Labour, private schools VAT and universities

[BloodyHellKen]

Following on from the thread about Labour, private schools and VAT please could someone explain to me why we shouldn't be concerned that a Labour govt wouldn't remove tax exemption from universities also as they are also VAT exempt in the same way private schools are.

I'm not personally worried about VAT being added onto private school fees and I recognise arguments for and against but the possibility of VAT being added onto a university education does really concern me.

Anyone?

House prices in good catchment areas are likely to go up even more as people choose to move into the areas rather than pay for private schools. That is exactly what we are going to do.
We have changed our plans and due to the added cost, would rather pay more for a house in a good catchment and still have that equity then start at a private school as originally planned. It will actually be better for us long term as we’ll get a free education and a higher value house. We will also have more money for private tutors.

I’m absolutely not defending the Conservatives. The fact that we don’t have a decent state school within catchment is disgraceful. However, adding VAT to school fees isn’t going to help improve the state sector. It will raise a relatively tiny amount of tax, if any.

Would you have moved house instead of opting for private school if you had known VAT was going to be applied?

In reality, if we had young children just starting education at the age of 4 with the threat of VAT and school fees at their current levels (partly due to high inflation) yes we probably would have considered it. I know many people feel the same.

No family should feel forced to move from where they are happy because of inadequate education though. The state education system should not be a postcode lottery.

From what I can see with friends who have older children, they tutor so their kids get the best grades at GCSEs and A levels. Not necessarily because they need it, but so they get the best grades they can (level 8/9 gcse).
So many parents pay for tutors at the state schools round here, even the very best schools. The tutors must be making a fortune!

I don’t understand why more people don’t move instead, particularly if there are several children. It seems crazy to be spending that kind of money for no tangible benefit. I think people in the private sector really underestimate how good some state schools are. We could easily have afforded private but there was no need. Our DC’s schools were excellent and they couldn’t have achieved better had they gone to the very top private schools. They are now in the top universities doing very competitive courses they are passionate about. They are also on track to be high earners paying lots of taxes so I don’t quite get @MisterChips argument that private school DC end up contributing more financially to society. Depends on the DC and their background, it’s not just schooling. SEN aside, paying school fees makes no sense to me.

I understand what you are saying. But your children are older now and already though the system. Schools have changed a lot the last 15 years and those starting at the age 4 now will likely have a different experience.

Many families are happy where they live and don’t want to move to a new area away from family and friends just for education. There are also benefits from private education which really aren’t available in the state sector (far more extra curricular activities etc).

We were both state educated (one at a decent school, one not so good), and both have done well. We’ve had experience of different types of school. Even having experienced an excellent state school (towards the top of league tables), I can see that our children’s private school offers so much more. There comes a point though, for many families, where the fees become unsustainable.

It’s not possible for every child to live into an area with excellent state schools either. There simply aren’t enough excellent state schools. One family moving to such a school pushes another family out. Telling families to move near a decent state school is not the answer and doesn’t address the problems in the state sector,

Mine each got ten grade 9s at GCSE and four A Stars at A-Level without a single tutor. This is possible with bright and hardworking DC in a good state school. It’s a bit of a myth that you have to tutor just because you are in state.

@ForlornLindtBear But most people aren't in your fortunate situation.

I am a single mum with one ds. We were offered a single state school place at a school that even Ofsted admitted wasn't safe.

Then DS got a 50% scholarship as the local independent.

Would you have sent a small shy nerdy August born child into a 1600 pupil unsafe chaotic environment with a history of bullying and school refusing? Or to a small, supportive, highly academic independent school?

Yes, it costs me every penny I have and then some, but DS is safe, happy and now on track for 10 x eights and nines at GCSE.

To move into catchment of a better state school would have cost at least £180,000. And no one would have lent it to me anyway. Seven years on the scholarship will cost me £63k.

It's not hard to understand. I did what I had to do.

Of course you don’t have to tutor. And your kids obviously did great. But I do know a lot of parents who pay for tutors to help their kids get the best grades. Particularly in maths, English, science.

You don't know how many either, so the impact is an unknown quantity. There is definitely an agenda of trumping up the predictions of numbers staying to make the figures fit the propaganda.

Nobody knows. And the ASI doesn't claim to know, it just explains why nobody knows and the IFS numbers have a lot of distortion and a distinct lack of credibility.

Given this is a tax on a double positive externality, and given the size of the risks if backers of the education tax are wrong, and given nobody in the world does this and the only country that tried it was a disaster.... It's on backers of the tax to prove the case and account for the costs.

Again, depends on the school. My DC did all sorts of extra snd supra curriculars -a wide range of sports, arts, music, debating, Olymiads etc. My DDs did French, Spanish, German and Latin before they decided STEM was more their thing. Of course I know not all state schools are like that but there are some schools that are. It’s a bit misguided to think you are getting better because you are paying. Not always the case.

I'm very pleased for you that you lived near a good state school. I don't understand why you can't comprehend thar not everyone is as lucky as you and that not all state schools are like the one you experienced.
State schools are a postcode lottery. Our postcode = crap state schools

The recent OFSTED report of an academy school in Sheffield today has hit the news where over 85% of parents stated they were unhappy with the school. And wouldn’t recommend it to others. Yet the school was still rated ‘good’. It’s appalling. How can that be?
There are a lot of state schools that are simply not fit for purpose. And parents desperately do what they can to find better schools.

Another discussion, but I’m not a fan of academies. I can’t see what they have added to the education system at all. Education has generally got worse under them, despite what we’re made to believe.

‘I don't understand why you can't comprehend thar not everyone is as lucky as you and that not all state schools are like the one you experienced.’

Bizarre that people who can drop £15k, £20k, £30k on private education PER year per Kid ALL seem to live in super dodgy areas with shite state schools… it’s almost as if you’d expect wealthy people to live in naice areas with better schools but apparently not…

"I think people in the private sector really underestimate how good some state schools are." Not really. Most of us are very clear some state schools are very good. If you're worried about equality, how about measures to bring the worst state schools up to the standard of the best? How about even enlisting the financial help of the 2 million top-quartile wealthy kids/families in state schools who could afford to pay towards it, but don't? Rather than saying it's 100% the job of people not using state schools to fix state schools?

"They are now in the top universities doing very competitive courses they are passionate about. They are also on track to be high earners paying lots of taxes so I don’t quite get @MisterChips argument that private school DC end up contributing more financially to society. Depends on the DC and their background, it’s not just schooling. "

Right, some families do really well at the taxpayers' expense of £80-120k per child. Great! And if they'd been at independent school, they might have done equally well without the £80-120k cost, thus contributing more to others. Other children do better as a result of independent school, in their parents' best judgment, and if so (being productive, creating value, earning money, paying taxes, creating jobs) it's an even bigger financial contribution to society.

Obviously you're right. Buying into a catchment area is, for most families, better value-for-money. But you're also wrong, in that the private school choice is in every case a much bigger contribution to society overall.

Secondary school catchment can cover very wide areas. I like where we live in a village and our local state school is ok. But I would prefer my children to go to a better school a few miles on, so the option is to move to access that school rather than pay for a private school that is now financially unviable for us.
We will have to pay a fair bit more for a comparable house in that catchment though.

Everything is a post code lottery whether education, NHS, public transport, employment etc. We seem incapable as a country of dealing with the inequalities.

I live in a lovely area but it is rural so cohort is taken from across the region which invludes some very deprived areas. NE schools have some of the worst outcomes in England. It is precisely because we live in the NE that we can afford private ie low mortgage etc. We have 1 child.

You really need to suspend your prejudices and accept that the picture is not as black and white as you would like to imagine.

In 2023, only 500 students in the entire country got 10 grade 9s at GCSE, so to suggest that’s it’s perfectly possible with a bit of hard work at a good state school is ridiculous.

. Of course I know not all state schools are like that

The vast majority of state schools are not like that. Yes, you were fortunate for your children to attend a school like that. Very few have that opportunity, which is precisely why so many people choose the private route.

Outside of London, average independent schools charge under half of that

I agree. So let's explore the reasons why and try to fix them.

Let's start by noticing it's not really about money - there's significantly more public money going to state schools in more deprived areas (pupil premium, FSM, free school buses, premium for lower attainment), yet the majority of top-performing popular state schools aren't found there. Yet some state schools in deprived areas achieve remarkable things while others fail abjectly, and it doesn't seem that the methods of the former are immediately rolled out across the latter (which is what any vaguely functioning organisation would do as a matter of instinct.)

That's one of the more insidious things about this education tax. It distracts from whatever is really needed to fix education. It will soak up inordinate time to legislate (if they really want, as they say, to "carve in" boarding, extracurricular, school meals and trips while still "carving out" those identical activities in the state sector and in universities/colleges). And it pretends all the problems in the state sector are (1) about money and (2) directly the fault and responsibility of the independent school families that already contribute disproportionately to the state sector without using it.