"This is an opinion piece. It is the writer who stands for the views that are put forward in the text, not Against."
"the DEBATE. Next year smyghöjer government tax with over half a billion in connection with the new Public Service-the tax is introduced. With the exception of The sweden democrats, it appears that a unanimous parliament does not see any problem with this. Neither to force citizens to fund a public service choice that is more similar to the commercial channels, or that Sweden's high taxes even higher. It is a serious matter."
"It should be cheaper when all are forced to pay and Otherwise no longer have to collect the money. But it does not. "
"Last week, the Swedish parliament decided to replace the TELEVISION fee with a new public service tax, the so-called SVT-tax. The new tax is equivalent to a percent of income, with a maxtak at 1 300 per taxpayer. You may think that it should become cheaper when everyone is forced to pay and Otherwise no longer have to collect the money. But it is not the case. "
"For a normal household raised the fee for public service instead of 200 sek. Total expected SVT-tax withdraw of 9.1 billion. It is almost a billion more than the 8.2 billion that the public service cost in 2018. But the appropriations for the public service increases ”only” 200 million next year. The rest, almost 700 million, it goes straight into the treasury."
"The natural had been to begin with to discuss what is the state with taxpayers 'money should help to finance"
"It is possible to argue that in the choice between a tv a fee and a tax, is it later yet more reasonable, if now the parliament considers that there is a concern the state, to finance the public service. "
"But there are two big problems. "
"the Proponents of the SVT-tax mean that everyone should be able to contribute, because the public service is essential for democracy and a central part in the examination of power. But in practice, it has unfortunately become the opposite. It is only a small part of all the billions that the public service broadcasters receive each year that goes to the quality culture, news, review, facts and current affairs. "
"How small the percentage, we know actually not because the public service broadcasters are not required to disclose how they spend the money. Not even the national audit office has full visibility of how SVT and Sveriges radio are spending taxpayers ' money. But we can probably all see how public service companies, the range is similar and the commercial operators broadcasting on both form and content."
"It is in all honesty difficult to understand why we should be forced to pay taxes for SVT to do kärleksprogram for priests"
"A narrower and sharper publicly-funded range, with clear requirements on the comprehensiveness and quality, had been easier to accept. But it is in all honesty difficult to understand why we should be forced to pay taxes for SVT to do kärleksprogram for priests, weight loss programs for dogs and buy into the English tv-show."
"They – until recently all Sweden's parliamentary parties – who want to use taxpayers' money to fund competitors to existing, private media, and questionable entertainment has the burden of proof that the money to better use there than in the welfare of the matter or the citizens ' own wallets. "
"A first step would be to give both the national audit office that the citizens transparency and the opportunity to review how the Public Service uses our tax dollars."
"nChristian Ekström, president, the Taxpayers"
"n Join in the debate and comment on the artikelnn – like Aftonbladet Debate on Facebook."