Streamers Urged to Pay U.K. Levy to Protect Embattled British TV Drama in Parliament Report: They Must ‘Put Their Money Where Their Mouth Is’

by

The British government is being encouraged to implement severe actions aimed at bolstering the struggling U.K. television industry and independent film sector, as suggested in a significant parliamentary committee report.

After receiving substantial evidence from prominent figures in the UK’s creative industries over several months, the comprehensive report proposed that “tax incentives and a streaming service fee” should be considered as part of an “immediate aid package” to help support the struggling high-quality drama sector in the U.K.

In light of escalating expenses, a faltering ad market, significant budget reductions affecting local broadcasts, and recent global retreats by studios and streaming platforms regarding local collaborative productions, the report proposed strengthening the tax incentive for homegrown high-end TV, similar to the Independent Film Tax Credit (IFTC) introduced in 2024.

The report urged streaming platforms, which benefit greatly from the creativity of British producers, to support these efforts financially by setting aside a portion of their U.K. revenue for a special fund aimed at producing shows appealing to British viewers.

If the industry doesn’t set up the fund on its own within a year, the government will have to enforce a legal fee.

As a film enthusiast, I’ve been pondering over the TV scene and found a report that sheds light on an intriguing issue: the relationship between independent producers and streamers. The report suggests that this dynamic is unsustainable and U.K. production companies are being drained by deals that don’t allow them to fully capitalize on their creative intellectual property. The government should explore ways to ensure U.K. can maintain a larger share of IP rights when collaborating with streaming giants.

The report acknowledged the IFTC, as suggested by the previous parliamentary committee, as an initial positive move for the film industry. However, it emphasized that while the IFTC could be a game-changer, it is not a universal solution to all the challenges faced by independent British films. As a recommendation, the report suggested that the U.K. government should take additional steps, including offering a 25% tax relief specifically for the marketing and distribution costs (P&A) of films that have already received support from the IFTC.

In an industry primarily composed of independent contractors, the report proposed several strategies to enhance both the proficiency and worker protections. One such suggestion was advocating, as previously recommended by the committee, for the establishment of a specific Freelance Commissioner by the government.

Propose initiatives such as establishing an AI research center in collaboration with the British Film Institute, cutting taxes on movie tickets, and regularly analyzing our film and high-end TV tax incentives against those of other countries every six months. This is intended to ensure our competitiveness remains strong.

The report further discussed strategies for combating bullying and harassment, emphasizing the need for the industry to pledge “ongoing, unrestricted funding” to the recently presented Creative Industries Independent Standards Authority within half a year. Additionally, it suggested that the government consider potential methods for financing this organization if the industry fails to provide a voluntary resolution.

Dame Caroline Dinenage MP commented that hit films produced in Britain have highlighted the exceptional quality of our film and television industry more than ever. However, she warned that the surge of foreign investment could push local independent producers aside. While streaming platforms like Netflix and Amazon have positively impacted the industry and economy, if the government doesn’t act quickly to level the playing field, for every unique British production enriching our dialogue, there will be numerous homegrown stories left unseen on our screens.

Kosminsky, who advocated for a 5% tax on streaming services, was pleased with this part of the report. He stated, “This is a bold move in the current political environment and undoubtedly the correct action.” However, he emphasized that it’s crucial to specify that the fund generated by this levy should only be accessible to productions either commissioned or co-commissioned by a public service broadcaster. In his opinion, this detail seems to have been overlooked in the report, and it is a vital aspect of the 5% levy’s solution to our industry’s challenges.

In response to what was said by EbMaster, Netflix disagreed with the suggestion, explaining that any extra expense due to the tax would simply be transferred to the end user or customer.

A representative stated that the U.K. is Netflix’s primary production center outside of North America, and they aim to keep it that way. However, in a rapidly expanding global market, it’s crucial to establish a business climate that encourages rather than discourages investment, risk-taking, and prosperity. Taxes can reduce competitiveness and impose penalties on audiences who ultimately face the increased costs.

A variety of distribution companies such as StudioCanal, Lionsgate, Black Bear Pictures, Altitude, Picturehouse Entertainment, and True Brit have expressed support for the proposal that the government should grant Production and Advertising (P&A) tax relief for independent British films.

In simple terms, Zygi Kamasa, CEO of True Brit, stated that when they launch a British film in the UK, they’re up against big-budget movies, video games, and other retailers for audience attention. These competitors have far larger financial resources than independent film distributors. To help these films reach their full potential at the box office, Kamasa suggested that a tax credit for Promotion and Advertising (P&A) costs would be extremely beneficial to both distributors and the films themselves.

Read More

2025-04-10 02:17