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.

@faffadoodledo that’s not how it works for the bursaries, as it’s means tested and non-selective. The scholarships are 10% off, so not particularly meaningful, and are all artistic or sport. Neither of which impact grades.

They're not letting exam no hopers one for bursaries though are they?

It's not 'charitable ' to do what almost every (state) school does

Exactly, the 'bursaries' and scholarships are for children who will, in effect, advertise their school.

It's not decided on the child's need (charitable), but what benefits the school

In case anyone is interested in this bursary scheme: intouniversity.org/support-us/independent-schools/
We know a lovely DC who benefitted from it, DC wasn't highly academic, musical or sporty, but a thoroughly nice DC who impressed the school.
There are quite a few independent schools (as mentioned up thread) who are not charities. They do not offer any bursaries or scholarships.
A friend's local state primary in North London raises 10k through their PTA's summer fete every year for their school and possibly charity. But an average four bed terrace in that area is £1.5m, the vast majority of parents pay for tutors several times a week from about Year 3, (some earlier) and spend a small fortunate at the local performing arts school. At least 30% try for independent secondary and at least another 25% would if their mortgages were not so big.

So education shouldn’t qualify as a charitable purpose? Hard to think of what should, if that’s the case! What about health charities? Presumably no need for them either, given we have the NHS

I think to qualify for charity status they should have to give a minimum number of scholarships to children from families who would not be able to afford private school. Also, they should contribute to the wider community.

Education if it adds to state provision, e.g. schools that specialise in a particular SEN.

If to avoid the hoi polloi, without doing anything extra than the typical state school does for charity? No.

theconversation.com/the-public-cost-of-private-schools-rising-fees-and-luxury-facilities-raise-questions-about-charitable-status-182060

If they were charged taxes, this could add 6% to state school funding. Honestly, some of their 'charitable activities' are laughable. And yet they're able to build state-of-the-art complexes with all their left over dosh.

You are perfectly entitled to consider them poor value for money. It's a free country. Others may disagree for all sorts of reasons, whether that's because they like the extra-curricular activities, because they want to get their child away from a bad crowd, because the local state school is dysfunctional or whatever. That's their right too, it's a free country.

There are three private schools I can think of local to me, one of which doesn't offer primary. Their day fees range from:

£7,695 (YR) to £11,655 (Y13)

£9,600 (YR) to £16,200 (Y13)
£12,705 (Y5) to £20,130 (Y13)

By the way, I hope that none of those of you proposing to add VAT to school fees are ardent remainers/rejoiners, because EU law prohibits it.

Many state schools have charitable status too. So all seems fair to me there.

So the state isn’t required to cater to SEN?
that’s simply not true is it

I suspect if they were denied charitable status they would incorporate at CICs which can run on a not for profit basis - without being subject to the governance, scrutiny and regulation which charities are, and without being subject to the public benefit test.
it’s not clear to me how that would improve any of the problems the antis claim to care about, I’m afraid

"So the state isn’t required to cater to SEN?
that’s simply not true is it"

All children of compulsory school age are entitled to a full time suitable education. LA must make sure this happens but there is no obligation for the state sector to provide it.

so the state is required to make provision for children with SEN then. SEN is not an add on to what the state is obliged to provide, as the PP implied.

The state do have to provide a suitable education for children with SEN. But what that suitable education is may not be the same as a parent's view of what a suitable education looks like.

That is a separate issue. What was being implied by the PP was that a distinction could be drawn, when deciding what should have charitable status, between what the state provides and what it does not. That is factually wrong. SEN education is absolutely core to state provision, not an add on.
I would be very wary of creating any approach which implied that SEN provision is non core or a matter for the charitable sector.

www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/62099261

I think at least a quarter of my DCs’ prep school will end up leaving to go to the local primary school if VAT is added to fees. A large percentage of the attendees are “well off” rather than “wealthy”.

That will just make the state school catchment tighter. We’ve got 2 private schools within 5 mins of each other. Adding 400 odd kids back into the state system just means they’ll need to greatly expand the local primary school facilities and hire more teachers. I’m sure the cost to the government of providing the additional education will then outweigh the VAT receipt 🤷🏼‍♀️

I hope they run the actual numbers first!!

I hope they run the actual numbers first!!

As usual, they won't consider the entirely foreseeable "unforeseeable" consequences.

Yes, a proportion of parents will take their kids out of private and put them in state schools instead (at a cost to the taxpayer).

Some foreign parents will take their kids out of the UK and educate them in another country (at a cost to the UK taxpayer in terms of lost income to the UK).

Private schools, if VAT registered, will be able to reclaim the VAT on their costs, such as utilities, building repairs, new buildings, new equipment, cleaning, waste disposal, telecoms, etc etc. So the revenue generated will be a lot less than headline figures lazily using 20% VAT on annual fees!

It's not being suggested for economic reasons, it's being suggested as the usual politics of spite/envy!

Judging by the whinging from parent of money being tight at ds schools it will be around 70%

I am quite certain vast majority shall squeeze their budgets even tighter and manage 🙄

It's not being suggested for economic reasons, it's being suggested as the usual politics of spite/envy!

Totally !.

Or perhaps levelling up? Or a Labour version thereof?

No, Labour's idea of equality is dragging everyone down to a common, low, level. Dumbing down!

No it’s being suggested because the most privileged of our children shouldn’t have more unnecessary privileges added

its the politics of privilege