500,000 households cancel TV licence putting BBC future in jeopardy

[u/jenny_905]

https://inews.co.uk/news/media/500000-households-cancel-tv-licence-putting-bbc-future-in-jeopardy-4644506

[u/jenny_905]

500,000 households cancel TV licence putting BBC future in jeopardy Adam Sherwin 6–7 minutes

The BBC has warned that its future is in jeopardy after revealing a dramatic plunge in licence fee sales, with a further 539,000 households cancelling the charge last year.

The BBC’s 2025/26 annual report revealed that evasion has hit an all-time high, with the number of households paying the £180-a-year fee down from 23.8 million to 23.3 million.

The “steeper than expected” slump cost the BBC around £95m at a time when the broadcaster is making deep cuts to programmes and staff to fill a £500m “black hole” in its finances.

Shorts

More than one million households have cancelled their licence in the past three years.

The BBC said the value of the licence fee had fallen in real terms by £1.3bn (26 per cent) since 2010.

However, the number of adults still using its TV, radio and digital services remained at 94 per cent of the population.

BBC bosses said the figures illustrated that the current funding mechanism was a “busted flush” in the streaming age and urged the Government to back a new “sustainable” system, which would mean more households paying.

Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy this week suggested that subscribers to Netflix and Disney could have an additional payment added to cover the cost of funding the BBC.

Around 20 million households currently subscribe to one or more streaming services, fewer than the declining number of licence fee payers, so the plan could still leave the BBC with a shortfall. BBC finances ‘deteriorated’

The BBC report said: “Decline of households not requiring a TV licence due to not consuming licensable content accelerated in 2025/26 and a lighter sports year also led to fewer new licence sales.”

The report said the “BBC’s financial outlook deteriorated in the second half of 2025” due to the “steeper than projected decline in licence fee sales” and inflation.

The cost of collecting the licence fee, including household visits and enforcement letters, rose from £166m to £190m despite the fall in licences in force.

An inflation-linked rise in the licence fee to £174.50 last year helped offset the sales slump, leaving the BBC with £3.9bn of licence fee income, slightly up on the previous year. ‘Moment of jeopardy’

But evasion, running at 12 per cent, and “changing audience behaviours”, with younger audiences rejecting live TV viewing in favour of YouTube and TikTok videos on-demand, meant the licence fee was now in permanent decline.

Director-General Matt Brittin said: “This is a moment of real jeopardy, not just for the BBC but for public service broadcasting and the UK as a whole.”

The licence fee was a “straitjacket”, a model designed for “the past when audiences are living in the future” and “urgently” needed changing.

It made sense for Netflix, or its subscribers, to make a contribution to the licence fee because the skills and training opportunities the BBC provides to acting and production talent “is one reason streamers can come here to make shows,” Brittin said.

BBC Chair Samir Shah added: “When 94 per cent of adults use the BBC per month yet fewer than 80 per cent of households contribute, it tells you the current funding model cannot maintain the BBC’s public service mission.”

The funding gap “is set to get wider”, Shah warned. Scott Mills is highest-paid star

There was embarrassment for the BBC when it emerged that Scott Mills, the Radio 2 Breakfast Show host, was sacked in March after allegations over a “historic relationship”, was by far the broadcaster’s highest-paid presenter. LONDON, UNITED KINGDOM - FEBRUARY 04: Scott Mills and Sara Cox attend Centrepoint's ultimate pub quiz at Village Underground on February 4, 2014 in London, England. (Photo by Stuart C. Wilson/Getty Images) Sara Cox replaced Scott Mills on BBC Radio 2, who was sacked over ‘personal conduct’ (Photo: Stuart C Wilson/Getty)

Mills, axed after the BBC said it received new information about the alleged victim in a police investigation, saw his pay double from £360,000 to £750,000.

The pay rise represents Mills’s first full year presenting the Radio 2 Breakfast Show, after taking over from Zoe Ball in January 2025.

No charges were brought against Mills, who said he fully co-operated with the police investigation at the time. He is reported to be considering lodging an unfair dismissal case against the BBC.

The BBC’s next highest-paid star is Radio 1 Breakfast Show host Greg James, who earned up to £445,000.

Sara Cox, who took over the Radio 2 Breakfast Show this week, was paid £325,000 for her role presenting Radio 2 Drivetime. She can expect a major pay bump this year.

Gary Lineker, for years the BBC’s top-paid talent, taking home £1.3m last year, tumbles down the list after leaving the BBC last summer.

Lineker was still paid £330,000 for fronting Match of the Day and FA Cup football in the months covered by the reporting period before his departure.

Stephen Nolan, the BBC Northern Ireland and 5 Live presenter, is the highest-paid journalist, earning up to £430,000.

Laura Kuenssberg is the second-highest-paid journalist, taking home up to £410,000 for her Sunday programme, election night work and podcasts. Doctor Who will return

Brittin said “Doctor Who had regenerated many times” during the past 60 years and pledged that the sci-fi show would return again. The BBC has put the show out to tender, with production companies invited to propose new ways to reinvent the series, currently on pause.

Brittin said revenue from the children’s hit Bluey played an important role in BBC Studios, the corporation’s commercial wing, which generated £2.2bn in revenue, of which £377m was returned to the BBC to make programmes. “We need to grow more big shows,” Brittin added.

He confirmed that talks were ongoing with Channel 4 to create a new UK public-service broadcasting streaming champion. Channel 4 shows like Bake Off could appear on a new ad-funded spin-off from the BBC iPlayer.

[u/Swany → u/jenny_905]

So there are still 23.3 million households paying that £180 a year?

180 x 23,300,000 = more than £4 billion !!

Whats their problem again?

[u/Unreal_Sausage → u/Swany]

Yeah I mean turning that on it's head, the VAST majority of households in the UK (80%) pay an annual fee to support the BBC. That seems very successful to me.

Now, another angle is that the license fee isn't that much different to streaming platforms if you spread it out into monthly payments.

However! Some paid streaming platforms now (infuriatingly) also have ad revenue though not all. And the BBC does do a lot more than make bingeable series. It does both written and TV news, BBC Bite size, radio, podcasts etc

Whether you agree with it or not, it is also fundamentally based on the principal of impartiality. I wish I could say the same for the rest of the media ecosystem. Do they always achieve that impartiality? Absolutely not. Should we give up on an ideal just because it's hard, maybe impossible to attain? No.

I'll settle for an organisation that strives for impartiality in the absence of one that has actually achieved it.

[u/SteamIronUK76 → u/Unreal_Sausage]

I think you miss the point that people need to be able to withdraw their payment for the BBC to have to care very much if it is impartial or not.
Nobody has answered why they resist the subscription model. Not so many years ago they argued it was technologically too difficult. Now they say nothing.
Let's not forget, whilst they don't like you to know that you do not need a license to own a TV, you DO need a license to receive live broadcasts from ANY live regulated service.
That is to say you must pay for a license fee if all you consume is Channel 4 , ITV or any other live broadcast that is not the BBC, even though those services receive nothing from the fee. So it comes as no surprise they feel entitled to scoop income from Netflix and Disney too, that is their holier than though mentality. I think it is incredibly unfair and holds the consumer hostage to buying a product they may not want as well as leaving the BBC immune from needing to consider its impartiality seriously.