To think abolishing private schools would cost the tax payer a lot of money?!

[bumblybum]

I am not against the idea at all but there's a few things I don't understand.

How do the dc currently in private schools fit into schools in areas where all the schools are already full?
Would private schools be open to foreign dc only seeing as a lot of students at the private schools are not from the U.K. and use private schools because their company often pays for their fees or would foreign dc also be forced into state schools?
What about boarding schools for forces parents? Are there enough state boarding schools?

Do grammar schools also need deconstructing as well in order for all education to be 'fair'? I live in a grammar area and you can forget buying a house in one of the school catchment areas unless you're already a lot wealthier. Is that not a similar problem? One school has 2% of pupils eligible for pupil premium for example.

Just wondering how it would work. Do state teachers want this to happen? Many move over to private schools so I suppose if many private schools shut down it would stop some choice in where to work.

Would state schools attempt to reach the standard of facilities that private schools have or would we accept that it is better that all British dc have the 'same' even if it's worse vs some having better facilities simply down to money.
Just Monday morning day dreaming about this really!

If a private school fails due to this I guess the state could buy the land and fund staff wages and other stuff I haven’t considered l.

But currently you have a site taking dc and the parents are paying fees plus tax. To having to fund that purchase, and pay wages and those parents are not paying fees plus taxes seems counter productive.

This is absolutely correct. People hear 'private school' and imagine Eton, swimming pools, luxurious facilities and not the tiny independents who charge a fraction of the price of those big private schools but whose parents are still stretched to capacity to pay. Parents who, like everyone else, have had their energy bills tripled and mortgage payments rocketing along with the cost of everything else. Fees are increasing anyway, any more pressure will tip these schools over. The Tories have decimated state schools and handed piles of taxpayer cash to academy trust CEOs while absolutely destroying education over the past twelve years. Now Labour would like to trash small independent schools, increasing the pressure on a ruined state system, leaving the big wealthy ones utterly unscathed (because the super rich can afford it without batting an eyelid and always will). It's destructive and insane - and I say this as a former teacher in state schools, from that perspective - this will only make education worse. I despise the Tories deeply but feel now that Labour offer very little hope for improvement.

You can single anything out very easily indeed just by tweaking the VAT act. It’s unbelievably easy to do.

Another thought.

If private education attracts VAT, does that mean VAT becomes payable on swimming lessons, dance lessons, sports coaching, music lessons, art classes? What about teaching martial arts or spin? It's all education.

If it does, the whole policy is untenable. It would hamper skills across the UK and materially disadvantage everyone.

I think I'm on the side of enforce charitable status. My son goes to state school very close to 3 different private schools all with lovely facilities. My son's state school have never benefitted from this- no offers to use the pool or gym or share resources or invite the state pupils to join in with activities. It's like they're part of a different world. My son went to a science club at one of the schools during the holidays, it was subsidised by the council but the organisers said the school were still charging market rates for use of the Hall. When I think of what the local churches do for the community (and I'm not religious) they are visible - offering a warm place and food and activities for kids all for free - and these "charities" which are actually elite schools, do nothing.

when VAT treatment differs for marshmallows depending on whether they are mini, normal size or big, and the VAT act can define the proportion of fur that a child’s coat can have before it no longer qualifies for zero rating, I think it can separate fee paying schools from nurseries and universities ffs.

A lot of the above would ordinarily already be subject to VAT, but the provider is under the VAT registration limit so no VAT is applied.

There are absolutely no plans to abolish them.

Another poster earlier wrote how difficult it would be to change legislation as the wording would need to be precise etc. As I'm not a lawyer I can't comment but do feel we are on the start of a slippery slope when we deem one sort of education needing VAT but not others as they are more "acceptable"

I think this policy will be popular with lots of voters as it won't affect them and they will see it as a way of targeting the rich and making the education system fairer.

Your question though OP is a good one. Where will the kids who are currently privately educated go? I would guess two places:

1. They would enter the best rated or 'nicest' state schools and channel all their resources and money into them turning them into quasi private schools. The rich will dominate the catchment areas of these schools and the poor won't get a look in. The difference will be that these schools will be government funded too so it will cost the country more overall and not improve opportunity for all.

1. There is a pretty significant proportion of parents that send their kids to private schools that aren't rich or necessarily even particularly high earners. They live in deprived areas where the local schools are poor and there is very little opportunity for children. These families prioritise spending on private education as a way improving their children's opportunities. They simply often can't afford the huge costs of moving into the areas with better school catchments. These children will probably end up in comparably poor schools and have fewer opportunities to achieve social and economic mobility.

I'm not sure either of those scenarios are desirable for those of us who agree with a better and fairer education system. The problem we can't rely on removing or targeting private schools (the best performing part of our education system) to improve the worst performing parts. All this will do is weaken our overall education system and the skills etc of our population and workforce. The focus should be on how we can improve failing schools and improve opportunity for all.

I have just learned that Giant Marshmallows for toasting are not considered confectionary and are therefore zero rated for VAT purposes. But smaller marshmallows do incur VAT. Amazing. Not what I expected to take from this thread.

It's a clickbait headline. Removing charitable status would disproportionately affect the standard private schools compared to the elite ones (Eton, etc). The latter would continue because their student intake is overwhelmingly 1%ers and/or international. The remaining (and vast majority) of fee-paying parents wouldn't be able to afford a 20% increase in fees, would withdraw their children and send them where exactly? In my area schools are massively over-subscribed already, and our children are being bussed out while out-of-area children take the local school places, thanks to the Academy system. We've also had an influx of people from Hong Kong, whose children need places. It seems they've been hot-housed and academically are easily two years ahead of UK-educated 11-year-olds, so they're at the head of the queue. I've had one ( Polish) friend complaining loudly to me this week about how unfair (!) it is that people who don't even live here are getting what she sees as preferential treatment because of their political refugee status. lDSis is a head teacher. She's dreading March 1st when the secondary school places are allocated. She's already got frantic parents trying to juggle the logistics of all their 11+ kids potentially being at different schools in different areas, and not through choice.
The education system is broken, and a one size fits all tax change isn't going to fix it. I have no faith in Labour's claim that the funds that'll (allegedly) be raised will be ploughed into the state system or, even if it is, that the money will be well spent.

They'll never abolish private schools. If you take away choice over schools it's the slippery slope of communism and removing private health care.

However I do believe that if everyone had children in state school, from PM to the cleaner. Prince George rubbing shoulders with kids from the local care home.

Then they'd be a vested interest in improving the standard of schooling across the country.
And that would be a mammoth investment into schools. But we all know it will never happen

Obviously private schools faced with paying VAT and full business rates would pass that onto their parents and that would make life very difficult for the parents only marginally able to pay fees. That aside, what is clear is tha to state schools are seriously underfunded (£7K per pupil p.a. compared with double that in the private schools on average) and that is what should be costing the taxpayer but I doubt either the Tories or Labour would double the state school spend.

Really? Did you not see the link in an earlier post?
This is from the Independent:

Labour will pledge to abolish private schools if it wins the next election, after the party’s annual conference voted for a proposal to “integrate” them into the state sector.

In a major policy shift, a motion approved by delegates at the gathering in Brighton said a government led by Jeremy Corbyn would “challenge the elite privilege of private schools” and claimed that “the ongoing existence of private schools is incompatible with Labour’s pledge to promote social justice”.

It said the party would include in its next manifesto “a commitment to integrate all private schools into the state sector

Whatever your view of private education, to make it illegal would be both extremely difficult and would involve crossing a line that most people would not support. It would remove a freedom to choose how to spend your money - and I can see the lawyers having a field day over that.

My friend holidays in the Caribbean each year ( as well as several other places). She spends thousands and thousands of pounds. We get a cottage somewhere in the UK. That's not equal, is it? Should she be allowed to have 'better' holidays than me? (er...of COURSE she should - this is not North Korea!!)

Yes, I know that education is different from holidays, but please, all those people wanting private schools to be abolished - think it through. Once you start telling people how to spend their money - where will it end? My parents lived incredibly (ridiculously) frugal lives in order to send me to a private school, and when they explained why in later years, I had to acknowledge that their reasons were sound. That was their choice and they were happy with it.

I've worked in state schools for much of my career, and I can see why parents would choose something else if they could. The sheer ideological micro-managing and one dubious initiative after another - not to mention the shocking standards of behaviour in some schools - would really put me off. I'm well aware of the social injustice of it - no-one needs to educate me about that - I've thought long and hard about it for years.

But leaving aside the 'it's not fair' arguement (no it isn't - as with so many things in life), how do people think it could/would be achieved? I predict a massive long-drawn out human rights case looming.

I predict a massive long-drawn out human rights case looming.

CulturePigeon some people would start home educating if private schools were banned so maybe Labour would abolish that too (another long drawn-out court case would ensue).
Some rich people would send their children to school abroad -not sure if it would be possible to ban that.

Some children ( mine included) with SEND are in independent special schools funded by LA because state schools don't cater for their complex needs.
However I would rather that state schools did cater for them. Independent special schools are now beginning to pick and choose who they take (again leaving the most complex children without places) because there is more demand than there are places.

Did you miss that the link’s more than two years old and the Labour Party isn’t longer led by Corbyn. It’s about as relevant as quoting Attlee.

I don’t think the plan is to abolish them? Unless pp mean this is a stepping stone to further action.

Starmer was on R4 stating we are good in this sector, some private schools are excellent, which is true the sector is well regarded o/s. He at least recognises it’s an asset even if wants to damage it.

In reality he just wants some votes based on political envy which is an easy gimmick and headline grabber.

Some people’s political envy is other people’s equality.

I can’t really take anyone who used private system seriously on this. So skipping past that pp happily.

I agree with Rabbit as we are in oversubscribed area too.

However I do believe that if everyone had children in state school, from PM to the cleaner. Prince George rubbing shoulders with kids from the local care home. Then they'd be a vested interest in improving the standard of schooling across the country.

This wouldn’t happen even if private schools were abolished. Even state schools are unequal because they select on the basis of faith or distance.

The state primary near me is stuffed full of well off families because the catchment area is tiny and houses in it cost £1.5m+. Even a flat costs £800k.

Then there’s schools like The Oratory - the Catholic state secondary where the Blair children went. Again the demographic bears no resemblance to your average comp due to all the entry requirements.

And then there’s grammars, again demographics tend to the wealthier end of things (dur to house prices, tutoring etc) rather than being a true mix.

If people think the state system is “equal” they are deluded IMO.

It’s not irrelevant. The Labour Party is still made up of the same members who voted for this. That hasn’t changed dramatically in 3 years. There is still the underlying belief that private schools should be abolished.

A lot of the smaller private schools aren’t turning a massive profit and sat on a fortune, one near me closed down during the lockdowns due to foreign students having withdrawn. It cause a lot of chaos as suddenly people were trying to move children to either other full private schools or into over subscribed state schools. If the vat status is changed then I can imagine the same situation on a much larger scale.
the proposal seems an attempt at headline grabbing with no thought as to what would actually happen.