Private Schools being able to hold charitable status

[IdiotCreatures]

I went and looked at a building associated with a local independent school yesterday, as it's always piqued my curiosity.
The school is run by the Woodard Corporation. I looked at their books on company house yesterday.
The amount of money moving through them is ridiculous. If people want to pay for a private education, then surely the institutions should be taxed.
Apart from a small number of scholarships, the average person is not benefiting from these institutions.
In the case of Eton, as pointed out on another thread, these schools are probably leading to damage to society and definitely do not promote the idea of equality.

of course they shouldn’t hold charitable status iits shocking that they do

I think this is based on a misunderstanding. Charity status means that they do not pay corporation tax. They cannot distribute profits to owners, so ultimately they will have to spend all their money. If their profits were taxable, they could just find a way to spend money in the same tax year it came in, and get the same result, of paying no corporation tax. In other words, for an organisation that is not trying to make a profit to benefit owners, and would rather further their own aims than give money to HMRC, all charity status does is give them some extra flexibility around how they spend.

I once worked alongside a management consultancy that charged out its workers at thousands per day. It was legally a charity, which one of the consultants did look embarrassed about when he mentioned it. But I saw nothing wrong with that, as all it meant was that all the money they took in would go out in salaries, which money would be taxed at a higher rate than it would have been if passed to owners as profits.

What about those parents who make lots of sacrifices to afford school fees?

Unsure of your definition of sacrifice @BiFoldChampion. Wouldn't 'choices' be a better word?

@WinterDeWinter once again, you have missed the point.
We have an obligation to those ‘left behind’. By providing what they need.
Not by tearing down others.
Your argument throughout this thread was that private schools should be closed. But the bigger picture is that some people will always be more privileged. Not just with money, as I pointed out more involved parents etc.

Why so much effort in cutting them down? Why not just provide more for state schools, SEN provision etc?

Its not a zero sum game. Having private schools doesn’t take away from state schools, if the latter were properly funded in the first place

I’m well aware of what it means. Are you aware Getoff of how much wealth some of these
schools are.

Most parents make sacrifices for their children I don’t know any who don’t. Being able to choose to send your child/children to private school you are in a privileged position. That privilege should not come on top of other privileges of the school

So basically, removing charity status would have no financial consequences on the school at all, but it would make some people feel better about themselves for having scored points against those who are deemed to be privileged.

@Getoff A company have to be undertaking activities that meet charitable benefits. These were tightened a few years ago around concerns that it was being used by some as a tax loophole. But schools are still covered if they do additional things to prove their charitable status.

The arrogance and pomposity of this. Actually very funny

@HRTQueen but it really is a very few of "these schools" that have huge cash reserves. As I have repeatedly said, the vast majority are actually very tightly run, narrow margins and often, whilst the buildings might look lovely as they are older, not flat roofed 60s/70s built comps, the actual infrastructure, especially tech is often way behind. But parents still want their kids to go there for all the reasons I have outlined preciously. I 100% agree we should be focusing on how to level up state schools but anyone that thinks closing private schools would achieve that is deluded.

I have not mentioned closing private schools many are hugely wealthy

i have said they absolutely should not have charitable status. Schools shall have to suck up the extra costs and some will have to be passed on to families they are businesses this happens with business

state schools have had to tighten their belts too

its a privileged position to be in a child at private school there is no need for extras privileges

I don't think you have any idea of the actual financial status of the vast majority of private schools or the majority of parents that send their kids there. Again, how is making life tougher for them going to help the state sector? It simply won't so all you're doing is making life worse for more kids. Many schools would close if the extra 20% had to be passed on to parents. Those kids then enter the state sector and swell numbers further.

DS is at private school and they do have a lot of bursaries and scholarships as well as doing a lot of community work. I think their charitable status is justified.

Apart from a small number of scholarships, the average person is not benefiting from these institutions

I am not sure this is much of an argument. I don't benefit from a whole host of charities that are out there because my personal circumstances are such that I don't need their services or have no interest in whatever it is they are campaigning for. A charity supporting homeless people in London is of no use to me whatsoever, even if homeless, if I am living in Birmingham. But I assume you wouldn't argue the London charity shouldn't exist just because you can't use it's services.

Just because we can't all benefit doesn't mean there aren't people who will benefit.

And they get something in return for those scholarships: talent. They are buying talent from other schools.
Sports scholarships attract athletes; music scholarships attract musicians. And not all are n financial need either by any means

Oh yes and don’t we hear all about the charity work 🙄

I expect this from ds school I expect state schools to add to the community too which they do

A parent that can afford to send their child to a private school is in a privileged position

its highly insulting to claim this isn’t the case it’s a choice beyond the vast population means

this is the reason why so many children at private school are so entitled this is what they are fed that they are special, there parents put everything above their education that is why they are there to admit to such privilege seems to be taboo an unspoken subject that very few will acknowledge

Clap trap. Very few private schools are elitist. There's often an intake when the child is a teenager that the state are unable to help SEN, bullying dyslexia etc. Parents give up a lot financially to help a struggling child,

Yes, I completely agree @justasking111
The private school I teach in has a high number of students from low income backgrounds and few are very rich. As I’ve said on another thread, our average student’s household income is £60k which, yes, is much more than some people live on but a £30k salary per parent is hardly millionaire territory. I just read an essay written by a student about growing up in a tiny, inner-city terraced house where she shares her room, but she loves it. The majority of our parents have ‘normal’ jobs like teacher, taxi driver, administrator, etc. Many can’t afford school trips or brand new uniforms. Our students know exactly how lucky they are to attend our school and lots are only there because of scholarships.

so you are talking about children on scholarships ....

what’s the minimum for a child to attend a secondary private school £10k

even £5k a year is way above the vast majority of people can afford

Agree with PP - my DSs school exists to educate, never much surplus, plenty of bursaries and just recently allowing free attendance by 6 Ukrainian refugees staying with school families

Ours is £12k a year, the least expensive in the county. Some are on scholarships but the vast majority come from normal families with normal jobs. As I said, £60k average household income. I worked several years in the state sector and see no more sense of entitlement in independent schools. I myself only went to private school because my grandma had a sizeable war widow’s and wartime nurse’s pension and only one grandchild. My parents couldn’t have afforded it.

£12k is way above the vast majority can afford

let’s not pretend it’s not

even half that is not affordable for the majority

this is the reason why so many children at private school are so entitled

and how many private school children have you spent enough time with to know that so many of them are so entitled?

I have worked in both the state and independent sector. Some of the most entitled children I have come across are those living in considerable poverty on a particularly notorious estate. We’re all different. sweeping statements without any real qualification are unhelpful.

I don’t disagree with you on that. I’m saying that the majority of students at the private schools I’ve worked at aren’t at all as you described them.

I’ve come across my fair share ....

are we also going to pretend that these children are just more hard working,
parents care more, that having tutors as well as smaller classes and less disruption doesn’t make a difference

state schools are having budgets cut so why shouldn’t that apply to private schools or once again should these children have privilege upon privilege