AIBU to call for VAT to be charged on childrens books?

[ZirihePevzig]

VAT is charged on things that are luxuries, so that wealthier people who can afford the extra luxuries of life pay more into the government's income for running the country than those who are just living with the bare essentials and making ends meet without luxuries. Therefore there is no VAT on basic food stuff, but more luxury foods like icecream, confectionary and crisps have VAT added, and food that is sold for eat-in in restaurants or sold heated (there was a whole thing about Greggs Pasties not being VATable if they are still hot straight from the oven, but would be VATable if reheated). In general, VAT is a good thing because wealthy people with a clever accountant can fiddle things to hide income and get away with paying less income tax than they should, but if you are leading a luxurious lifestyle you are going to pay the VAT on it.

Things that are considered to be generally "A Good Thing" don't get VAT added, such as sporting activities and physical education, education and training, and medical treatments - VAT is effectively a "brake" on spending on non-essentials and its seen as inappropriate to tax things like this that it's not a bad thing to spend money on. Books come under this category and so are zero-rated.

However, in real life, books really are a luxury - even without VAT a book is generally around £10 (sometimes it might be as low as £7) and you could feed a family for at least a day on that. Less wealthy families are going to use libraries and get access to books for free, so the main beneficiaries of the VAT exemption on books is wealthy families who can afford to throw away £10 on something they could access for free at the library. Some affluent households may own thousands of books, and that's a huge amount of luxury goods that could have been taxed. You won't find that kind of book collection in households struggling at close to poverty levels.

OK I admit it, I am not actually in favour of charging VAT on books, but the exact same argument - that only wealthier people can afford it - is used as justification for the suggestion that education should no longer be in the list of things that are VAT exempt. If this is the case and education should no longer be VAT free then books are in the same category.

So if you are voting that IABU to call for VAT on books then you should also be supporting non-profit-making schools - ones that are providing education as a service, not as a business, in regions where the state offering is inadequate - to be able to charge their fees at cost-price without adding VAT, even though not everyone can afford that.

So YANBU = yes books and education are only accessible to poor people in their "free" forms from public libraries and state schools, so anyone who can afford the extra money to access a better version privately should pay VAT on that luxury

YABU = books and education are ultimately good for society and not appropriate to be taxed, even though the available budget for spending on them will be unfeasible for many people.

Yes, as above. The similarity between cheap and expensive confectionery is much greater than the similarity between books and private education.

It’s a ridiculous idea, but no more ridiculous than adding VAT to school fees.

Education is not a luxury. Lots of children are send to independent schools because their local state schools do not have a suitable provision (eg very academic/sporty/musical children would not be stretched enough at lots of state schools). I’m not saying all state schools are like this, but lots are. Lots of parents with children who have special needs feel there is no option but to send their child to private school.

There are plenty of other luxuries which aren’t subject to VAT. Air fares and designer label children clothes for example. Air passenger duty is often a lot less than the equivalent VAT would be. People are more than happy with no VAT being charged on a £1000 child’s coat or on a £10,000 air fare but call for VAT on private education. There’s no logic to the argument.

I can't vote because you seem to think it's ok to give only two options neither of which reflect the fact that your OP is too long, too confused and frankly rather ridiculous.

How is adding VAT to school fees going to stop the wealthy from networking? It won’t.

The TL;DR version: "I don't want to pay extra for my children's private education and here's a tenuous reason why I'm not being unreasonable.

Things that are considered to be generally "A Good Thing" don't get VAT added.

Where your argument falls down is that you assume private education is "A Good Thing." This is not a given.
Indeed I would argue, as many people do, that private education is always and everywhere a bad thing for society, as it entrenches class divisions.
This country is riddled with social class distinctions, to the massive disadvantage of the majority.

Private school fees should have vat added, as a gesture, because it is not (yet) practical to outright ban the sale of full-time education for under 18's.

YABU because books are one of the main steps of social mobility. In the interests of equality we should be making them as cheap as possible. Reading & access to books are key in enhancing children’s life opportunities. Private school on the other hand entrenches social position. You are literally comparing opposites.

A lot of children with the most complex needs are educated in independent schools funded by the council, these families are some of the most vulnerable in society and yet you want to make them less accessible by making them more expensive

There may be unfortunately a point to libraries and VAT exempt books.

In working class communities libraries are viewed as a middle class subsidy. The middle classes read more and the children who visit libraries are likely to have engaged educated parents and therefore reasonable salaries.

The same argument was made against sure start in that the middle classes dominated some centres and therefore diverted resources from the disadvantaged.

I sometimes feel a bit conflicted getting a free resource for my child when in reality they don't need it (for free anyway).

Would library money be better spent on supporting children who have literacy problems through one to one teaching for example?

There's nothing quite as "luxury" as separating your precious kids from the local povvos and saying it's because Petunia wants to play lacrosse.

Off topic, but we did get to play lacrosse at my spectacularly shit comprehensive in the 1970s/1980s.

No. I’d like good education to be free for all.

How many private schools are really run on a none profit basis and how many are businesses? They seem to run like businesses to an outsider. My

I sometimes feel a bit conflicted getting a free resource for my child when in reality they don't need it (for free anyway).

But you pay for it through your tax/NI, just like you "pay" for your child to go to state school. People should absolutely support their libraries! (I'm not saying that makes OP's argument make any sense)

I can't vote for either of your options because they're both ridiculous! I'm not rich and I'm happy to buy my kids books when they want them, they enjoy reading and will read books multiple times. I've never paid £10 for one either, usually Asda and Tesco have 2 for £7 promotions or other discounts. Just because YOU wouldn't buy then doesn't mean only the elite are.

Education is not a luxury. Lots of children are send to independent schools because their local state schools do not have a suitable provision (eg very academic/sporty/musical children would not be stretched enough at lots of state schools). I’m not saying all state schools are like this, but lots are. Lots of parents with children who have special needs feel there is no option but to send their child to private school.

Of course it's a luxury. Do you not think there are plenty of very academic/sporty/musical children who attend their local state school because their parents don't have the option of sending them to private school, because they cannot afford it. Funnily enough those very able children still manage to achieve, and end up at the same universities as very able children from private schools.

You’re trying to argue logic and common sense (ish) to a tax which troubled the highest courts in the land as to whether a chocolate tie turned a gingerbread man from zero rated to standard rated.

Don’t be daft.

YABVU. Books are essential!! Children need to read to learn and to improve their writing and comprehension skills. VAT would make a massive difference to whether a book was affordable or not. Libraries are often closed or located a good distance away. Working families often lack the time to take their children to the library during opening hours. They could however, pop a £4 book in the trolley from a supermarket. Upping this to £6 would be less affordable.

Your post is 1) a good study in seeing who comments before actually reading it and 2) a study in very poor logical reasoning on your part

You could just say you’re angry because you are wealthy enough to pay for private school and feel you might get screwed by a vat charge. You’ll get little sympathy from me, but I’d at least respect the honesty. The books comparison is fatuous. A better comparison is private healthcare because the state provides the baseline (NHS) but if you’ve got the money you can pay for private.

Unfortunately for your argument it’s clearly and rightly a luxury, and VAT should apply because you are able to afford something many might want but can’t have, and thus you should pay into the system more to help improve the baseline services (in principle anyway - whether these thriving Tory freeloaders actually do that or give it to their mates is a different question).

Equating books with private education is peak Mumsnet entitlement.

Independent schools have had an easy ride on their qualification for charitable status. They can pay VAT, if state-funded FE colleges pay VAT why shouldn't independent schools?

If you ready the original post this isn't really anything to do with books. The op said she doesn't really agree with VAT on books, it's just she doesn't want to pay VAT on private education.
I would agree with you IF private schools took their charitable status more seriously and did a LOT more for their local communities. Ie free access to their sporting facilities and swimming pools, libraries and science labs etc etc
ALL of the private schools I have worked in have done the absolute bare minimum to support the local community, as little as they could get away with. If the schools do nothing to deserve their charitable status then they should be taxed as any other business, including VAT.

Children having access to books is not the same as private/public schooling.

Private education is a privilege for the rich. They have access to state, same as poorer children.

I don't think that I'm being unreasonable to think that most people who read a lot use computers and e readers etc because they can afford to and its much more convenient where as people with less disposable income buy books as and when they can afford to unless they get them from charity shop etc in other words other people's cast offs ,nothing wrong with that but to be given a special brand new book is such a personal thing .And anyway why are you promoting yet another tax ........

This idea is so absolutely bollocks you must be on the wind up. All of the charity shops here do 10 kids books for £1.

It's these cases that both fascinate me and boggle my mind with regards to vat.

The cases that exist to establish the correct vat treatment (at least per the law) really do fascinate me. I know, I need to get out more 😂

I can think of a better comparison.
plain biscuit: not vattable
choclate biscuit: vattable.