VAT on school fees not applied retroactively- ultra wealthy are safe

The reason for the classes of 67 in this article has nothing to do with birth rates.

They were caused by the Tories cutting council budgets by 50%. It even says that in
The article. Massively underfunded schools results in much bigger class sizes.

Yes it's true that the people who suffer from this envy-based pretend politicking is the least wealthy at the school. They're usually either the people with SEN kids or the ones who have absolutely scraped to send their kids there. It won't touch the actually wealthy people.

Also, when those people I mentioned take the best state school places, there will be a whole tranche of 'not quite rich enough to be near enough to the good school' kids who go to a less good school as well. So in both cases, the least privileged will miss out (even if they are still more privileged than average overall. Just a lot of silly nonsense.

Indeed that did happen in a school near me. Right down to the dodgy bursar...

You have completely misunderstood this. The document clearly says that hmrc will challenge fees in advance schemes. The pre paid amounts are not guaranteed to be exempt at all.

If you pay for years in advance, what happens if things change? The head could change and the new one is horrific, the bursar could embezzle all the money, you need to relocate for some reason, the school goes bust…

That’s what came to my mind.

Nope. I hope as many of the private school fee payers avoid as much VAT as possible though advance payments or any other schemes that schools can come up.

People already paying for state education that they use less of overall (depending on age that child started private school) through their taxes, I don’t agree with hitting them even harder through VAT and good luck to everyone that avoids it.

We do not care about it so scroll past if you do not like it. No one has to be walking eggs shells to not offend the ones perennially offending us.

I could get behind a higher rate VAT on Lambos tbqh.

I know people say that overall due to declining birth rates there are/will be plenty of state school places so I hope it all works out.

Are you in the UK? I don’t want to be the bearer of bad news, but…

www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/number-overcrowded-classes-schools-rocketed-24716057

That isnt what the document says. You’re only reading part of the paragraph.

Only if the pre payment scheme meets the HMRC requirements of it being defined amounts for each term, is my understanding.

So for those that have paid for a year in advance, the termly fees will be defined and the payments will be for those set fees (or can be for longer periods if the term fees are set several years in advance, as the PP said is the case for Radley).

But if you’ve prepaid (say) an amount of £20,000 for 2028 and the 2028 term fees have not been defined - then that’s what HMRC will be looking at.

At least that’s my reading of it.

What fees ?.

Oh my god, I still don't care. What's not fair is having a two tier education system.

That's fine. People who paid it all in advance and are now finding they owe VAT only have the VAT to pay each year now. They took a chance and lose out on the growth shrewd investing could have given them. That's up to them.

I didn't have children but have paid taxes contributing to state education and to the various benefits all parents have received for their children. I don't mind at all as I see taxation as for the greater good.

All fees incurred for Jan 2025 are liable for vat whether paid in advance or not

It really doesnt.

you should disagree with this on principle.

And so what if I do? My opinion literally makes no difference so why are there so many people trying to convince others that the VAT proposition is wrong. The whole of MN can agree with you @Kitkat189 it won’t change a thing.

Edited to say, why don’t people spend their time writing to their MP instead? You know, instead of crying to MN

Yes, thanks to your shrewd financial planning

the article was written before labour won and the policy implemented.

so it is talking about what a number of parents did sensibly do… paid upfront and will avoid VAT before the deadline.

these parents will definitely have avoided paying the VAT

anyway i have got to go to bed now. Tomorrow…

Not sure quite what you mean?

The HMRC consultation document says it will challenge schemes that allow prepayment of fees where the actual fee amount hadn’t been set when the payment was made.

In that respect I’m not sure it matters when the GE happened.

many of the ultra rich won’t pay in advance they’ll keep the cash and make more then the 20% rise through investments.

What makes you think a good school and state initiatives are mutually exclusive?
It makes you sound like a snob.

It’s because the outraged posts from private school parents are really annoying! They are patronising and offensive to those of us who don’t think that ‘but I’m rich’ is a moral stance, and they take up a disproportionate amount of space (… just like the alumni of private schools of course)

But this was always the obvious outcome of this policy. The pulling away of the ultra rich and the most elite schools was the clear outcome of a policy that makes something more expensive. It’s why only really rich people have Lamborghinis.
This policy will just mean that the truly elite schools get better because they don’t have to worry about any of their friendly state initiatives any more, and plough money back into the school - they might even not bother staying a charity and then they can find great investment opportunities. The smaller schools will lose out.