Full-time-equivalent staff
Across the BBC Group, on average in 2024/25.
01 / Understand the scale
A whole world.
Behind one number.
£3.84bnOne year of licence-fee income · 2024/25
It is a large sum. But the BBC is much bigger than the programmes any one of us watches.
Start with the scale of the wider BBC — including its commercial businesses, which have their own funding.
Hours of local radio alone
Across England and the Channel Islands in 2024/25.
And 58 radio stations
UK public services, from BBC One to BBC ALBA.
Countries & territories
Where the international BBC News TV channel is available.
Sources & what these numbers mean
The money: £3.843bn in net licence-fee income, rounded here. This is our fixed 2024/25 benchmark, not the BBC’s entire budget or a claim about current income. National Audit Office ↗
The people: average full-time-equivalent employees, including apprentices: 17,531 in the public-service group and 4,242 in the commercial group. This is not individual headcount; casual contracts are reported separately. BBC Annual Report 2024/25, note D1 ↗
The hours: reported BBC Local Radio output in the England data pack. This is a subset of BBC output, not a total of unique new programmes across TV, radio and online. Shared broadcasts must not be read as separately commissioned content. BBC Annual Report 2024/25, England data ↗
The services: eight pan-UK TV channels plus BBC Scotland and BBC ALBA. The 58 radio stations include national, minority-language and local services. Counts follow the NAO’s 2024/25 overview. National Audit Office, page 20 ↗
The reach: BBC Studios reports availability in more than 200 countries and territories for the international, English-language BBC News TV channel. Availability is not measured audience, and this is not the World Service’s country count. Checked September 2026. BBC Studios distribution ↗
That is the scale.
Now, what is the value?
02 / From the number to everyday life
The BBC you watch.
And the BBC you might not see.
Learning. Local voices. Reporting beyond our borders. A public service can matter even when you are not its audience.
The BBC is a broadcaster, a learning resource, a local presence and an international news service. A single funding debate reaches all of them.
You do not have to use every part to think it should exist.
A little help.
A bigger future.
A bigger future.
Homework without a checkout.
Learning resources that a child can open without asking a parent to buy another subscription. The BBC’s learning remit includes resources to support formal education and preschool learning.
Supporting learning is part of the BBC’s remit. Provision can be commissioned for its educational value, rather than only its ability to attract paying households.
These are examples of public value, not slices of a spending chart.
Can your alternative fund it? →03 / Put your alternative to the test
Same ambition.
Different way to pay.
Start with the alternative you think should work. Change the assumptions, watch the total, then take your proposal into the next step.
2024 market benchmark: £5.2714bn, including streaming.
A scenario input, not an estimate of demand.
Your annual total
£2.52bn
£1.33bn below the £3.843bn benchmark
AdvertisingSubscriptionsLicence fee
What would close the gap?
At 10 million subscribing homes, this mix needs £21.04 a month before additional costs.
Every assumption, calculation and limitation
- Target: £3,843m net licence-fee income in 2024/25. NAO. This is a dated benchmark, not total BBC income or a claim about the current year.
- Advertising: £5,271.4m × the selected market share. AA/WARC, 2024. This is TV including streaming, not all advertising. The model holds market size fixed; it does not predict demand growth, prices, radio or other digital advertising.
- Subscription: price × 12 × subscribing homes. Price and demand are deliberately independent so you can test your own case. The 30m slider ceiling is a design range, not a demand forecast or a measured market size.
- Retained licence-fee income: £3,843m × the selected percentage. It is revenue retained, not a proposed household price or a household levy.
- Advertising and subscriptions are counted before deductions. VAT, sales costs, collection, churn, enforcement, exemptions and transition costs are not modelled. Existing non-licence income and the service ambition are held constant. This is optimistic gross arithmetic, not a business plan.
- A hybrid assumes the two revenue streams can be added. It does not model how an ad-free tier reduces ad inventory or how advertising affects subscriber demand.
- Presets are illustrative starting points, not forecasts. The chart rescales if income exceeds the target. Break-even rounds the subscription price up to the next 10p. Saving an attempt keeps it only until you reload this page.
- The next step uses an explicitly illustrative schedule. No funding gap is allocated to a named service, and no programme cost or future cut is calculated.
What about a household levy?
A levy could also raise public funding. Replacing the collection system would raise separate questions about fairness, exemptions, enforcement, independence and transition. This calculator cannot establish that the licence fee is uniquely capable of funding the BBC.
A mix can reach the target. The next question is whether it can sustain the service and its public obligations.
04 / Follow your funding choice
What disappears
between the favourites?
The funding total is only part of the story. Confirm your mix in step 3, or explore the funding level below.
A day of public service.
An illustrative day across TV, radio and online. The fading entries show kinds of provision at risk—not predicted cuts or actual BBC listings.
07:00An illustrative gap
The morning headlines
TV & radio · news bulletin
08:30A story never commissioned
A new story, made for children here
Children’s TV · original UK commission
10:00Less room for the local conversation
Your council, questioned
Local radio · a locally produced interview
16:00An illustrative gap
Help with tomorrow’s lesson
Online & educational TV · learning resources
18:00A broadcast no longer transmitted
A world beyond the headlines
World Service · a language-service radio broadcast
20:00An illustrative gap
The programme everyone’s talking about
TV · shared evening viewing
At the benchmark, the full illustrative schedule is visible.
How to read the disappearing schedule
The money comes from your calculation. The gaps are an editorial illustration of vulnerability, not calculated programme losses. Children’s commissioning, local programme sharing and World Service broadcasts are foregrounded because there are documented changes to examine below. We cannot establish which would be cut first in a future BBC.
In this illustration, those three entries fade together over the first 35 percentage points of a funding reduction, with a small visual stagger. Remaining entries fade as the slider falls below 65%. These figures are animation settings, not evidence-based cost thresholds. Empty slots remain visible to make absence noticeable; raising funding brings the entries back. A fully funded mix causes no deletion here, but still needs to explain access and public obligations.
What has already happened
The gaps have a history.
These examples establish vulnerability. They do not establish a future order of cuts.
More choice does not guarantee more made here.
Ofcom records falling UK commissions and commercial pressure across children’s TV. It identifies children’s programmes and news as less commercially attractive genres that need support.
This is a sector-wide trend, including the BBC. Changing viewing habits and distribution also matter; it is not a controlled experiment proving one cause.
History shows the vulnerability. It cannot tell us exactly which future programme would be cut.
What should we keep? →05 / The case for keeping it
Keep the licence fee.
Demand a better BBC.
You can question the spending, challenge the coverage and expect reform. The case for retaining the fee is a case for protecting a shared service while improving it.
Keep
Public funding that supports services beyond the programmes any one of us would choose to buy.
Improve
Accountability, value for money and support for people who struggle to pay.
Ask
Any replacement to explain who will pay, who will have access and how less commercial services will be protected.
A starting point to adapt
I support retaining the BBC licence fee through Charter renewal, alongside stronger accountability and fair treatment of people who struggle to pay. Before any replacement is adopted, I want clear evidence of how it would fund the BBC’s public remit, maintain access and protect less commercial services.
What position will you take on this in Parliament?
Draft only. Review and send it yourself through your MP’s official contact details.
The current Charter expires on 31 December 2027. The public consultation has closed; Charter review continues. Follow the review ↗
Read the evidenceSources & accountability
An argument you can check.
Keeping the licence fee is the position of this site. Published facts, our calculations and illustrative scenarios are labelled separately.
01 / National Audit OfficeThe £3.843bn benchmark ↗
Net licence-fee income in 2024/25. Not the BBC’s total income.
02 / Advertising Association & WARCThe television ad market ↗£5.2714bn in 2024, including streaming. The model holds this market fixed.
03 / OfcomChildren’s media and public provision ↗Evidence to Parliament on UK commissioning, market pressures and the BBC’s remit.
04 / National Audit OfficeWorld Service savings and reach ↗Documented platform closures and the decline in audience, with qualifications.
05 / OfcomIndependent scrutiny of the BBC ↗Performance against its public purposes, including areas needing improvement.
06 / UK GovernmentThe Charter review ↗The current Charter expires on 31 December 2027. Follow official developments here.
Why use 2024/25 figures?
This version keeps the £3.843bn benchmark used throughout the original argument and pairs it with 2024 advertising data. It does not describe these as the latest figures. 2025/26 accounts are available; any update to this exercise should update the target, comparisons and source notes together.