AIBU that VAT on school fees makes no economical sense?

[fuckwitery]

Trying to research what it costs the state to put a child through school each year. Figures I've found show between £6 - £8k. We pay £13k per DC per year. That's prep, so will be more for senior school. So at the mo introducing VAT on these fees would add £2,600 to the state coffers. £4k for senior school.

We, and lots of others who just about manage to pay for private schooling, will be forced to take their children out. Therefore it's a NET loss for the state?

Or am I missing something.

For all those asking where the state school places are, we have places at our 'outstanding' primary. We live in an area where going private is very popular choice despite having great schools.

Agatha:

Talking I just did an quick sum on a 'calculate your income if self employed' website. We bring in £36,000 p/yr between us (DH business is £££ for parts). The £60k isn't profit (please god that it were)!!

So £12k fees = £24k
£9k mortgage = £15k
& it costs us pennies over £1k a month to eat/pay bills/ etc

Like I said I'm not looking for sympathy but we are not lucky. We have taken silly risks and made some shitty financial decisions & worked hard like everyone else here I imagine. I'd do it all differently if I could have a do-over.

This is turning into a thread hijack but the VAT on fees doesn't seem to make any financial sense?! No matter how I work it I can't make it make sense????

Sorry, but it does look like you're asking for sympathy. What makes your situation more deserving than anyone else? You've chosen to pay for your children's education because you could afford it, otherwise you wouldn't. Others don't get that choice because their circumstances don't allow them to even consider it in the first place.
Your decision will unfairly advantage your children in future. However intelligent your children may be, there will be other children from poorer homes who are more intelligent and more deserving but who will not get the same chances.
As a taxpayer, I want university places to be given to the most deserving students and not to those whose parent's could afford to give them a leg up. The system should be run purely on merit but it's being played by those with money and I have no qualms about taxing those who want to gain unfair advantage.

The sad thing is that, for people who 'struggle' to afford public schooling, those who can afford it hold your struggles in contempt.

Biggest problem is that residential schools for children with SNs would also have to have VAT on them

Not really, if you are buying something for a person with a disability and the thing you are buying is something they need then you don't pay VAT.

Eg buy a walking stick because you like it - pay vat, buy a walking stick because you need one - don't pay VAT.

I imagine some parents would also qualify to not pay VAT if the private school is the best one for a child due to medical needs.

If vat means middle class families will leave private schools en-masse, then fees should drop. Those schools wouldn't stand empty.

i live in a grammar school county.

30% of the most able children are hived off as they reach secondary.

For those children attending non-grammars, this is a far more grievous stab that ensures a lack of equality than the very few children nationally who attend private - if equality is the motivation, where's the outcry over this?

This is a stupid headline grabber. It would never generate some moneybags bonanza, but boy doesn't it feel good to stick it to the rich, hey?

I wish I knew where these private schools were that only cost £10k a year.

The medical exemptions specifically exclude education (VAT notice 701/57)

It's a fairly complex tax regime and needs proper consideration of how the successor system would work. And it needs to be done properly, not in pieces.

I am lest confident than PP that a promise of some reduction in the bill for 'best' school for medical reasons will offer much comfort for parents of those who need them. The state claims it can deal with everyone, but parents still choose to pay because what is on offer may not be of the quality they want.

Paying for what they perceive to be higher quality and closer fit for their child is the rationale of every parent who chooses a paid-for option.

Agatha Lots of private schools in the North West charge £10,000 pa. Examples include Bolton School and Merchant Taylors in Liverpool.

I should say they charge just over £10,000 actually. I've just checked and Manchester Grammar's fees are just under £12,000 which, if you are that way inclined, seems good value considering the facilities they have and the results they achieve.

scaevola
But as I've been saying again and again.

VAT can only go on school fees if there is a hard Brexit.
If there is a hard Brexit all VAT rules are up for grabs.
And if there is a hard Brexit, school fes will be the least of most rich peoples' worries.

My child was actively prevented from doing the A levels she wanted at her state school. So she went to a private school. It was the only one she could reasonably get to in a morning without a car.

It's not true that it's only because we had enough money we could make choices, families with cars can also choose the school we couldn't get to - and some did - for similar reasons.

Am I angry that we had to pay to get the same chances as what was afforded to others? No not at all. It's circumstance. I'm just glad she was able to do the course she wanted at uni.

There are some areas which would cope fine with the extra numbers needing places in state schools but the pp who mentioned areas like edinburgh having big problems is entirely correct.

The school dd attends - state btw - is currently over capacity. It's been extended once and is being extended again next summer but the site is very small - ie no grass playground at all- and the building listed so expansion options are limited. There's a huge private school on the same street which takes a lot of children from within the catchment at present. Even a small drop in that number would cause chaos for our school and the admission rules mean you couldn't just send the kids to a school further away with spaces. Catchment boundary revision could be an option, except all of the adjacent schools are in the same position, as are their adjacent schools in the majority of cases.

I know that's not the case everywhere but "charge vat and spend it on lunches" is a very simplistic approach which ignores the massive costs that implementation could have in some areas. It's relatively easy if the schools have spaces but if they don't then some areas will be in major trouble. Is there a plan to fund these extra extensions and new schools that will be needed? I doubt it

We already have the free lunches for all here too and I don't view it as a priority worthy of the issues it will cause. I'd rather the free school meal criteria were extended so it went to those who need them.

Agatha, loads of them. My brother pays £10k (secondary) (Yorkshire) whereas my sister and I pay about £16k (SE/London). I am from the NE originally and schools there charge £10k - £12k.

Spending it on free school lunches is ridiculous! We as a family don't need it. Won't value it.
No idea what the rationale is for it, but it's not logical.

I had free school meals as a child at times, and didn't feel singled out so I don't see the problem.

VAT can be replaced whatever sort of Brexit we have.

And, as I have been saying, a future UK sales tax is bound to happen (the government will not wish to forego the revenue) and it can then cover whatever the UK government wants it to. It is however a fairly complex tax code, and I think it is undesirable to rush (because changing one part may impact on another, and a whole revamp might be better, especially if people want to replace it with a 'luxury' tax.

Or of course it could be totally replaced from scratch, but again I think it might take some time.

Much more likely that a Great Repeal will roll the system as it currently exists forward into the new era, and then it can be changed whenever we are ready.

Actually the regional issues are quite interesting. Fees much less in areas where wages are less (exactly like house prices for that matter). Also results worse outside the SE which as always seemed weird to me as surely IQ is evenly spread and finally so very many people in the SE (my children's private school is increasing another 100 places to to massive demand - they have never had as many applicants per place - we are in outer London and our London borough has never had as many people living in it is in history, more beds in sheds sadly too than any other areas and loads of immigrants it is a privilege to live among who work so hard and ensure in most schools private and state that hard work ethos rubs off on the often but not always lazier local born children).

scaevola
If there is a "soft" brexit and England stays in the single market, VAT law will hardly change at all.

I'm not convinced that free meals need to be provided to all school pupils.

(If they want to give to parents including the comparatively affluent, then I think restoring the universality of child benefit would be both simpler and cheaper)

But if provision of food, free at point of consumption, in schools really is a priority in schools policy, then whether this - as thread of title asks - could make economic sense, by considering what level of tax would not cause outflux to state schools.

People are able to make different choices in schooling not just because of money.

Family living nearby - can help with choice - may be able to do pick up
Not working shifts - may be able to take child to a further away school
Even if you were on benefits you have opportunities and choices I don't have. (Attending sports day as a given etc)

I would make no predictions on what a final Brexit deal would look like and the role of harmonised taxes in that.

As you say it 'will hardly change at all' - which means that the possibility of change emerges.

I think it is a net loss for the state to raise taxes and then fritter it away.

You have to critique the policy in the round. Is it fair, would it raise more and the flip side, what is it to be spent on.

Raising money and asking people to give extra, is only reasonable if the end use is reasonable.

I will reiterate the point that if parents are spending an extra 20% on vat for school fees they will be spending that 20% less on other vat chargeable things so therefore there is no net gain for the state. So it's pointless.

Muggins - a huge pressure is taken off the NHS by people who choose to live healthy life styles, so will hardly use it in their life time compared to an obese alcoholic smoker for example. Does that mean people who don't use the NHS should get a rebate? If you choose to pay for private education when there are other options you cannot expect a rebate.

If Labour are advocating this then they must be advocating for hard brexit.

The two are entirely entwined.

So do supporters want a hard brexit then?