.
(1 reply) #8 The Teej on 25 Sep 2009 - 19:42
At first I saw broadband tax and my eyes rolled to the heavens... but it -is- only 50p (oh no, you'll get a can of coke less a month, what a shame), and it'll benefit millions of people all across the nation, moving this nation forward to a digital age, which is nothing but a good thing.

I'm for it!
#8.1 wildk on 27 Sep 2009 - 17:23
Unfortunately with the current "administration", it will not stay at £6 per year and it will never be used for the purpose it is allegedly being collected for.
(3 replies) #9 +Vice on 25 Sep 2009 - 19:49
I don't mind paying an extra 50p if it actually goes towards the building of new infrastructure throughout the country. However I bet 25p of that will go to administration costs and another 15p will be diverted in to some governmental slush fund with a mere 10p actually going to the infrastructure building.
#9.1 Fusion101 on 25 Sep 2009 - 20:10
Thats was my thoughts as i read the story too. Im all for it if it is used for the proposed purpose.
#9.2 m.keeley on 25 Sep 2009 - 21:42
Agreed. Even if 100% was used £175m isn't enough to make any real difference when they're talking about £10's of billions being required.

Can't stand Mandelson, had to resign twice but is back again like a bad penny. Even worse he's not even elected and what the hell did he do to become a Lord apart from mixing in the right circles?
#9.3 iamwhoiam on 26 Sep 2009 - 01:09
Vice said,

How long before it starts to go higher and higher before it's at, or close to, the price of the tv tax? Once a tax is put on the books, it rarely, if ever, goes away. British subjects have been paying that BBC tax since 1922.
#10 rob.derosa on 25 Sep 2009 - 22:05
It's not a tax on broadband. Anyone with a phone line is charged.
(1 reply) #11 Shadrack on 25 Sep 2009 - 22:20
I'm fairly sure my DSL in america has some form of tax that is on every bill. I'm too lazy to go check, though.
#11.1 iamwhoiam on 26 Sep 2009 - 01:06
If you happen to have a land line, then you pay a luxury tax to the feds for that phone. If you have naked DSL (no land line) then you don't pay that tax.
(1 reply) #12 Billus on 25 Sep 2009 - 22:55
Adding tax just simply defeats the purpose of privatisation, adding more un-needed expenses upon the public and hence ruining markets, forcing pricing to go up due to lack of competition and government going into deficit. And what do we get for our moneys worth? Government trying to sell it off when they realise that they can't handle it and usually it is sold to 1 (yes, one) company which in turn becomes a monopoly.

You can see this with governments all around the world. Tax here, tax there and it becomes seemingly worse when governments decide to have these "stimulus" packages and giving away money. Of course someone has to pay for this and usually it's the hard working taxpayer which is hit double hard as the government wants to make a profit. They tax cigarettes and alcohol on the basis that it's bad for you and their trying to help. Health tax they call it. Well hello obesity; tax fast-food chains like McDonalds and Hungary Jacks because that's certainly not healthy for you. They'd tax all the pleasures in life if they could like driving and its thousands of dollars in bills in regos.

Then there's this "global warming" crap. What is it? I'll tell you what it is, it's another tax grab called "carbon trading". God this is ridiculous. If your a fan of paying more tax for the environment then shame on you. What about the families that are already trying to scrape past each week eagerly awaiting their next pay check? Food prices up, petrol prices up. Hell, everything will go up as companies are forced to pay the government to "trade-off" carbon. I'm all in for the environment. We grow our own herbs, have ducks and chickens, a compost bin, rainwater tank, waste-water system, solar hot water and our house is insulated. This was even before all that crap about global warming. All this really is, is an opportunity for the government to tax us hard-working people and spend it worthless projects which never work and have a massive budget blowout.

Yes, I know governments need to make money from somewhere but it's getting over the top where the average person can't enjoy life anymore, homelessness shoots through the roof and the cost of living is just isn't affordable no more. Instead of spending tax on useless things, why not spend more on improving the "quality of life" like health care, education, recreational facilities etc and also spend more to help us uni students like youth allowance for everyone.

That was fun

Last edited by Billus on 25 Sep 2009 - 23:06
#12.1 wakers01 on 26 Sep 2009 - 02:21
Billus said,
Adding tax just simply defeats the purpose of privatisation, adding more un-needed expenses upon the public and hence ruining markets, forcing pricing to go up due to lack of competition and government going into deficit.


But didn't you see Michael Moore's new movie? Capatalism is evil, man. LOL, j/k Moore is an idiot.
#13 dhruva on 25 Sep 2009 - 23:35
in sweden you have to pay tv license even if you dont watch the tv if you just own the tv set and have it in the living or inside the appartment you have to pay tv license(includes computer that has tv turner kinda absurd but well you gotta obey the law.
#14 Turion on 26 Sep 2009 - 01:06
DSL is over the phone line. So there are likely taxes for the phone line. Broad band tax is quivilent to double taxations. We already pay tax on the purchase of internect connection. Taxing based on your usage is obsurd. You dont' get taxed for how much you watch your TV or listen to your radio exept in the form of tax on energy usage (so that's an additional ta We earn money and get taxed. We spend the money leftover from the income tax and get taxed on what we buy. We pay sales tax on broad band for unlimited usage.


NO one was meant to be insulted by this post. And if you were....7-UP Yours!
#15 Ferret on 26 Sep 2009 - 01:07
Yet another tax.... It will NEVER go towards any broadband upgrades.
#16 NfoTech on 26 Sep 2009 - 01:38
Taxes=$Money$+ Well... u know.
#17 wakers01 on 26 Sep 2009 - 02:21
Seems like you guys pay a lot of taxes. Maybe it's just that I've heard a lot about it lately, but I feel like every time I turn around I hear about another tax on this or that service in the UK. That's gotta suck, right?
#18 akav0id on 26 Sep 2009 - 02:28
It's not really a broadband tax because if you don't have a land line phone and get your broadband via FTTC you won't pay the extra £6 a year.

I guess the news label it as such because as part of the 'Digital Britain' report, it will go towards getting the entire of Britain including rural areas online at a minimum of 2Mbps
#19 SuperHans on 26 Sep 2009 - 09:46
It's about time we got fiber optic
#20 hotdog963al on 26 Sep 2009 - 09:50
As long as they actually improve the lines here, I'm happy with that.
#21 ]SK[ on 26 Sep 2009 - 11:48
80% of the money you make ends up in tax. Why not take a bit more now? UK sucks.
#22 mmck on 26 Sep 2009 - 12:50
I think the reason they want to tax it is purely because that way they can charge everyone in the country to improve services to a couple % of the homes.
(1 reply) #23 leesmithg on 26 Sep 2009 - 14:07
It will probably end up like the Vehicle Road Licence/Tax.

Only 33% will end up being used for it's purpose.

Lord Mandelson is a wealthy moron.

I bet he will use his expense account to pay his.

You get what you vote for and I hope you Labour supporters are very happy!
#23.1 mmck on 28 Sep 2009 - 08:00
You actually get someone you didn't vote for, but nonetheless you get someone from the party who you delegated that power to.
#24 xSuRgEx on 26 Sep 2009 - 16:33
more taxes that will just end up being used to fund your local mp's "expenses" who already clame expenses for things like cable tv and brodband. i wounder what speed jackie smith is claming for? ?? proberly the highest as her husband needs super fast pron downloads.

#25 +DrCheese on 26 Sep 2009 - 21:02
Who exactly will own this "network" that we're paying to finance? If it's BT then that's just retarded as they are a private company nowadays.

(1 reply) #26 artnada on 27 Sep 2009 - 07:39
This tax is designed to help people in rural areas get a better, faster broadband connection due to current infrastructure being old and expensive.

Help for people in rural areas, in nice houses with shed loads of land and more than l likely oodles of money in thier bank.

Oh well, another tax on the less well off to help the rich, sounds about right for the UK stitchup institute commonly known as the Government!
#26.1 mmck on 28 Sep 2009 - 08:11
Oh dear... you think that size of house is all that measures wealth - have you ever though about location and actually looking at house prices? A like for like house in a city may cost double and in greater London 3 times or more.

You do realised people in the countryside have more land because it costs a fraction of the price when its agricultural land that you cannot build upon. You can buy a whole field for a few thousand pounds, but that's all its worth.

Also land you can build upon is cheaper and also house prices are much lower. Council tax is again much lower (maybe half in a town to that to in a city) because they have less access to services.

Obviously though wages are less, so its not all positive.

If you want to move to a rural area feel free, its not a closed society of the rural people not letting you move.

Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!

Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.

Advertisement (Why?)