To be annoyed at The Guardian largely because it is such a dump solution - private schools

[Dlwch276]

So as part of their recent excessive coverage of a book which attacked the private school system (written by someone who went to private school) The Guardian has suggested adding VAT to school fees.

Asides raising more money via tax i don't see how this would make the system fairer? From what I've seen the logic is that parents who are motivated to pay £20k+ on fees would force state schools to improve if their children attended them. Mumsnet is full of posters at their wits ends trying to affect change at their local state schools. No-one that I've met at our small private is wringing their hands that the local state schools are terrible and that this gives their children extra advantage.

Surely to improve educational equality either we all need to pay more tax to change class sizes or poorer students need better access to private education. In NZ private schools receive the same student allowance as state schools - wouldn't this be a better solution for students not able to access private education? For everyone to sit the entrance exam and then private schools to have to accept the student allowance as fees for those who can't afford it?

Across Europe, private schools have charitable status or an equivalent.

I privately educate my DC these days. I started them off in the state system, but I just found that it was completely incompatible with working FT. Absolutely impossible to deal with logistics.

I will continue to privately educate my DC regardless of whether or not VAT is added to their fees. I’ll simply cut back on some of our discretionary spending. We’ll eat out less and buy fewer goods/services in the local area. Probably the VAT I was paying on those goods/services (the ones I’ll no longer be buying) will balance out with the VAT I’ll end up paying on school fees. The private schools will survive. Will the local businesses? There are 5 private secondary schools in my town. If all the parents using those schools simultaneously tighten their belts, then I’d expect the local economy to take quite a hit.

BTW - I think it’s a little disingenuous to refer to the current (EU mandated) lack of VAT on school fees as a “tax break.” After all, I’ve already paid 45% tax (plus 2% NI) on the income I use to pay the fees with. It’s not like I’m using untaxed income to pay the school fees.

Teachers, good ones, enjoy the high wire act of teaching young people who may be cleverer than they are, and in the very best schools, that's what is expected.

I don't think of schools as charities, but I believe the existence of excellence to be a public good.

@zzzz, I don't think I said so. I said the requirement to keep ahead of the students' knowledge and meant that keeping them stretched was intellectually challenging, especially at 6th form level.

Hainault, I'm sure the local economy would survive without your largesse. But good of you to be concerned about the plebs service providers.l which obviously us lesser beings never give a thought to. The upper classes are well known for this. Also, if you pay 45% on all of your income you need a better accountant.

"but why private school fees are exempt from VAT?"

I wonder how many people who think private school fees should incur VAT would be outraged if university fees attracted VAT?

But why should a service for a child be taxed more than a service for an adult?

There is no need to be so rude Handay

I pay tax on my income via PAYE (so no accountant needed - my tax situation is perfectly straightforward). I obviously don’t pay 45% on all my income, but I think it’s OK to assume that I pay the school fees out of the money left over once more immediate needs like food/housing/bills have been taken care of. As such, this money has all been taxed at 40 or 45%. I don’t object to paying tax at this level BTW. I understand that tax is necessary.

I’m not remotely upper class, and I don’t have a privileged background. I grew up in a northern pit village during the Thatcher years (I was 8/9 during the miners strike).

"Universities should not be charging fees at all"

Agree with you 100% on that!

Why should Universities not charge fees! It is not a right to be educated for free past 18 years of age.

There are some students that should not be charged fees notably those in receipt of Disabled Students Allowance, but why should able body students get free education past 18 .

So how do universities get funded? Surely a university education is an example of privilege? You could go down the Scottish route but that results in a cap on places which means that even top grades won’t guarantee a place! Only one in four Scottish teenagers go straight to university vs. one in three English teenagers. The difference will not all be driven by the cap but the reality is that there is a need to limit numbers because of budget constraints.

"Why should Universities not charge fees! It is not a right to be educated for free past 18 years of age. "

There's no absolute right or wrong in these decisions - it's simply a decision that we need to make as a society as to which services we chose to pay for collectively out of taxation and which services we chose to require people to pay for themselves.

My personal belief is that it is better for all of us in society if education is paid for centrally to the highest level. I believe this enables us as a society to grow to a better level than we would do otherwise.

Other's may feel differently and as taxation is paid collectively its a decision worth debating to reach a common consensus.

My view only - other's may take a different one :-)

I haven’t read the thread. Where I live all the secondary schools are full or due to be full in next few years.
The private schools have room. I think more should be done to get them full (more bursary’s/support) rather than those private students trying to get places into local full schools. If they closed it would be a disaster.

How about reintroducing the Assisted Places Scheme...

" We so valued our top young minds that we were willing to pay them to spend time studying."

We valued the top ones, yes, but the numbers going to uni have vastly increased, so you now have more people going than in the past.

It doesn't really make sense to kick 2/3 of uni students out of uni and return to the 60s with maintenance grants & free fees.

yes, the 60s:

1st degrees awarded:

1960 - 22,426
1970 - 51,189
1980 - 68,150
1990 - 77,163
2000 - 243,246
2010 - 330,720

as far as the 'early 90s', in terms of HE participation there really wasn't a big change from the late 60s.

Obviously we are not going to go back to the 60s, and paying students to go to uni would be idiotic in the extreme. (Note that most unis have bursaries for students on low incomes - it might be a good idea to increase fees further in order to extend this.)

yes but there are 5x more students now.