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.

To be fair it can't be both a money making business and a charity. That's two different things. If you mean that it is a charity that has a high income it is still not a business in the sense that it has an owner or shareholders who are raking in the profits.

Any profits from the charity income would need to be spent on the aim of the charity (educating kids, maybe in smaller classes or with better paid staff, or better facilities but still part of the aim of the charity - in other words the parents are getting what they paid for). Or the charity can keep money aside for a rainy day - in case expenditure suddenly went up or income went down.

Many independent schools are quite hand to mouth actually. One small economic shock and it is curtains. There are several smaller independent schools in my area that have closed in the last 10 years, and a couple that were a bit bigger that have be come state schools as they could not keep going on the income they had - their reserves had just been whittled away over the years - so now anyone can apply, the entrance exams have gone and there are no fees, just a standard state academy school.

What is a far bigger disgrace and affects far more kids is schooling by post code lottery. Loads of professional parents on two incomes buying houses near outstanding state schools. At least independent schools are honest - everyone knows money has changed hands. Everyone knows what is going on. We pretend the state system is equitable but it is not. If kids go to a good state school it is because their parents have 1) enough middle class know-how to judge the right school and how to get into it; and 2) enough money to buy a house in the right place. It is this kind of middle class clustering that makes average schools worse and good schools better. (Not because the middle classes are 'better' in any way but are more likely to have the time, money (for extra-curricula), energy and know-how to support their kids to most advantage. ).

Even worse than the post code lottery is the schools that select by religion, where you get the "pushy" parents pretending to be religious and who start attending church regularly for a couple of years just to get enough "points" to gain a place.

If we want a level playing field, then ALL forms of selection, whether by 11+, religion or independent need to be scrapped. We'd still have the post code lottery, but the effects wouldn't be so severe.

In my town, we have two huge religious schools which suck all the kids from pushy parent families. That leaves the remaining "comp" schools inevitably failing schools.

Oh here we go. The leafy comps arguments coming out. The truth is, in areas where there these mythical beasts reside, there is also plentiful private provision. I moved from SW London (peak leafy suburb) where the comps were ok (not excellent tho) and yet they were surrounded by grammars (Tiffin) and privates (LEH, Hampton Boys, St Catherine's, Surbiton etc etc)
I now live in an area of rural deprivation (albeit one tourists love) and there are evenly spaced average or below average comps and 20 miles hence in the county town a couple of (non selective) privates. Who surprise surprise still manage to squeak more Oxbridge candidates in, not bc their grades are better, but bc they have specialist help in house.
Rambled a bit there but what I'm saying is this postcode lottery argement is a red herring bc private schools exist in 'nice' areas in even greater profusion

Sorry not aimed at you @Badbadbunny! Your point about alternative provision contributing to a school's exam success is spot on

That's an average though, plenty of schools will be cheaper. One near me is £7k for primary, payable in monthly installments. Cost of housing isn't too high here either so the fees are definitely affordable for a household with two working adults and only one child.

@DdraigGoch that cost is way below average. Unless a specialist school like Montessori, I would question the benefit of a primary school that charged those fees.

That's the point though. Averages will cover a range of values, some cheaper, some more expensive. Not all private schools have state of the art swimming pools.

Of course if you added 20% to the cost, you'd price out middle earners and leave good education for only the very rich.

Indeed, some private schools are pretty cheap really, especially in the regions which don't typically attract the uber-rich/foreigners etc. Our plasterer's son goes to a local independent - he only got sent there (it's residential) because of getting into trouble with the gang at the local comp and heading for a life of crime. His parents can't really afford it, but they're making sacrifices to avoid their son getting deeper into problems with crime etc. They certainly couldn't afford 20% more as they're already not having holidays, running a crappy old car, etc to pay for it. Thankfully it's working and the son has turned his life around now he's not in the gang culture, and is now expecting to do well in his exams and aiming for Uni etc., so a "win win" for society as a whole to have one less "problem"/criminal to look after.

The nearest 4 private primary schools to us are per year:

£6390k
£7359k
£8142k
£8905k

That's for the first child and year 6.

Here:
£11,600
£8.700
Just under £7,000

I only looked at their websites, but the two cheaper ones look no different to the primary schools around here. I have heard of the more expensive one as it has a decent reputation.

I mean if you want to pay a lot of money for what you can get for free, it is up to you. I do not see any point though unless what you are getting is significantly better.

I agree they shouldn't have charitable status. I seriously doubt their actual charitable impact (a few scholarships and offering their pool out isn't exactly that) and I don't have a huge amount of sympathy for the poor private school parents who then won't be able to afford. With the exception of specific children and some specialist schools, private education is buying your children a privilege. That might be the way you choose to spend your money, but it's not a charity, and there is no reason the state should pay for it through lack of taxes.

However, given the educational background of the government, this will not change.

I think it depends what is important to you.

My children go to one of schools I put the fees of. The reasons are:
Small class sizes, more individualized curriculum, excellent and flexible wrap around and holiday provision (the biggest factor given our local state alternatives), lots of different learning opportunities, styles and clubs.

Our local state schools are very good but wrap around provision is non existent and class sizes are enormous (35 in the class DC was allocated to) and they only do 1 class trip/ additional learning opportunity a year. So we couldn't get it for free. But I believe some areas are better for all of that and we may have made a different decision in those circumstances.

Their coexistence have nothing to do with the crux of the argument - which is the buying of privilege.

It may not even be a ‘good state school’ per se that attracts wealthy parents. But that schools in wealthier area have more resources. Parents who can contribute money, time and connections.

I seriously doubt their actual charitable impact (a few scholarships and offering their pool out isn't exactly that)

I obviously can't speak for all independent schools, but the one I work at raises in excess of £40k annually for local charities. Our 6th formers run a number of activities over the year for older people, there are endless trips to old people's homes with our musicians and choir in tow, and we take part in lots of community activities over the year. Our facilities are used as a means by which to help local charities promote their causes and make money at special charity fairs 3 times a year. We have a number of students who pay no fees whatsoever and care is taken to ensure that these children are coming from homes that otherwise couldn't afford the fees.

You clearly know very little about what is going on in at least some independent schools.

@howtomoveforwards every state school my children have ever attended do similar. What you've described isn't special I'm afraid.

Except they don't raise as much cash because generally the parents don't have as deep pockets. But the same sentiments are there

DD's state school does as well...

Each form has it's chosen charity, for example. 49 forms, each usually raise at least £1,500. Plenty of pupils on FSM, so not coming from wealthy parents, it takes work.

every state school my children have ever attended do similar. What you've described isn't special I'm afraid

but it is charitable. [Confused] as are free places.

state schools aren’t charities so the comparison is apples with pears.

I find the assertion about “lack of taxes” curious. With a charity, any surplus has to be deployed towards the charitable aims. It isn’t the case that there are profits such as a private or public company might generate which are escaping tax through a break or loophole.

Some private schools in fact do operate as corporates (about 40% do) - they have to operate and pay tax in line with the rules applying to companies.

@howtomoveforwards why the eyes? So your private school raises money for local and further afield charities; so do state schools. I made the point because you made the assertion as if it was a unique thing that private schools do. It really isn't!

I’m saving the government £10k a year by sending my 2 DC to prep school. Their school offers a large number of bursaries and scholarships. Those would be the first thing to go if they lost their charitable status.

If we had to pay VAT on school fees, so be it, but that would be £5k that we stop donating to charity each year. Many more friends would leave the prep school to go to the infant school and make the catchment even tighter and deprive others of places.

It’s a shortsighted approach to make private schooling even more expensive. The fees will rise even steeper over the next year once they pass on more of their increased running costs. The increase for September is already 4.8%.

Then @KittyKittyKat your school would lose talent. They offer discounts on fees in order to attract talent.
Schools don't give places for nowt in return. They get something in return. And often quite cheaply - our local private school gives 15% off to top music students. And guess what they get great music results. Which in turn attracts more pupils. It's great!