In a passionate guest column for The Hollywood Reporter, acclaimed director Peter Kosminsky—best known for Wolf Hall and The Mirror and the Light—pushes back against the notion that a proposed U.K. streaming levy is tantamount to a trade tariff.
Instead, Kosminsky makes the case that this 5 percent levy would inject critical funds into Britain’s public service broadcasters (PSBs) and rescue high‑end drama from contraction.
A Tale of Two Industries
Kosminsky opens by lamenting the 25 percent plunge in PSB drama production since 2019. “When the streamers first appeared in the U.K., they were eager to co‑produce.
Over time, that appetite has dwindled almost to nothing,” he writes. With Netflix, Amazon and Disney+ making multiple series in Britain and driving up costs, PSBs like the BBC, ITV and Channel 4 have found themselves priced out of the market.
“It Isn’t a Tariff”
Critics warn the levy would provoke U.S. backlash under a future trade deal. Yet Peter Kosminsky insists that the levy differs fundamentally from a tariff:
“If a U.S. manufacturer faces a 125 percent tariff in China, that money goes straight to the Chinese government—and the importer can’t claim any back. But our proposed 5 percent streaming levy would form a production fund, repayable to streamers when they co‑produce with a U.K. PSB.”
This distinction, Kosminsky argues, should allay White House fears and secure the levy’s passage.
Reviving Co‑Productions and PSB Drama
Under the levy plan, streamers must partner with PSBs to claim credits, reigniting a once‑vibrant co‑production ecosystem. Peter Kosminsky highlights this as a “win‑win”:
- New funds flow to PSBs.
- Streamers gain local expertise and brand prestige.
- Audiences benefit from both global and home‑grown content.
Kosminsky warns that without this intervention, “the PSBs can no longer afford to produce high‑end drama in the U.K.”
The Real‑World Stakes
Referencing Mr Bates vs The Post Office, whose makers now shoulder crippling debt, Kosminsky underscores the high cost of inaction. “We would not succeed” in mounting prestige series like The Mirror and the Light in today’s climate, he notes. The levy fund, he contends, would reverse contraction into growth, enabling PSBs to reclaim their cultural role.
“A 100‑Year Tradition”
In a stirring appeal, Peter Kosminsky invokes Britain’s century‑long PSB heritage.
“These broadcasters represent a 100‑year tradition of programme‑making in the U.K., a tradition the British audience will not thank us for jettisoning.”
By forcing competition and collaboration, the levy would strengthen that legacy, ensuring dramas that speak directly to UK viewers continue to thrive.
Beyond Tariffs: Addressing Market Failure
Rather than viewing the levy as punitive, Kosminsky reframes it as a corrective measure for a distorted market. “No other solution put forward adequately addresses the acute problem faced right now in high‑end TV in the U.K.,” he asserts. The levy would compel streamers to “up their game”, sparking innovation and creative partnerships.
Political Will: The Final Hurdle
Despite broad industry support, Kosminsky acknowledges the realpolitik at play.
“Except that no one thinks the U.K. government will be brave enough to poke the Trump tiger.”
The piece ends on a rallying cry: only courage in Westminster can implement the levy and safeguard British drama.
Quick FAQ
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| What’s the levy rate? | 5 percent of streaming revenue, refundable upon co‑production. |
| Which PSBs benefit? | BBC, ITV, Channel 4, and other public service broadcasters. |
| Is it a tariff? | No—it’s a production fund, not a tax on imported goods. |
Key Takeaway:
Peter Kosminsky makes a compelling case that the U.K. streaming levy is not a tariff but a vital fund to revive PSB drama, foster co‑productions, and preserve Britain’s storytelling heritage. It’s now up to policymakers to act.
