Quote:
|
Originally Posted by NitroNutter
Why not it makes a great dvd movie veiwer and an even better screen for computer games plus the added benefit of ocasional sky usage, but your saying dont own one to avoid a TAX that is in reality illegal, but because the tv is capable of recieving something which i dont want I have to pay.
You would begrudge paying a smokers tax just because you own lungs which is why tax is applied to cigarettes not if you own lungs, its a fairer way of taxing those who use what they want to use.
|
Nope, you don't pay tax on cigarettes, you pay duty. There is a small but significant difference, you pay a fixed amount of duty every time you buy the specific product to which duty has been applied.
The TV licence is not a tax on TV ownership, it is a licence to use a TV within the UK to receive broadcast television signals. The drivers' licence is not a tax on being allowed to drive or own a car. You can know how to drive and yet be unlicenced, and you can own a car yet be unlicenced. The drivers' licence is a document that entitles you to drive on British roads.
The difference between the TV licence and the drivers' licence is the proceeds of the TV licence fund some of the services you are then entitled to view, while the cost of a drivers licence AFAIK is enough to cover the cost of providing it to you.
The TV licence is not by any means unique as a licence to use radio receiving or transmitting equipment. Most of the broadcast spectrum is licenced in one way or another, be it for radio stations or mobile phone companies.
In what way is the TV licence an 'illegal' tax? It was set by Parliament and has never been overturned by the Law Lords, by definition it is therefore legal.
