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?

"private education would be exempt with or without charitable status, as I understand it."

It wouldn't, its the charitable status which allows private schools to be exempt, other educational activities are more accessible via the lack of VAT, it makes little to no difference to private education.

BTW only one third of students are on reduced fees.

More than 50 % of these pay more than half.

Regardless of whether that is true or not it isn't really relevant as it doesn't change my point, made umpteen times, that by removing charitable status and removing all means tested bursaries it increases the equality gap, makes private schools more elite because the few people that for actually benefit from financial assistance no longer will.

It seems strange for someone that claims to want to eliminate elite privilege and equality gap to campaign for something that will increase it.

@WeBuiltThisBuffetOnSausageRoll
I agree with you and my children go to state school. We couldn't afford to send them and we have a combined income well into 6 figures.

An abolition of the private sector would be better or a redistribution of inheritance so everyone gets a chance.

Or are you happy for the wealthy to use private schools, it's just the uppity social climbers that have ideas above their station that should be prevented access?

"removing all means tested bursaries it increases the equality gap, makes private schools more elite because the few people that for actually benefit from financial assistance no longer will. "

Bullshit.

Only 1 percent of students get a full free ride.

Only 1 third of students are on reduced fees, and over half of these pay more than half the fee.

The average recieved bursary is about 5k, whilst the average fee is £18k.

Many of the bursaries are awarded to siblings of students already at the school

I've said over and over and over that more children should benefit from them. So campaign for that! Or campaign for getting rid of private schools entirely!

Why campaign for chucking out the children that currently benefit from that assistance?

While allowing the wealthiest to continue using them

People pay private school fees for all the other “stuff
That's not my experience. The main motivation is the belief that their kids will achieve better grades in private. The other 'stuff' is a bonus. Most other 'stuff' is available outside of school at a fraction of the price.

Not all private schools are set up with charitable status, some schools are giving it up as the exemption vs. all the measurement against criteria to retain is too onerous. I think I read that the number of private schools with charitable status has fallen to 75%. In Scotland they are removing charitable status from all private schools in 2020. This will save the Scottish government approx GBP 5 million. There are around 30,000 private school pupils in Scotland so the amount of the tax break per child is less than £200 per year.

It is anticipated that this marginal increase in fees plus other rising costs will force enough private school pupils out of private education in Scotland that it will cost the government £10 million to educate these additional pupils in the state system.

So overall the Scottish government from 2020 will have to find more money.

The introduction of VAT would have a much more catastrophic impact.

A private school local to where I lived closed last year. If every single one of those pupils had returned to state education it would have cost the local authority £2.5 million pa to educate them, this is a local authority that is desperately trying to save costs.

As previous posters have stated adding vat will make private schools even more elitist not less so and will squeeze council budgets even more so state educated children get even less.

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?

Maybe in NZ private school fees are similar to the amount state schools receive?

The 'assisted places' scheme was scrapped because the majority of children gaining places were already in a private school.

"I think that people who buy health insurance/choose private schools should be given a tax break on the cost"

I think everytime the private sector takes on a nurse or teacher or other professional who has been trained by the taxpayer then the private institution should have to pay a fee that can be allocated to the NHS or education.

And noone, repeat no one, doesn't ever use the or need the NHS. Private hospitals do not have accident and emergency departments. These are expensive and take money from other parts on the NHS.

Amendment to my post - not removing charitable status but removing the ability of Scottish schools with charitable status to benefit from the associated tax relief on business rates.

Oh the business rates thing drives me mad.

Private schoools are exempt.

State schools are not.,

Private schools should be paying that too.

I am pretty sure the state schools can claim back business rates

And it is very unlikely that many people will be so affected by VAT that they will withdraw their children. They have to budget for unpredictable fee increases after all.

They may get some relief if they are an academy but private schools in Camden alone avoid business rates of £2.5m due to charitable status.

I agree Betrand, the fees at private schools have had above inflation increases for years but parents still send them.

The "think of the poor children" cry is a rubbish argument too.

It is extraordinary that anyone thinks it’s OK for private schools to have charitable status. Extraordinary.

You can argue that state school business rates are circular it gets paid to the government and reallocated. If state schools received relief then their budgets would probably just be cut as this circular movement of money is just removed.

The money that is paid by private schools (even with business rates relief) is new money and actually adds to the government tax take and is a benefit.

Boris you are not actually responding to the points being made to you. I don't see how a sensible discussion can be had in these circumstances.

If you think children won't be forced out with the addition of VAT and removal of charitable status then you are wrong, I get that you don't care if the less wealthy are forced out but don't act like a fucking social justice warrior when you're perfectly happy for the wealthiest to maintain their privilege.

You still haven't answered why you're happy for the richest to use private schools but not those that require financial Assistance. And you won't.

Small point but not all private schools have charitable status.

Yes there are reasons why good private schools tend to do significantly better than state schools, which is why parents pay to use them.

My DC currently go to a private school. One where children can start in the school nursery at 3 yrs old and then continue through until they’ve finished their exams.
It usually has excellent GCSE results, far better than those of most of the nearby state secondaries.

But. Our private school has a policy of weeding out pupils who they believe aren’t capable of getting good GCSEs.
You’re a parent with a child who struggles academically, or a child with SEN who needs extra support to access the curriculum, and you’ll almost certainly be asked to remove your child before they start the secondary school. Once you get past the infant school part, new pupils are assessed for their academic potential before being offered a place, which again, is intended to make sure that only pupils capable of getting excellent GCSEs get offered a place.

So, while yes, our private school does get significantly better exam results than the local state secondaries, it’s not comparing like with like, because the state secondaries don’t get away with having policies of removing pupils who aren’t academic high fliers.

Most do though,

If it's not selective then clearly it's doing really well if it's gcses are significantly better than state.

its still not comparable because of the resource difference.

The vast majority of the top performing private schools are selective though.