TV Licences Are Outdated, But Is A Streaming Levy The Right Fix?

The TV licence system is on life support. Less than 20% of South Africans with a licence actually pay, and the costs of chasing payments often outweigh the revenue collected. People no longer see value in funding a public broadcaster when they have endless content options elsewhere.

That said, the SABC remains important. It provides essential news, educational programming, and entertainment for millions who can’t afford premium services. Beyond content, it ensures vital information reaches all South Africans, promotes local storytelling, and supports cultural preservation. A strong public broadcaster is essential for media diversity and democracy, making its sustainability a national priority.

To address its financial struggles, communications minister Solly Malatsi recently proposed a levy on streaming services as a funding option for the SABC, calling the TV licence model inadequate due to “low compliance, high collection costs, and the eroding effects of inflation.”

But forcing streaming platforms to foot the bill isn’t as simple as it sounds.

Will streaming services absorb the levy or pass it to consumers? 

The biggest question is: who will ultimately pay?

In some countries, streaming services absorb levies as part of their operating costs – but that’s unlikely here. Netflix, Amazon, and Disney+ have already raised their prices multiple times in recent years. If this levy is implemented, South Africans will likely bear the cost through higher subscription fees.

With economic pressures mounting, many South Africans are already cutting back on entertainment spending. A price hike could push more users towards illegal streaming, free ad-supported content, or even ditching paid services altogether.

Could this hurt our film and TV industry? 

Beyond SABC funding, there’s a broader conversation about how global platforms support local content. Over the years, Netflix, Amazon, and Showmax have invested heavily in South African productions, giving our stories international exposure. But that investment is slowing. Some platforms are becoming more selective with local content, and Amazon has already reduced its spend in Africa.

As streamers shift focus from subscriber growth to profitability, content churn is accelerating. Viewers constantly seek fresh entertainment, forcing providers to deliver more at a faster pace, often with smaller budgets and lower content quality.

If the government imposes a levy, streamers may reduce local investments even further. However, if structured properly, the levy could fund local productions, create jobs, and support the industry. The key is transparency – without clear reinvestment in South African creatives, this could become just another tax with little impact on the industry.

Could streaming platforms exit South Africa? 

Would Netflix, Amazon, or Disney+ leave South Africa over this levy? Probably not. The market remains valuable, and global platforms have faced tougher regulations elsewhere. However, they could scale back operations, reduce local content investment, or bundle costs in a way that makes streaming less affordable.

Streaming services already face high operational costs in South Africa. Bandwidth is expensive, and many platforms partner with telecom providers to manage data costs. Adding another tax could complicate things further.

What would a fair and sustainable levy look like?

For this levy to work, it must support both the public broadcaster and the local content industry – without making streaming unaffordable. Funds should be reinvested in South African films and TV shows, not absorbed into government budgets.

The levy must also be reasonable. If set too high, platforms will either pass the cost onto consumers or cut local investments, hurting both viewers and the industry. Different streaming models should be considered – a flat tax won’t work for platforms with varied revenue structures.

Additionally, private broadcasters like MultiChoice and eMedia could also contribute. A local content levy applied across the industry would ensure the burden is shared, rather than placing the entire responsibility on global streaming services.

Finally, the SABC must prove it can manage funds responsibly. Before imposing a new tax, inefficiencies must be addressed, and transparency ensured so that revenue benefits South African content creators.

A levy could work – if handled correctly

South Africa wouldn’t be the first country to tax global streaming services. Some have done it successfully, while others have seen unintended consequences – higher prices, reduced local investment, and frustrated consumers.

If implemented correctly, a streaming levy could strengthen local content creation and support the SABC. But if rushed or mismanaged, it could drive up costs, push users towards piracy, and harm investment in local storytelling.

The government must engage with all stakeholders – streaming services, content creators, and consumers – to find a fair, effective solution that benefits the entire entertainment ecosystem.

• Leslie Adams, Sales Director at Reach Africa