In principal, I agree with those who are prosecuted being hit with the cost of taking legal action against them alongside the original licence fee. However, that said, the route of the problem is the inefficient method of collecting the licence fee which could be partly dealt with, if applied when tv's were first purchased (i.e. if you buy a tv you must produce your current licence, or pay for the first year at the time of buying the tv and let the retailer forward it to the relevant authority so the licence can be issued).
The point is to generate revenue, just like all taxes, and just like all taxes once they are in place the State has to make sure they are collected.How much do you think it costs to issue the fine, track down the person, keep track of missed payments etc etc???
I thought the point was to generate revenue. None of it sounds like a cost efficient way to operate.
The point is to generate revenue, just like all taxes, and just like all taxes once they are in place the State has to make sure they are collected.
The main cost of collecting it is the fact that you can do it through the Post Office and the Post Office charges a fee for handling it. It's just a subsidy for Post Offices (like the dog licence). Force people to do it online by charging a higher rate if you want to do it through the Post Office.Apparently, Lois XIV’S finance minister, Jean-Baptiste Colbert, declared that "the art of taxation consists in so plucking the goose as to obtain the largest possible amount of feathers with the smallest possible amount of hissing."
This really doesn't seem to pass that test to me... There's a lot of plucking and a lot of hissing and not many feathers coming out.
The cost of collection should be a small percentage point of the revenue collected.
If we include the court time tied up on TV licence evaders as well as the +10 million spent on collection... that's a lot of cost relative to the 150-200 million it brings in.
Then consider Some charges (e.g. ESB) have the advantage of limiting demand.
I don't think the TV licence passes either of those tests.
The main cost of collecting it is the fact that you can do it through the Post Office and the Post Office charges a fee for handling it. It's just a subsidy for Post Offices (like the dog licence). Force people to do it online by charging a higher rate if you want to do it through the Post Office. It's what they do in the passport office; the cheapest may for the State to produce a Passport is if you post in the application. That method costs the least. If you arrive in two days before you travel it costs a fortune for the State to get the passport made so they charge you a higher fee. The same thing should apply to TV licences.
The main cost of collecting it is the fact that you can do it through the Post Office and the Post Office charges a fee for handling it. It's just a subsidy for Post Offices (like the dog licence). Force people to do it online by charging a higher rate if you want to do it through the Post Office.
It's what they do in the passport office; the cheapest may for the State to produce a Passport is if you post in the application. That method costs the least. If you arrive in two days before you travel it costs a fortune for the State to get the passport made so they charge you a higher fee. The same thing should apply to TV licences.
You are not required by law to have a passport. You only need one if you wish to travel outside Ireland and the UK. You are required to have a TV licence if you have a TV. If you choose to pay for it in a way which costs the State more then you should be charged more.We don't have enforcement agents going around trying to ferret out people in their own homes without passports though.
And the passport is an individualised service, it's not annual... I don't think it's a similar situation.
There is already a massive subsidy of rural people by urban people. How much extra do you think they should get?you can get your tv licence on line, An Post provide the service. However forcing people to do it online by charging a higher rate if you walk into a Post Office would rightly be seen as another anti-rural policy given that half of rural Ireland has little or no broadband service and won't have it for many years.
And that's why your not a politician!You are required to have a TV licence if you have a TV. If you choose to pay for it in a way which costs the State more then you should be charged more.
There is already a massive subsidy of rural people by urban people. How much extra do you think they should get?
Anyway, you don't need broadband to open simple interactive forms. You can do it on your phone with a half decent signal.[/QUOTE
that's assuming you can get a half decent mobile signal which isn't always possible.
I'm sure rural people will look at the lovely motorways, Luas extension, buses and free water that Dubliners get, most of which are funded through direct taxation and have a different view.
I'm sure rural people will look at the lovely motorways, Luas extension, buses and free water that Dubliners get, most of which are funded through direct taxation and have a different view.
Apparently, Lois XIV’S finance minister, Jean-Baptiste Colbert, declared that "the art of taxation consists in so plucking the goose as to obtain the largest possible amount of feathers with the smallest possible amount of hissing."
This really doesn't seem to pass that test to me... There's a lot of plucking and a lot of hissing and not many feathers coming out.
All I am hearing is a lot of hissing from the lucky pluckers in Montrose
Yup, not a word out of our Minister for Communications though... he should be kicking a$$ out in Donnybrook !
Yup, not a word out of our Minister for Communications though... he should be kicking a$$ out in Donnybrook !
I think it's 250k per annum. Prob some sort of top ups after that which aren't publicisedThis has the potential to bring RTE a little more under the microscope, although the lack of equal pay for different sexes is only one of the many things that needs fixing out in RTE !
RTÉ chief faces grilling by TDs on gender salary balance and finances
One of my first questions would be how much is Dee Forbes being paid ?
Rabbit checked a few years ago to see if he could keep on plucking and the answer was no more feathers for plucking time to start selling the taxpayers silver instead.Ministers Kiss a$$ out in Donnybrook and the people out in Donnybrook kiss a$$ back. Even the people who were expecting a feather in there cap for paying on line got plucked the same amount. The canny people from Leitrim were allowed to keep a few feathers to feather
The cost per head of population of delivering services in rural areas is far higher than in Urban areas.
There is far more road per person in Leitrim than in Cork city.
Look at the allocation of money from property taxes; €5.06 per person in Dublin, €7.38 per person in Cork City, €169.43 per person in Monaghan and a whopping €260.47 per person in Leitrim. The figure for Leitrim actually constitutes a cut per person on the subsidy that they received through the Local Government Fund.
Rural broadband will also cost a fortune which will be paid for by the State. The vast majority of revenue is generated in urban areas; Dublin accounts for half the country’s GDP and the average worker in Cork generates €105,000 in GDP (in Dublin it’s €96,000). This is due to number of multinationals in Cork.
Sure she's balancing out the whole gender pay issue all by herself!This has the potential to bring RTE a little more under the microscope, although the lack of equal pay for different sexes is only one of the many things that needs fixing out in RTE !
RTÉ chief faces grilling by TDs on gender salary balance and finances
One of my first questions would be how much is Dee Forbes being paid ?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?