Our wonderful BBC ?

[Manoverboard]

Does it bug you that publically funded BBC employees are reported as ripping off the Inland Revenue through Tax avoidance schemes ... or feathering their nests at the expense of the Licence Payers with over inflated contracts and pensions ?

Do you believe that Chris Evans, for example, is worth in excess of £2,200,000 for the drivel he spouts on a daily basis ?

How can a man and a woman on the same breakfast show get paid different amounts ?

I have always thought that the management of this organisation are a shambles but now it seems that they are an incompetent cheating shambles. It must be the right time to privatise this particular dinosaur me thinks.

[towny44]

I agree the beeb needs privatizing, but re the morning show Louise and Dan are paid the same but he gets extra for football focus.

[allatc]

The more the management pays it's "stars" the more they can justify their own inflated salaries.

[barney]

Aunty Beeb's dirty little secret is out.

I wonder how chuffed Alex Jones is to find out that Matt Baker get's a hundred grand a year more for reading the same autocue?

[david63]

I quite like Chris Evans in a morning - is he worth that much? That is a commercial decision for the Beeb.

You also have to remember that those salaries that have been published are only what the Beeb pays directly - there will be some who are paid additionally by the Beeb via "production" companies.

Tax avoidance is legal and we would all, and in fact many of us do, take whatever advantage of it when we can.

To be perfectly honest what anyone is paid is between them and their employer and is not my concern - whether that be public money or private money.

[Manoverboard]

It does not generally concern me either what people earn but there is a slight difference here in that they are paid by a Company and/or an Organisation that is Publicly funded which means that me and thee are helping to pay for their excesses ... and this I am not at all happy about.

I agree about Louise and Dan ' Towny ' but there are reportedly other examples where inequality does not apply, hence the threat of legal action by a number of the female broadcasters / newscasters.

[towny44]

Aunty Beeb's dirty little secret is out.

I wonder how chuffed Alex Jones is to find out that Matt Baker get's a hundred grand a year more for reading the same autocue?

Similar to my post #2, Matt Baker also does countryfile which accounts for his higher salary.

[Mervyn and Trish]

And for the year in question Chris Evans was also paid for Top Gear

[Stephen]

I'd much prefer they stopped paying rediculous high salaries and invested the licence payers money in new program material instead of showing the constant list of repeats. And if the high flyers don't like it I'm sure there is plenty of up and coming talent out there who would jump at the chance for a fraction of what the current draft get.

[Mervyn and Trish]

But bear in mind the total of all these high salaries is a fraction of the overall BBC revenue. Great fodder for the Daily Wail (whose editor gets more than anyone on this list) but the vast majority of BBC employees get very ordinary salaries. Firing every one of these wouldn't put a meaningful amount more in the programme pot.

[Stephen]

Every little helps.

[towny44]

I don't blame the 'Talent' they will obviously try to get the best deal for them including any tax minimisation, but I wonder if the BBC bosses had to answer to shareholders for their profligate spending whether it might be better controlled.

[Mervyn and Trish]

There's no evidence that ITV who do have shareholders are less progligate. They just don't have to tell us

[Mervyn and Trish]

And for context 41,752 people were paid less than £150k. Most of them less than £50k. Some less than £15k. Compared with 90 high earners

[towny44]

But what about all those being paid off the books through their own companies, not to mention those being paid by production companies. Quite possibly this will add up to more than is already being disclosed.

PS we seem to be back to having to press submit twice.

[Mervyn and Trish]

Still a small number. But if the issue is people being paid through their own companies let's make it illegal. May p*ss off millions of self employed people in a whole range of industries, including my neighbour who is a builder, a friend who works in IT and my dentist. But if it's wrong it's wrong. For everyone. Not just people at the BBC. Should be a real vote winner.

[towny44]

Still a small number. But if the issue is people being paid through their own companies let's make it illegal. May p*ss off millions of self employed people in a whole range of industries, including my neighbour who is a builder, a friend who works in IT and my dentist. But if it's wrong it's wrong. For everyone. Not just people at the BBC. Should be a real vote winner.

Typical politicians reply, never answer the question asked, always deflect it by posing another, you've missed your true vocation.

[Mervyn and Trish]

I think the answer was still a small number.

[towny44]

I think the answer was still a small number.

Small is relative, the question really is, are they worth it, and are the published figures the true totals, If not they should be.
We will leave the ethical debate about whether these tax limitation loop holes should be plugged, and has any political party got the balls to do something about them for another day, maybe tomorrow.

[david63]

... the question really is, are they worth it ...

But surely that question also applies to many others in the "entertainment" industry.

There is also another side to this whole argument and that is that some, not all I admit, probably earn the Beeb more in sales of their programs than they are being paid - Top Gear (as was) being a prime example.

[towny44]

... the question really is, are they worth it ...

But surely that question also applies to many others in the "entertainment" industry.

There is also another side to this whole argument and that is that some, not all I admit, probably earn the Beeb more in sales of their programs than they are being paid - Top Gear (as was) being a prime example.

In which case my point about the stupidity of BBC management is even more valid, why shoot the goose that's laying you golden eggs.

[Manoverboard]

Their stupidity was never in doubt ... the issue of renumeration and Tax avoidance is in addition.

Would point out to those who tend to defend BBC Tax avoidance that some of their employees, direct or otherwise, are reported as still being in schemes that were banned more than 12 months ago.

[Mervyn and Trish]

If they're illegal prosecute them. Simple. Along with anybody else in any field of work also involved.