Changes to the fibre tax
have been proposed by the Valuation Office Agency (VOA), the department of
the UK’s tax agency which defines how specific things should be valued. After
consultation with industry, including the Broadband Stakeholder Group, new
proposals have been put forward that should make it more affordable to deploy
next-generation access (NGA) networks which use fibre to deliver the
service.
Vtesse Networks raised the issue of high taxes, particularly when compared
with how the VOA treats the same taxes for BT. Other providers are taxed per
kilometre of fibre and the number of fibre lit whilst BT had their network
examined as a whole which meant that taxes were significantly lower,
representing an unfair advantage. Vtesse took their case to the courts, but
lost at every stage, including at the European Court of Justice. Virgin
Media are also treated differently and have their taxes calculated based on the
number of homes passed.
In
the changes proposed the VOA state that there are different types of
networks and locations which will warrant a different approach to how NGA
networks are rated. In the two-thirds of the country reached through
traditional private roll outs (i.e. not the ‘final-third’), rating should be
based on a similar basis to Virgin’s cable TV network but on a “per end user”
basis rather than “per home passed”. This will offer some advantages as there
is likely to be low take up at the start, and providers would only have to pay
for what they use. There may be some exceptions for large business customers or
high bandwidth customers which may see the traditional style of fibre rating
still apply.
In these urban and sub-urban areas, the VOA propose that NGA connections
will be rated at £20 per home or SME connected, or £18 pounds if utilising
sub-loop unbundling (as BT would still retain rating liability on the final
drop from the cabinet).
In the final third, where public subsidies are required for capital
expenditure, a ‘receipts and expenditure’ model will be used which would be
equivalent to how BT’s network is taxed. This should give a variable scale of
rating of £2, £6.50, £10 or £13 per end user depending on the factual data of
the network. This would largely see the scale split by areas, with these
defined in the ratings manual.
This looks to decrease costs that providers will likely have to pay as
networks will no longer be charged based on the number of fibres used or the
length of these fibres, but at a fixed cost depending on how the region and
network is defined and the number of homes that are using the network. One
question does remain and that is how projects will be taxed that are deployed
in regions that are considered to be the final-third but are not using public
subsidies. Some councils have already
denounced the BDUK scheme and networks deployed in these regions could face
fibre tax rates at the higher £18/20 per home connected.
Test your broadband speed
Follow us on X for the latest broadband news 
I’m sure that the VOA will do everything it can to create a complex charging system in order to justify its own existence. No doubt levying the various charges and interpreting the complex rules (of its own invention)will require an army of paper-shufflers.
Giving a headline figure of how much money the government is spending on BDUK for infrastructure seems somewhat disingenuous when another arm grabs a notable portion back through taxation.
At some point they need to pay taxation, but surely it makes more sense to tax the services more rather than the infrastructure you so desperately want them to build. I’m sure there are legitimate reasons.
What really should be done is incentivise infrastructure investment. So no VOA is applied to new to residential fibre roll-out for 3-5 years.
Even better would be the same taxation regime as in the rest of europe… which is nothing.
Agree with first 3 commenters.
The VOA is robbing Peter to pay Paul and stifling innovation and growth to protect the copper cabal and their own jobs, and clawing money in for government to pay their expenses.
Do we want a digitalbritain or not?
Common sense says scrap this tax. If the government doesn’t, then is this an admission of a lack of understanding of the value of fibre optic infrastructure? Clearly.
Differentiating between residential and business is dumb and unenforcable in rural communities with a great many “at home” businesses. Can someone explain why this isn’t dumb? anyone care to offer an annual figure for TAX income from the VOA fibre tax? Always good to quantify what we’re talking about, before we talk about it. This may make the BDUK £530M look rather paltry, or not!
Because, a residential home is a residential home, whether it has located in it or not.
Whilst a business property is only ever that. So farmhouse = residential home.
Whilst small trading estate or factory out in sticks is business properties.
What’s so difficult about that?
VOA is applied to anyone with a fibre link or network… consider how many businesses large and small have fibre links between buildings/cities. Then all the ISPs have their own networks. It all adds up and likely to be quite substantial.
should say “whether it has a business located in it…”
Government does this with everything, gives with one hand, gets the money back with the other.