VAT and Bursary impact

I think you’ll find that those at the socialist end of the spectrum have ALWAYS had a massive issue with private schooling. Your comment is wishful thinking.

Yes thanks. My kids went to an excellent state primary. I went to excellent state schools myself.

I think Labour are doing a good job of distracting focus from the real issue here. I think that, if state schools were uniformly good, then people wouldn't really care very much about some people using private schools (as they didn't when I was growing up). Society is generally very accepting of the fact that people can spend money as they want (on bigger houses, nicer holidays etc). The real issue is that state schools are not uniformly good - they are massively variable, leading to huge inequality within the state system.

IIf this policy was going to change that, then I would be much less bothered about it (though I still fundamentally believe that all education should remain VAT exempt, as a matter of principle). However, what Labour are actually doing is selling a Brexit style lie. They're taking an issue that people are deeply concerned about (the parlous state of some state schools) and trying to deflect that anger against private schools. The implication that taxpayers are somehow financially subsidising private schools is utterly dishonest, and Labour must know it. The 'private school tax break' and 'I care about the 93%' soundbites are 'take back control' all over again - and the 1.6bn promise is the new version of the Brexit NHS claim.

If Labour want to damage the private school sector for ideological reasons then they should have the courage to come out and own it - rather than Keir Starmer saying on record that he has 'nothing against' private schools. If not, then they need to be honest about the many real reasons for the problems within state schools, and come up with some properly funded plans to start solving them.

improving state schools

but you are aware that there are many very good state schools, aren't you?

just saying because people who send their kids to private schools seem to think that all state schools are an absolute disaster

First of all I didn’t choose to live in a capitalist country it was the like that when I was born into it.. I can’t afford to move countries and so I have little choice to put up with the system as it, until it changes, which is unlikely. Also you’re wrong in saying that people don’t call out other aspects which are unfair, the Green Party (and some independent MPs) have been doing this but sadly they don’t get much support or attention. From where I’m sitting all I’m seeing is the private school lobby actively scream and shouting about how unfair this VAT is..every other thread on the secondary school board at the minute seems to someone moaning about this policy. It really isn’t a good look and isn’t helping their cause in my opinion, especially as outside of MN this policy is fairly popular.

OK, and I absolutely recognise the need to massively improve state education, healthcare and social care. But, having said that, we do choose to live in an essentially capitalist country - there is a basic principle that people can use their money to buy better things - whether that's food, or housing, or care homes, or social life, or cars, or holidays. There are very few areas of life where money can't buy you a better version of something - about the only exception I can think of is emergency healthcare. I don't agree with the VAT policy because I don't think it will achieve its stated aims (ie raising net revenue and improving state schools), but where I actually have more of an issue is with people shouting very loudly about how private school is 'unfair', when they're mainly perfectly happy to accept 'unfair' in almost every other area of life.

All of what you’ve said is true but it doesn’t make it right. Also the state system doesn’t suddenly get better for the SEN children left behind because a few can and choose to move private the same with the NHS… this is the problem of multi tiered system it breeds resentment and that’s not good for anyone. Something needs to be done to address this. This policy is popular outside of MN with the majority because it helps to address this resentment.

If you have say 70% bursary do you still pay full vat? I wonder how it's going to work in reality?

When most of the private school staff live on the local council estate you'd be surprised. Unlike state, they don't just employ mostly teaching staff. Support staff also work year round for private let's etc

Just to add to my post above - my son has had an EHCP (formerly Statement) and full-time 1:1 support since he was four years old. Even then we had to go private at our own cost for a few years after a disastrous experience at our village school. We moved 100 miles to a private school that we could afford more easily and which could meet his needs. In Year 6 he moved from private to a special school which was paid for by our LA. However this took a massive fight with the LA and a lot of cost on expert reports and an education lawyer. The LA argued that he’d be fine at the enormous (330 students in a year) comprehensive in the next town. The school’s senco told us that he’d have to arrive at each lesson five minutes late and leave five minutes early to avoid being crushed in the corridors, in spite of having a 1:1 with him at all times. He would also be expected to learn through the window in the classroom door if he couldn’t cope in the classroom. He wouldn’t be allowed to use the lifts because he isn’t a wheelchair user even though he had poor mobility and struggled with long flights of stairs. Etc etc etc.

I totally agree that we are very fortunate as a family that we’ve (just, with my mum’s help) been able to afford private education. It had never occurred to us previously to go down the private route though. No child should be offered what my son was offered. I’m sure others have been offered much less suitable provision than he was, and changes need to be made urgently.

No, of course it shouldn't be up to individuals. But if some parents of children with SEND choose to remove themselves from the state system, that leaves fewer people remaining that the state needs to cater for. It's well documented that SEN resources in state are completely overwhelmed. Same with private health - the NHS is already falling over, with people waiting months and years for appointments. The fact that some people get quicker treatment by going private may feel unfair, but it does relieve the NHS of the cost and capacity of treating all of those people.

there are also loads of people with kids with SEND who cannot afford to pay for private schooling even though state schools are failing their kids.

Not by borrowing, begging, asking family, selling property, taking out huge mortgages… the bulk of people in this situation cannot do anything to ameliorate their children’s position, they have no financial options.

it should not be up to individuals to prostrate themselves and stump up for independent school fees to ensure their disabled children get a fair crack of the whip.

My disabled child’s situation is a bit different to yours - but we too entered the private school system because our local state school was completely unable to meet his needs. We tried and it failed. Too many people seem to think that parents in similar situations to us are trying to buy our disabled children an advantage. If I could have bought my child out of having a disability then I certainly would have done…. but with regard to his education, I just wanted him to get one.

I that was what I was saying - that schools can be set up for profit but that many of the best ones , oldest, the academic ones tend to be charities - the ones where my children went. Merchant Taylors etc.

@Xenia Many private schools are companies. They file accounts and have shareholders. Just for interest: look at Wychwood School in Oxford accounts. There is loss as well as profit. They have shareholders. There are various models of private schools but private companies is certainly one and they must file accounts.

They could also be trusts or charities. Most well run ones want a buffer of money to invest in buildings, curriculum development or unforeseen expenses.

You are muddling up two separate issues.

VAT is not currently paid by charitable OR profit-making schools, and this is nothing to do with them being profit/ non-profit-based.

Educational services of a prescribed type are VAT exempt: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c033dp0z1edo

In fact it relates to education generally - primary and secondary. It says schools. Not universities.

@PeachSalad

It's the first paragraph of the paper.

It doesn't relate to higher education. It relates to secondary education.

No.

I think that's been proven multiple times.

I h ave not researched the law on this but I had thought private schools could run for profit. Almost all the good UK private schools - the only ones I have ever considered for my children or where their father has worked have all been charities; but even 100 years ago sometimes people set up a little school and lived off the profits - a couple of ladies might have done that and hired teachers and made a modest profit. I don't think the law ever changed to ban this but I might be wrong. It is a bit of a side issue as in my view the best academic private schools all tend to be charities.

I just found this from about 10 years ago "Although the Department for Education (DfE) in England acknowledges that schools in the
independent schooling sector can be run on a for-profit basis, they do not have a definition of
for-profit schools;"

I think what they say on paper and what they actually do is two different things

they might be “not for profit” in Hmrc’s eyes but I personally have no clue what they’re doing with the cash!

if they’re actually reinvesting in education they’re doing an awful job, cause it doesn’t show!

they operate like a small neighbourhood groceries store !

What you good at is being rude. Please send me the link of a proper school site where it is stated. Do you understand that the " for profit" schools already would pay 20 perc VAT? And that it is " not for profit" status that prevented it all this years? Why do you think 50 perc are registered as charities? Because of tax.

Are you actually capable of comprehension?

🙄 honestly, you are copying information about higher education and White Rose which is not a secondary school. As stated in Wikipedia thatbyou dismissed clearly without readin, there are " for profit" higher education institution.

Show me a proper link to the contemporary secondary private school that is registered " for profit" and not some archaic stories about 1910 and educational i institutions, financial holdings that are not schools but only related to schools. Just black on white school. Thank you.

That makes total sense actually. How infuriating, women always get the crap end of the deal!

The independent article you quoted is actually about coalition/ conservative government policy on STATE- funded schools although that would not be immediately evident to non-uk, non-enmeshed in uk education policy circle folk. It’s badly written and unclear. It seems straightforward but is not. I can see why you’ve concluded what you have from this article, but you’ve misunderstood and also the article itself is poorly expressed and confusing.