Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Should Private School fee payers get a tax rebate

400 replies

Pamplemousecat · 13/09/2019 12:49

Just following on from another thread. If a child isn’t in the state system should the parents still have to pay the proportion of tax that is taken for education?

OP posts:
JacquesHammer · 14/09/2019 12:25

Someone is missing a trick with “school insurance”.

Pay premiums monthly to ensure a payout if you don’t get any of your school preferences.

Wink
PettyContractor · 14/09/2019 12:29

The fact is, those who believe they "don’t burden the state system" do precisely that by creaming off many of the better teacher staff who were trained by the state and paid by the state whilst gaining the knowledge, skills and experience that private schools then use as their unique selling point.

Now that slavery is illegal, the "knowledge, skills and experience" of individuals, i.e. their human capital, belongs entirely to them, and they are fully entitled to sell it to the highest bidder. Whether we are talking about education or health, the state does not have a right to that at a below-market price. If the state wants to be repaid for training up people, it can (a) get the individual to take out repayable loans for their education or (b) get individuals to agree to work for somewhat below market salaries, for a while, where the value of the training means they are not actually losing out.

ScreamingLadySutch · 14/09/2019 12:43

Yes private schools SHOULD get a tax rebate.

They are taking the cost of education off the state. They are also creating future higher rate taxpayers. That is a lot of value add to a nation.

ScreamingValenta · 14/09/2019 12:56

They are also creating future higher rate taxpayers

No guarantee of that! I know several privately educated people who, in their 40s, have never come anywhere near the higher rate tax bracket either because they work in generally low-paying jobs (retail, teaching), work part-time or are SAHP.

wonkylegs · 14/09/2019 13:03

Nope as others say that's a slippery slope that only leads to a less civilised society
The education of our nations future should be a collective responsibility.
If you don't want to utilise that resource then fine that's your choice but you don't get to opt out of societal responsibility if you want to take up the other less tangible benefits (educated population as a whole)
Don't want to pay those taxes then go and live in a society that doesn't have them but probably doesn't have the wider benefits either.

ScreamingLadySutch · 14/09/2019 13:07

arents and pupils everywhere have much to fear from Labour’s proposals to impose punitive taxes on independent education.

Whilst it might at first seem tempting (they can afford it, right?) this is a dangerous policy based on myths and dodgy maths. It will effectively destroy independent education and drive up costs and class sizes in state schools.

First, let’s bust those convenient myths. Most independent schools are not the couple of famous schools everyone thinks of, but small schools, with no spare income. Some are special needs schools or give places to children in care. Any spare cash goes straight back into education, including free or discounted places for lower income families and supporting local state schools; that’s why they are charities. A third of pupils get discounted fees and parents choose to spend their money that way rather than on tutoring their children or buying houses near good state schools. All this saves the taxpayer over £3.5 billion a year.

This is important, because the real losers from such policies will be parents from all walks of life who choose all types of education. For those who choose to pay, John McDonnell’s policy is a fundamental attack on their freedom of choice – a right enshrined in the UN Declaration of Human Rights. Those least able to pay will be driven into the state system, unable to afford the inevitable rise in fees necessary to pay the extra taxes.

So what of parents with children in state schools, faced with an influx of children into their local schools? Class sizes and costs will go up, as schools battle to find the money to educate even more pupils. Independent research from Baines Cutler shows that nearly 135,000 pupils would be pushed into state schools over five years, at a total cost of £1.35billion. At the end of the first five years, the taxpayer would be over £416million worse off, taking extra tax revenue into account.

Everyone loses.

And reports suggest there is something even more dangerous at play. Labour’s tax grab could well be part of a plan to kill off independent schools and bring all schools under state control – death by a thousand cuts. If so, we face a world in which parental choice is eradicated, costs may well cripple the state sector, property and assets are seized by the state and charity and employment law is torn up.

The saddest thing about all this is that it genuinely wouldn’t improve education for all pupils, and it wouldn’t improve social mobility. It is commonly accepted that middle class families would continue to colonise the best state schools, tutoring their children and buying homes by the most sought after schools.

Ultimately, we all want the same thing – to improve life chances for all young people. Labour activists are ignoring the fact that independent schools play a hidden but critical part in that; for example, do they really want to destroy the independent school-sponsored London Academies of Excellence, which this year got more disadvantaged pupils into top universities from inner London boroughs than ever before? A third of the pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds at Oxford university come through our schools this year, and we stand ready to do more.

Ultimately, we need a new conversation, about all types of schools working together to improve education. Blaming a few independent schools for being too good will not solve that dilemma.

Mike Buchanan is the Executive Director of the Headmasters' and Headmistresses' Conference (HMC)

ScreamingLadySutch · 14/09/2019 13:07

(Article written by M Buchanan, hope that is clear)

espress0s · 14/09/2019 13:51

Interesting article Screaming, and yes, I suspect that if all independent schools were abolished tomorrow, standards in state schools would continue exactly as they do now - ie a postcode lottery.

courderoy · 14/09/2019 14:37

“le, do they really want to destroy the independent school-sponsored London Academies of Excellence, which this year got more disadvantaged pupils into top universities from inner London boroughs than ever before? A third of the pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds at Oxford university come through our schools this year, and we stand ready to do more.”

I would like disadvantaged kids to be able to get into Oxford through a state school system that is accessible to all.

BertrandRussell · 14/09/2019 14:43

“And reports suggest there is something even more dangerous at play.”

Which reports are these?

espress0s · 14/09/2019 17:10

Bertrand - from your comments on MN, I imagine you living in a safe, reasonable area, somewhere like the Home Counties (apologies if I’ve got the wrong impression here)!

Could I ask you though - if you lived in a city, where your local state school options were truly dire, yet you were equally surrounded by some of the top independents in the country and you had a child who had a chance of passing the entrance examsfor the independents, what would you have done? Gone with the failing state school? Home schooled at great cost? Become an avid attendee at your local Catholic Church? Or spent the equivalent of the school fees on moving into a better catchment area?

What if you had a dyslexic child or one with other SN and there was a smaller, more specialist independent school option in your area that you knew would benefit them? Would you still put them in the problematic comp and take your chances?

Or what if they’re was a free grammar school and you thought your child might have a chance of getting in - wouid you refuse to let them sit the 11 plus out of principle?

I’m just saying that the decisions we make are driven by the particular education system in our local areas. All things are not equal across the country - as I say, it’s a postcode lottery and we all know it. In a different area, I know we would have made different choices for our DC. Do you think you might have?

MutedUser · 14/09/2019 17:12

@ScreamingLadySutch so you believe in tax cuts for people with no children at all?

pikapikachu · 14/09/2019 17:29

No. Private medical insurance people shouldn't get a rebate either.

It's a slippery slope - I've not an an ambulance/police/fire brigade visit me so I should get a rebate etc

Pollywollydolly · 14/09/2019 17:51

You don't pay tax for your children to be educated, you pay tax for the current generation of children to be educated so that they can become the nurses, teachers, street sweepers etc of the future and keep the country going.

AsTheWorldTurns · 14/09/2019 19:50

It's a slippery slope - I've not an an ambulance/police/fire brigade visit me so I should get a rebate etc

That's a poor analogy, you can't predict whether you'll need the ambulance/fire/police so it's much closer to an insurance policy than a fee-paying arrangement.

A better analogy is a rebate for services not used e.g. living off grid/not using rubbish collection.

BasiliskStare · 14/09/2019 19:56

Ds went to a private school - no way should we have had a rebate. I would also say that those in state schools do not just become the street sweepers etc. Depends on child and school and much else. I think that was a somewhat unkind post

horse4course · 14/09/2019 20:43

No and they shouldn't have charitable status either.

BertrandRussell · 14/09/2019 21:52

“you pay tax for the current generation of children to be educated so that they can become the nurses, teachers, street sweepers etc of the future and keep the country going.”

Fuck me- that’s a hideous post on so many levels!

Userzzzzz · 14/09/2019 22:00

Why is that hideous? My reading of it is that the poster is saying everyone pays tax towards the education system in part because it contributes to the education of public servants that contribute to society more broadly.

TrainspottingWelsh · 14/09/2019 22:07

My reading is that we need the state system to educate the skivvies to do all the jobs below the privately educated. Whom of course will be doing superior, higher rate tax paying things.

So yes, hideous.

BertrandRussell · 14/09/2019 22:20

“My reading of it is that the poster is saying everyone pays tax towards the education system in part because it contributes to the education of public servants that contribute to society more broadly.”

Not actually sure that helps!

Notthetoothfairy · 14/09/2019 22:36

I see where you’re coming from but, if the only ones who paid for the state schools were the ones using them, they would then effectively be fee paying schools.

Toomanyradishes · 14/09/2019 23:09

I cant have children, im not paying tax to pay for education to pay for my non existent children, im paying for the future doctor who will treat me when im older, the cashier in the supermarket, the nurses and the police officers. Education pays is neede for nearly everyones fuction in society that we all benefit from, sure id love a tax rebate because i can have children but it would be a ludicrous systen that would cost a fortune to administrate and wouldnt really benefit people in the long term

longwayoff · 15/09/2019 07:20

National lottery anyone? Loadsa money folks, buy now and be rich beyond your dreams. Buy now so charities can benefit from our largesse. Charities like Eton School, granted the money for a new swimming pool.

ittakes2 · 15/09/2019 07:26

I think education is both so integral for individuals but also the nation as a whole - we should all pay for it to make sure it happens.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread