ToxicBunny

Oi! Leave me out of this...
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
101,209
I'm not the one proposing the model. Just saying its not unique. Sure it needs tweaking to work in SA but I get where the SABC are coming from.

Anyway, that's all I have to say about it. Chances are this won't happen anyway so its a ,moot point.

Generally it would be a moot point I agree... the realities of them collecting this "tax" would make compliance rates probably about the same, if not less than current.

The model itself doesn't necessarily need tweaking, the SABC as a whole needs a serious overhaul and its cost base needs serious attention. If the SABC produced good quality programming, and were not riddled with corruption then it would be less of a stretch to pay this license in its proposed form.
 

Nemesys

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2017
Messages
402
Their proposal already make provision that 80% of the population will not pay a sent.

the SABC’s view that it should be replaced by a technology-neutral, public broadcasting household levy that would exempt the indigent and should be part-collected by the dominant pay-TV operator.
 

Mekon

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Messages
2,919
“[It] does not take into account the SABC’s view that it should be replaced by a technology-neutral, public broadcasting household levy that would exempt the indigent and should be part-collected by the dominant pay-TV operator.”

So in layman's terms they want other people to do stuff they should be doing because they to useless to?
 

Mekon

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Messages
2,919
You guys know Germany has this model in place right?
Since 2013 all citizens have to pay. Regardless if they have a device or not to watch tv or listen to the radio. Currently their fee is 18 euros per house per month.

I can see where the SABC are coming from. The current model is outdated and doesn’t work. Germany ditched that model in 2013 for the same reasons.
But this is shythole South Africa. You think they going to get a cent out of rural area's and informal settlements? This will again become a burden on Joe average.
 

Priapus

Executive Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2008
Messages
8,267
Generally it would be a moot point I agree... the realities of them collecting this "tax" would make compliance rates probably about the same, if not less than current.

The model itself doesn't necessarily need tweaking, the SABC as a whole needs a serious overhaul and its cost base needs serious attention. If the SABC produced good quality programming, and were not riddled with corruption then it would be less of a stretch to pay this license in its proposed form.

Yes, there I agree.
 

NoLuck Chuck

Senior Member
Joined
May 16, 2019
Messages
934
Wouldn't mind to pay it if it means programming will improve.
But knowing RSA it would just be another money black hole....
 

grok

Honorary Master
Joined
Dec 20, 2007
Messages
25,355
You guys know Germany has this model in place right?
Since 2013 all citizens have to pay. Regardless if they have a device or not to watch tv or listen to the radio. Currently their fee is 18 euros per house per month.

I can see where the SABC are coming from. The current model is outdated and doesn’t work. Germany ditched that model in 2013 for the same reasons.
Germany is a first world country & also not ring-necked into the communist ideology sphincter.

If you have to compare us with them I want the rest of what they have too, so gimme my low crime rate & autobahn sehr schnell else fek right off with your one-sided comparisons.
 

Louis72

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2010
Messages
1,669
You guys know Germany has this model in place right?
Since 2013 all citizens have to pay. Regardless if they have a device or not to watch tv or listen to the radio. Currently their fee is 18 euros per house per month.

I can see where the SABC are coming from. The current model is outdated and doesn’t work. Germany ditched that model in 2013 for the same reasons.
The difference between Germany and SA is that most people follow the law there.

The only way Gov can reliably collect money in South Africa for this is some sort of tax on the sales of TV's

Similar to how a small increase in the fuel levy years ago would have made eTolls obsolete with its high running cost and low compliance.
At the point of sale or import would be a way more effective and cheaper model of collection for Gov.
 

Nerfherder

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 21, 2008
Messages
27,205
You guys know Germany has this model in place right?
Since 2013 all citizens have to pay. Regardless if they have a device or not to watch tv or listen to the radio. Currently their fee is 18 euros per house per month.

I can see where the SABC are coming from. The current model is outdated and doesn’t work. Germany ditched that model in 2013 for the same reasons.
Thats fine - except the part where we have to pay a cent.
 

rvZA

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
7,682
You guys know Germany has this model in place right?
Since 2013 all citizens have to pay. Regardless if they have a device or not to watch tv or listen to the radio. Currently their fee is 18 euros per house per month.

I can see where the SABC are coming from. The current model is outdated and doesn’t work. Germany ditched that model in 2013 for the same reasons.

As long as the poor pays too, I have no problem. Else, GTFO!
 

Trybble

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2005
Messages
102
Here's a better idea - scrap SABC because they're bloody useless and then you don't need a TV license. Leave broadcasting to those who know how to run it as a business. Or, if you really have to have them around, simply fund them from the taxes already collected instead of letting thieves get away with nicking the dosh.
 

Vanessa13

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2009
Messages
218
"...this household levy should be based on the ability to access the SABC’s services rather than the actual use of its services."

So then I can invoice them for my services, since they can use my services if they want to. It is only their choice that prevents them, not me. Looking at all the other c**p going on, clearly personal choice is down the toilet!
 

ToxicBunny

Oi! Leave me out of this...
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
101,209
"...this household levy should be based on the ability to access the SABC’s services rather than the actual use of its services."

So then I can invoice them for my services, since they can use my services if they want to. It is only their choice that prevents them, not me. Looking at all the other c**p going on, clearly personal choice is down the toilet!

Well that is an option actually, you could definitely send them an invoice for your services that they could possibly use...

Would be a very interesting legal fight I reckon...
 

Corelli

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
2,280
They will keep to the taxes. Even the DA sucks at it. They charged us a pipe levy and pushed us up on a very high water tariff for the drought. Now dams are over 100% and they refuse to drop the rates or the pipe levy. Just say its here to stay.
 

garyc

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2010
Messages
3,131
it would like to see a household levy system replace TV licences.
This is a household tax. Does this mean that if you move into a new place and the previous occupant was in arrears that it becomes your problem?
 
Top