Churches may prove to be caught out as well. I understood that they do not require licenses for activities promoting their religious aims. That suggests to me that, if they are used for general concerts (as many are, particularly in rural communities) a license would be required.

That is more the case now, but under the new Act, is clear that commercial concerts in places of public worship do not require a Premises Licence at all.

Roger, is your point that because LAs will be getting license fees from every pub, they therefore won't miss the fact that they're not getting the PEL fees from only a few?

No the LAs will miss the fees a lot. My point is that as far as the government are concerned, the distinction between places with Premises Licenses and entertainment permission and those without - is one that will be lost.

The only problem with this is that currently PELs are charged on an annual basis, while the new License is a one-off charge for the life of the business. I'm still not sure exactly what defines "the life of the business", but presumably a large number of pubs expect to stay in business for a considerable length of time.
The annual inspection charge is the one that most resembles the old PEL. perhaps when the fee level is eventually set - it may resemble the old PEL even more?