TV LICENCE EVASION, THE NORTHERN IRISH FILE

The number of households without a TV licence is rapidly increasing. It is rumoured that the BBC’s loss are hitting its funding harder than previously expected, with a £150M loss due to what is referred to as the “Catch-up TV loophole”. At any given time, there are at least 5.6 million UK addresses (out of 31 million) without a TV licence.

The BBC claims to catch 900 evaders every day.

In England and Wales, 185,580 people were prosecuted in 2014. In Scotland, where the law is slightly different, 32 were prosecuted, whereas 13,486 cases were disposed of via out of court fine.  In Northern Ireland, 4,905 people were prosecuted in 2014.  I personally think it’s a disgrace to even prosecute one person for the sake of making television. Clearly, this is not a case where the end justifies the means.

NI at a glance

PROSECUTION
Results from a Freedom of Information Requests shows that most of Northern Irish evaders are located in Belfast. More surprisingly, is the fact that 70% of them are females. This 30%-70% male/female ratio observed in Northern Ireland, is at odd with statistics for other small crimes, but is pretty much the same across the whole of UK for this crime. It is not clear if women are more targeted by TV licence officers, but, statistically, they are more likely to be at home during day time, taking care of children for example. Women might also be more trusting and willing to sort out their TV licence when prompted, ending up being the victims of this system.

RESULTS IN DETAILS

DEFENDANTS PROSECUTED FOR AN OFFENCE OF ‘NO TV LICENCE’,

by gender, age band and court division, Northern Ireland

2014

Gender Age Band Division
Belfast Londonderry Antrim Fermanagh and Tyrone Armagh and South Down Ards Craigavon Total
Count Count Count Count Count Count Count Count
Female Under 18 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 2
18-19 15 5 4 4 2 2 5 37
20-24 146 35 69 51 32 63 42 438
25-29 212 76 77 78 55 83 84 665
30-34 157 74 65 94 52 69 81 592
35-39 144 45 46 71 38 38 55 437
40-49 211 112 89 126 55 83 70 746
50-59 139 52 46 53 33 46 41 410
60-69 22 11 4 10 9 9 12 77
70-79 2 1 1 1 1 0 0 6
80-89 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
90+ 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 2
Not recorded 18 5 4 6 2 4 2 41
Total 1,067 417 406 494 279 398 392 3,453
Male Under 18 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
18-19 4 2 3 3 3 2 1 18
20-24 47 13 23 18 14 13 14 142
25-29 66 20 28 26 21 33 20 214
30-34 62 18 24 25 26 31 19 205
35-39 39 24 19 35 12 25 24 178
40-49 95 43 50 55 39 55 44 381
50-59 49 12 26 30 30 33 19 199
60-69 17 6 2 8 6 8 6 53
70-79 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 4
80-89 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
90+ 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
Not recorded 15 4 3 9 3 4 3 41
Total 397 142 179 211 154 204 150 1,437
UNKNOWN 5 2 4 1 0 2 1 5
Total 1,469 561 589 706 433 604 543 4,905

CONVICTION

An astonishing number of the prosecutions that are commenced by the BBC do not result in conviction. 1,286 people were wrongly prosecuted of committing a TV licence offence last year in Northern Ireland. This means over 1 in 4 are either dropped or withdrawn by the BBC, or people were not found guilty. The very large number of ‘unsuccessful’ prosecutions brought lends weight to the view that cases are initiated on a speculative basis where it is hoped by the BBC that people will plead guilty or won’t contest the prosecution. This surely is a scandalous abuse of the court’s process by the BBC.

The cost of pursuing these failed prosecutions, added to the cost of the legal process, again calls into question the methods used against TV licence evaders.

Defendants proceeded against and found guilty at all courts, by age group,

2014

COURT DIVISION Proceeded against Found guilty Unsuccessful
Belfast 1,469 1157 312
Londonderry 561 395 166
Antrim 589 428 161
Fermanagh and Tyrone 706 491 215
Armagh and South Down 433 301 132
Ards 604 475 129
Craigavon 543 372 171
TOTAL 4,905 3,619 1,286

IMPRISONMENT

Fines, for TV licence evasion, can be as high as £1,000, but as they are based on the criminal’s income, the average fine is, according to the BBC itself, £170. If this fine is not paid, the TV licence evader may end up in jail. In 2012, there were 50 people imprisoned for this crime in England and Wales, at an average cost to the tax payer of £95 per day. In comparison, the situation in Northern Ireland, up to 2012, was positively appalling, with over 200 imprisonment each year. A Judicial Review led to a temporary suspension of fine defaulters being sent to prison, putting a stop to the unsustainable practice of giving jail time for non-payment of outstanding fines of as little as £5. Now, fine default warrants are being issued, only if the defendant is already in prison serving a sentence or if they live outside the jurisdiction.

Number of defendants committed to prison for

FAILURE TO PAY A FINE ARISING FROM TV LICENCE EVASION (1)

Year Number of defendants committed to prison Length of sentence (range)
2011 206 2 to 28 days
2012 228 3 to 28 days
2013 18 7 to 14 days
2014 1 7 days

The British parliament proposed decriminalising the offence once and for all, but the proposition was turned down by a House of Lords vote by 178 to 175 in February 2015.

PLANNING FORWARD

The definition of TV licence payer, as it stands, includes every person in the UK who watches, listens to or uses TV receiving equipment to watch or record live television programmes. The current government have made it clear that they intend to extend this definition to cover people who choose to restrict their viewing habits to Catch-Up TV, using the German Household levy as an inspiration. In their view, a system which forces everyone to pay, regardless if a TV is owned or not, is fairer. They base this “fact” on a wild extrapolation from a microscopic sample of people using insignificant length of time. Indeed, since 2011, the BBC has been claiming that 96% of the population uses one of their services on a weekly basis. What they keep to themselves is the fact they are using a weekly survey of 500 people and consider that 15 min qualifies as “reach”.  In a nutshell, a household levy doesn’t reduce the monthly fee and still relies on bullying and threats, therefore, it doesn’t address most of the TV licence problems. It only adds the fresh hell of the complete lack of freedom on top of the other issues.

The “Free licence” for people of over 75 actually costs around £600M to the government. Whittingdale, Secretary of State for Culture, media and sports, has made it clear that this may also become a thing of the past soon.

A petition, called “End the BBC Licence Fee“, hosted on 38 Degrees, as already signed by over 160,000 people. It calls for a debate on the future of the licence fee, with the hope the TV licence fee will be abolished in the near future. It can be signed here https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/end-the-bbc-licence-fee

Even though the TV licence fee has been frozen until 31st March 2017, the BBC’s charter will be up for renewal in December 2016. The negotiations started just after the general election. It’s important to raise awareness on this and get the TV licence payers involved in the process, for the first time ever.

The BBC has been funded by the licence fee since 1923, but the current TV licence fee started in 1946. It’s classified as a tax since January 2006. It costs 40p a day (which is 40p too much if you object being associated with the BBC) or £145.50 a year. It goes without saying that this fee represents a much higher proportion of income for many households.


(1) Figures relate to defendants committed to prison for fine default arising from TV licence evasion, however, these defendants may also have been committed for non-payment of fines for other offences.  They exclude defendants who have served time for fine default arising from TV licence evasion whilst already in custody for other charges.

Sources:

Northern Ireland Courts and Tribunals Service, Prisoner Record Information System Management (PRISM)

Integrated Court Operations System (ICOS)

FOI 102/15 and FOI 094/15

TV licence evasion – The Scottish File

There are many reasons to be upset about the current TV licence system. Many people stated Scotland’s referendum in their reasons to sign. Agnes F. wrote “As Scots we should not be paying for a licence for a corporation ruled by Westminster and a hugely biased and corrupt organisation.” Louise C. wrote: “Propaganda during the Scottish referendum was blatant and outrageous. Complete waste of money as I no longer watch BBC.” John B. said he signed “Because the BBC are Bias to the Scottish People” Robert M. claimed to have “stopped watching BBC due to bias during indi ref.” Ronald R. wrote “I’m fed up watching a biased program and getting charged to do so.” Ann M. shouted “Bias BBC TUFT THEM OOT”. David E. concluded “they don’t treat Scotland fair.”

TV LICENCE EVADERS IN SCOTLAND, GENERAL GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION

map of scotland TV licence evaders

Some local authority areas, including East Dunbartonshire, East Renfrewshire, Midlothian and North Ayrshire, do not contain a sheriff court. As there is no court recorded for police fixed penalties these cannot be broken down to local authorities.

TV LICENCE EVADERS IN SCOTLAND, BROKEN DOWN BY AGE, GENDER AND LOCAL AUTHORITY

Non court disposals where the main offence was under the Communications Act 2003, section 363(2)&(4), by local authority area, Scotland, 2013-14
Local Authority Male Person Female Person Total
Age group Age group
16 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 54 55 to 89 16 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 54 55 to 89 other
Aberdeen City 4 15 12 2 10 33 40 9 1 126
Aberdeenshire 2 10 12 9 19 15 2 69
Angus 5 20 17 2 19 39 49 5 156
Argyll & Bute 4 15 3 7 8 16 2 55
Clackmannanshire 3 5 8 6 12 39 32 2 107
Dumfries & Galloway 3 21 13 2 15 32 23 3 112
Dundee City 24 73 107 21 78 188 157 31 679
East Ayrshire 23 69 99 21 75 189 180 37 693
East Lothian 2 24 28 10 21 49 39 5 178
Edinburgh, City of 29 96 196 38 103 290 331 42 1,125
Eilean Siar 2 2 1 3 8
Falkirk 12 41 57 14 44 116 85 9 378
Fife 64 142 183 27 152 375 353 50 1,346
Glasgow City 57 265 565 107 301 803 1,114 192 3,404
Highland 5 14 16 1 9 24 21 2 92
Inverclyde 4 20 39 6 23 84 93 15 284
Moray 4 5 1 1 9 10 8 1 39
North Ayrshire 1 3 4
North Lanarkshire 55 165 302 58 206 452 572 83 1,893
Orkney Islands 1 1 2 1 5
Perth & Kinross 4 20 24 7 21 41 41 9 167
Renfrewshire 21 71 90 24 62 188 195 26 677
Scottish Borders 8 23 8 2 14 28 28 2 113
Shetland Islands 1 4 3 6 14
South Ayrshire 12 35 51 10 27 80 101 4 1 321
South Lanarkshire 17 65 102 19 57 148 172 23 603
Stirling 1 8 10 5 3 16 26 3 72
West Dunbartonshire 3 9 12 12 16 34 42 9 137
West Lothian 20 58 81 14 56 170 146 23 568
Unknown 6 8 10 2 7 12 16 61
Total 389 1,291 2,064 416 1,363 3,473 3,899 589 2 13,486
PEOPLE PROSECUTED IN SCOTTISH COURTS under the Communications Act 2003, section 363(2)&(4), where main offence, by local authority area, 2013-14
Local Authority Main Result of Proceedings
Guilty Not Guilty
Males Females
Age group Age group
16 to 24 35 to 54 55 to 89 16 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 54 55 to 89
Clackmannanshire 1
Dumfries & Galloway 1
Dundee City 1
East Lothian 1 1
Edinburgh, City of 1 1 1 1
Fife 1 1 2
Glasgow City 1 1 2
Inverclyde 2 1 1
Moray 1
North Ayrshire 2
North Lanarkshire 1 3 1
Renfrewshire 1
South Lanarkshire 1 2
West Dunbartonshire 1
Total 1 9 2 1 1 12 2 4

TV LICENCE EVADERS IN SCOTLAND, QUICK OVERVIEW

pie charts scotland

All in all, the results do not show the kind of hardened criminal one could have expected. Usually, small crimes are committed by men in higher proportions. This 30%-70% male/female ratio, observed in Scotland, is pretty much the same across the whole of UK. But, why should it be so? Women may or may not be more targeted by TV licence officers, but, statistically, they are more likely to be at home during day time, taking care of children for example. Women might also be more trusting and willing to sort out their TV licence when prompted, ending up being the victims of this system.

THE 96% CLAIM

How often do you tune in to the BBC?

According to various bodies:

65.8% listened to BCC radio, for at least 5 consecutive minutes in a week.

81.5% watched BBC television, for at least 15 minutes minimum in a week.

49.5% used BBC Online weekly.

Since 2011, the BBC has been bragging of a combined 96% weekly reach and has been using this statistic to justify why every house with a TV (receiving or recording live broadcasts) should be subject to the £145.50 licence fee. The fact that this is a wild extrapolation based on a microscopic sample of people (a weekly survey of 500 people) using insignificant length of time qualifying as “reach” remains a well-kept secret.

The BBC has been funded by the licence fee since 1923, but the current TV licence fee started in 1946. It’s classified as a tax since January 2006. It costs 40p a day (which is 40p too much if you object being associated with the BBC) or £145.50 a year. It goes without saying that this fee represents a much higher proportion of income for many households. And what amounts to 40p a day is, in context of austerity, actually quite a lot.

At any given time, there are 5.6 million UK addresses (out of 31 million) without a TV licence, even though watching live TV without a TV licence is a crime. 185,580 people were prosecuted in England and Wales in 2014 and 4,905 in Northern Ireland. In Scotland, where licence fee evasion cases can be disposed of via an out of court fine, there were 13,486 such cases and 32 prosecuted via the courts in 2013-2014.

The BBC claims to catch 900 evaders every day. Fines, for TV licence evasion, can be as high as £1,000, but as they are based on the criminal’s income, the average fine is, according to the BBC itself, £170. If this fine is not paid, the TV licence evader may end up in jail. In 2012, there were 50 people imprisoned for this crime at an average cost to the tax payer of £95 per day[1]. Sentences last usually less than 28 days.

LOOPHOLES

The definition of TV licence payer includes every person in the UK who watches, listens to or uses TV receiving equipment to watch or record live television programmes. The current government have made it clear that they intend to extend this definition to cover people who choose to restrict their viewing habits to Catch-Up TV, using the German Household levy as an inspiration. This new system would force everyone to pay, regardless if a TV is owned or not. Free licenses for people over 75 might also be a thing of the past soon. Whittingdale, Secretary of State for Culture, media and sports, said “it is very difficult to justify why my mother doesn’t have to pay a licence fee.” At the very least, he would like if the BBC was picking up the £500 million bill.

If the fact that the British Broadcasting Corporation, an independent body (not a governmental entity, the clue is in the name) is allowed to collect a tax and if the BBC’s bullying tactics upsets you, there is a petition, called “End the BBC Licence Fee“, hosted on 38 Degrees. The petition, already signed by over 160,000 people, calls for a debate on the future of the licence fee, with the hope the TV licence fee will be abolished in the near future. It can be signed here https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/end-the-bbc-licence-fee

Please feel free to share this article.

UPDATE
impris scotland FOI

Kapil Summan, Assistant Editor of the Scottish Legal News says:

“It seems strange that in 2015 evasion of the TV license is still a matter for the criminal law. If the evasion rate were likely to remain at 5% in the event the offence became a civil infraction I think it would be reasonable to make this change given as there have been no custodial sentences imposed in Scotland in the past five years.

As for the proposal of a household levy, it seems anomalous in an age in which people have unprecedented control over what media they consume and pay for. Perhaps the TV license should indeed be abolished and replaced with a voluntary subscription, allowing the BBC to survive or die on the merits of its programming.”


[1] extrapolation from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/251272/prison-costs-summary-12-13.pdf

HOUSEHOLD LEVY OR TV LICENCE FEE, DOPPELGANGER?

According the the Culture, Media and Sport Committee a “broadcasting levy on all households” is the best alternative to the current TV licence fee. This system, imported from Germany, means every home in the UK would have to pay the same flat tax. The Committee said, in their report called “The Future of the BBC”[1], that  it would:

  • close the catch-up TV loophole
  • ensure that the people who use only BBC radio and online services contribute to their costs
  • and obviate the need to identify evaders through extensive and expensive investigatory measures

In their opinion, this universal levy would be justified on the basis that “the BBC reaches over 96% of the population”.  They acknowledge that the principal losers would be the households with no equipment of any sort capable of receiving broadcasts but minimise this fact by saying that the “the number we are talking about is very, very small”.

But before examining each of these claims individually and in more depth, let’s see how it really works in Germany.

RUNDFUNKBEITRAG, IN A NUTSHELL

The household levy, or “Rundfunkbeitrag”, as the Germans call it, was only put in place in January 2013, so the German government is still very much playing it by the ear.  Their motto is “One apartment – One contribution“. In other words, it doesn’t matter how many people live there and how many TV or radios are available. This is because their previous fee was based on the number and types of broadcasting receiving devices. It was therefore complicated system (unlike in the UK, where it was always as simple as “one household, one fee”).

It costs €17.98 per month per civic address. Businesses, public sector institutions and non-profit-organisations have to contribute based on the number of their business premises, their employees and their motor vehicles (the number of vehicle is relevant because each one of them is fitted with a radio). Here’s one example showing how the monthly payment is calculated[2]:

Household levy example

Even though the Rundfunkbeitrag is a flat tax, some social exemptions have been put in place to make it fairer.  For example, the following people can apply for an exemption, if they supply the relevant evidence:

  • Under aged people
  • Recipient of educational grants living away from home (BAföG, Berufsausbildungsbeihilfe or Ausbildungsgeld)
  • Recipients of certain welfare benefits (Arbeitslosengeld II, Sozialgeld or Grundsicherung im Alter)
  • Blind people

People with disabilities with the code “RF” in their disabled person’s pass can apply for a reduced fee of €5.83 per month (1/3 of the price). Those with a level of deafness above a certain threshold can apply for the reduced rate.

In comparison, Britain only offers a 50% reduction to blind people. And because there is no age minimum in the British law, technically, a kid could be prosecuted. This is why British students are not exempt from paying the TV licence fee. On the other hand, the German household levy is for life, whereas in the UK, people of 75 can claim a free TV licence, which is, in fact, paid by the British government.

Before moving on to the next section, there are a still couple of important differences to stress between Britain’s and Germany’s system.

  • German public broadcasters are funded by a combination of advertising and household levy whereas the BBC relies only on licence fee and international sales of its broadcasts.
  • The German household levy funds 22 TV and 67 radio stations, whereas the current British TV licence fee only pays for 8 BBC channels, 18 BBC radio stations and BBC World Service.

Now that we know a bit more about the German system, let’s see if the claims from the Culture, Media and Sport Committee, mentioned above, hold water.

THE 96% PREMISE

The initial premise, used to justify why every house with a TV should be subject to a levy, is shaky at best and relies on way too much wishful thinking for my taste. Let me explain why. The Average Weekly Reached, measured by GfK for the BBC, is based on a weekly sample of 500 people. Five consecutive minutes of radio a week, or 15 minutes minimum of television in a week, is all it takes for the BBC to claim someone has been “reached”. To put that in context, listening to 5 minutes of radio is listening to one song and tuning out as soon as the DJ speaks.  And can we just assume viewers who only tune in for half, or a quarter, of a TV programme didn’t enjoy the show?  For more perspective, let’s compare the BBC’s samples with real samples used by other organisations. RAJAR, the official body in charge of measuring radio audiences in the United Kingdom, interview a quarterly population of 53,502 people, while BARB, the organisation responsible for providing the official measurement of UK television audiences, used a panel of around 11,300 individual respondents daily. Why the BCC is happy with such low standard is anyone’s guess. But we can safely say that the “fact” that the BBC reaches over 96% of the population is nothing more than wild extrapolations based on a microscopic sample of people, using insignificant length of time.

LOOPHOLES

Currently, people not watching (or recording) live broadcasts do not require holding a valid TV licence. So, asking everyone to pay a household levy, regardless of their TV habits, would, indeed, close the catch-up TV loophole. But what about the freedom to not endorse the BBC in any way, shape or form? Not owing a TV (or simply limiting viewing to catch-up TV) may seem a case of “cutting off the nose to spite the face” to some, but for others, is not a big deal, as principles are paramount.

The BBC do not want to disclose how many people use catch-up services only, but we know, from their own statistics, that 5.6 million UK address out of 31 million currently don’t have a TV licence (for any number of reasons). If all of them were suddenly asked to pay the same flat fee as everyone else, this would potentially raise £814M. And, because there are currently 4.33 million free TV licence as we speak, an extra £630M could be added on top if the conservatives were to get rid of the privilege offered to people over 75, as they heavily hinted.

This means the government is looking at a combined £1.444 billion gain. Personally, I think charging people who don’t own a TV is unreasonable. But will the greed be stronger than the social concessions and sense of fair play?

BBC RADIO AND ONLINE SERVICES USERS TO CONTRIBUTE

Radio only, and combined radio & television licences, were abolished on 1st February 1971. It is unclear why, but the decision was taken that radio should be free. So what the Committee is suggesting is returning to a regressive system, abandoned 44 years ago.

As for internet, charging the full TV licence to someone because they occasionally click on a BBC recipe seems disproportionate to me. Also, computers might be quite common, but let’s not forget that, at the very least, 4.7 million household don’t even have access to Internet at home. If the BBC wants to restrict access to its content to TV licence payers, there are relatively easy and cheap modifications that can put in place which would not penalise those who can’t afford the £12 monthly fee. Take the Times Online for example. They run a subscription system, which gives the start of an article as a teaser, but requires a log in to be read in full.

THE NEED TO IDENTIFY EVADERS THROUGH EXTENSIVE AND EXPENSIVE INVESTIGATORY MEASURES

It’s true: TV licence officers won’t need to prove that someone has been watching TV anymore. But the need to chase evaders and their money will not diminish in the slightest. Why? Because if someone was objecting paying the TV licence fee in the first place, they won’t suddenly want to comply simply because it’s now called a household levy.

Unsurprisingly, Germany is still experiencing a fair amount of resistance to its new levy, 2 years later. Evaders, who prefer to call themselves “strikers”, use delaying tactics in the hope that the Rundfunkbeitrag will be, one day, declared unconstitutional. Therefore, the Germans still need to send a lot of paperwork such as:

1) an Invitation to Register

2) a First Reminder to Register

3) Second Reminder to Register

3) a Third Reminder to Register

4) a Notice of Forcible Registration, Assignment of Account Number

5) a Request for Fees Due

6) a Reminder for Fees Due

7) Beitragsbescheid Payment demand  and Late Fees

I’m not making this up. Here are examples of the kind of letters they send in Germany[3].

german letters

This strong conviction they should not to fund something they don’t believe in means Germany still hire enforcement officers, called “Vollziehungsbeamter”. They also hire bailiffs. So, from the outside at least, managing and collecting the household levy seems to be just as much a pain in the back side.

The economy of this system the British government is dreaming of might be just that: a dream.

LEVY OR LICENCE, WHAT’S IN NAME?

At the end of the day, a household levy will still be regressive, compulsory and expensive to collect (i-e everything the TV licence was blamed to be), because, as Whittingdale put it himself, a “household levy […] is essentially the licence fee by a different name.”

The slight change considered might be a good thing for the BBC and the government, as it may increase the amount of money collected, but it won’t do much for the public, unless the social exemptions introduced in Germany are also imported and the original British exemption, for the people over 75, is kept.

But at the end of the day, the household levy doesn’t address most of the TV licence problems. As it doesn’t reduce the monthly fee, it’s still a burden to people on low income and single parent families, and as it’s not taken at source or by voluntary subscription, it still relies on bullying. It will actually be worse for poor households as they will lose the ability to economise by getting rid of their TV.

It also still provides an unfair advantage to the BBC, compared to other broadcasters with a far smaller budget. Therefore, it’s the same evil, only with the fresh hell of the complete lack of freedom added on top.

As a society, and indirect owner of the BBC, we have to decide if we really want to charge people of 75 (haven’t they done enough?), and if charging people without a TV, internet connection or radio is fair, and, finally, if we think billing non-profit-organisations and charities is such a hot idea. And while we are at it, we should question why everyone should pay the same flat fee, regardless of their means, just because it makes it simpler to collect.

If you are against the current TV licence fee and the projected Household levy, or if you simply want the choice NOT to fund the BBC, there is a petition, called “End the BBC Licence Fee“, hosted on 38 Degrees and signed by over 160,000 people.  It asks Whittingdale, as the new Secretary of the state for Culture, Media and Sport, for a real open public debate on the future of the licence fee.

The petition can be signed here: https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/end-the-bbc-licence-fee


[1] http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmselect/cmcumeds/315/315.pdf

[2] http://www.rundfunkbeitrag.de/e175/e201/Informationsflyer_Unternehmen_Institutionen_und_Einrichtungen_des_Gemeinwohls_englisch.pdf

[3] Source http://www.toytowngermany.com/forum/topic/324660-refusing-to-pay-tv-license-fees-rundfunkbeitrag/