> The $275 license works out at about $23/month, which is significantly Yes I've never had cable in the UK, I watch as much TV as I want with just the 5 channels received by antenna .. (Except for the recent Simpsons episodes! ) There are a few details of the implementation that are irritating, e.g. if you have a black&white TV, it's much less, but if you have a VCR, it is deemed to be receiving 'colour signal' and you're supposed to pay the full price even though you cannot actually *watch* the programs in colour! And if you actually don't have a TV, they are always after you to prove it, like those vans in the original article (often reputed to be dummies anyways) My friend who owns a house with 2 flats (apartments) had an them empty for some time during renovations, and several times had to fend off the TV inspectors demanding why the flats had not paid their TV licenses! So though I don't mind paying for it, I think I would personally support making into part of tax rather than user license. I am sure there could be some formula that would still benefit those poor/elderly/blind/etc , who benefit from fee waivers or reductions now. Probably that is the real source of disbelief from the OP, that they sneak around spying on your television, rather than that we pay for the BBC, right?