VAT on private school fees - will it change how you vote?

[Iwishicouldflyhigh]

Following on from the other interesting thread about whether it will be implemented, will this policy change how you vote either way?
For me - i've voted Labour and Tory over the years, but Tory for the most recent GE's. This year, i've been thinking seriously about how i'd vote at the next GE and it wasn't definitely a Tory vote - i was definitely a floating voter.
However, my children are at PS and so i will now most definitely be voting Tory (not just because how the VAT will seriously impact us - child number 3 will now not be going to the prep that we had lined up for her, she'll enter the local primary until secondary school - but how i think that it will affect schools negatively and children negatively).
I have a lot of left leaning friends who educate privately and whilst they cannot bring themselves to vote Tory, they won't vote Labour either at the next GE because of this policy.

It seems to me that this policy is only a vote loser (ie many Labour voters and 'floaters' who school privately won't vote for them at the next GE) and not a vote winner (ie i can't imagine that many Tory or 'floaters' will vote for Labour solely on this policy).

AiBU to think that Labour have really shot themselves in the foot with this idea?

How is education 'free'? What do you mean?

I totally agree. Everyone should be able to access a decent school which is suited to their child. It’s sadly not possible in the state system in many areas of the country though.

It’s a choice.

I have a lot of money left at the end of the month and could choose to pay it into my pension instead of taking it as salary. If I did that my income tax bill would be reduced

i could also choose to move to another country with lower income tax rates, my skills are in high demand. I don’t want to, but I know others who would if tax becomes too high.

Which 'other countries'? All the ones I know of have a totally private sector.

Feel free to put it in your pension or move to a different country.

IFS have said it will raise between 1.5 and 1.7bn

However, Labour's policy paper says this;

ANNEX

We will invest nearly £1bn of the money raised from ending tax breaks for private schools in the package of policies in this paper...

The policy will now make me vote Tory even though I will hate doing it.

if everyone on here voted Labour how on earth did the Tories get in to fuck everything up?

So you’re going to vote for the party that’s fucked everything up?

Brava!

Thanks for this @Clavinova! They are literally taking everyone for a ride. Bearing in mind they will never even raise the 1.5-1.7bn in the first place, the amount they will actually end up investing will be even less than 1bn. Also where do they intend to “invest” the rest of the money raised?!

It is also factually incorrect to call not paying VAT on education a “tax break”. You cannot invent a new tax out of thin air and then accuse people of having been given a “tax break” because they haven’t previously paid your newly dreamt up VAT! 😂

Bit of a failure of imagination here.

Salaries are far and away the largest costs for schools, and private schools currently have 2 x as many teachers per pupil as state schools. Means they've got an easy way to reduce costs to absorb the VAT imposition - just reduce staffing and have bigger classes, like state schools had to do following austerity budget cuts.

They'd vote for them anyway. But now they feel they've got a reasonable excuse which is something like WON'T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN!

What these children?

Under fives betrayed as health declines - experts - BBC News

NHS funding has been in a steep decline since 2008 - the Conservatives have been in power since 2010.

Remind me again who created Sure Start and who cut the funding?

No silly - not poor children.

But they'll vote Tory to preserve every ounce of their child's privilege. I suspect that includes some 'left leaning' people with kids at private school.

It won’t change how I vote. I think it is bad policy and ugly rhetoric. We aren’t rich but we will find some way to suck it up.

I could NEVER vote for the current government. It’s the worst conservative government for generations, utterly lacking principle and achievement. They have wrecked public services, they’ve created a poisonous discourse and debased public life. The prime minister making a £1000bet on TV about issues affecting vulnerable people’s lives. Yuck! Nasty party indeed!

The conservatives don’t even have credibility on the economy any more. The legacy of Liz Truss should keep them out for a very long time.

What they are explaining is someone on an average salary could sacrifice everything, live in a tent, eat solely out of food banks and devote 100% of their salary to fees… and not be able to afford the fees.
Not weighing up holiday options level of sacrifice, but actually not being able to access the system regardless. In that pile are the disabled parents, many hard working families who love their kids. That’s why people are saying ‘rich’. Because compared to the average you are rich.
Thats ok, to have wealth. But you aren’t poor, and if you think you are you’ve lost perspective.

That’s what sticks . They’d actually vote Tory and everything else that entails to save on school fees. Every other principle out the window. Just to avoid school fees.

Personally I don’t think means tested state education is happening. There’s already rising numbers of home educators and kids out of school. They aren’t going to create a policy to compound the problem. Especially when the majority of the population values the wider gains of a good quality education system and is happy to fund it for their own wider benefits. It’s hardly an election winner, any barrier to education is it. Particularly with the immigration barriers up it’s insane.

Sorry, wrong thread post

@MirrorBack

You've explained better than I have what I meant! Spot on.

Not having a holiday because you've spent £60k on private education isn't an example of sacrifice that means you 'are not rich'.

To think it is shows an out of touch perspective on the reality of 'not rich' for most of the country.

There's nothing wrong with being rich, at all. It's not something anyone should feel they have to justify. Not a moral failing. Nothing to be ashamed of at all.

But someone spending double the average person's salary on private education alone absolutely makes someone objectively rich.

At what point did I say poor. I know I am not poor. But I am not rich. I just earn more than the average salary. Perspective.

Sweden, Finland, Norway, Denmark
You can't have gold plated services by punishing higher earners alone. Everyone should benefit from the system especially those paying into it. People will want to pay if they are all getting something back. In Scandinavia children all get money paid to a school of their choice. It has nothing to do with what their parents earn.

I will move or pay into my pension and remove children from private school to home school them. I will still not pay the extra proposed tax, as if we don't get taxed enough. School should be free for everyone.
Alternatively move back to Scandinavia.

Only the wealthy can afford it, that's you. Honestly, I doubt Labour will actually "lose " any votes on this particular issue. The rich vote Tory amd if they don't, this one issue won't change anything as they ll realise that the country will benefit from change.

Not all private schools are £15k a term though. There’s one near us that is around £2.5k to £3k a term. It’s not an Sen school but a lot of kids go there that aren’t coping with mainstream school and need small classes/small schools. As accessing support in mainstream is such a fight some parents choose to move their children to this school The majority of those children if left in mainstream would go on to be diagnosed with some type of Sen and probably need an ehcp. as children generally have to deteriorate before they can access support this support may then well be more costly to the la than earlier intervention would be. The type of people that are sending kids here aren’t rich and it is within the realms of a lot more of the population to make sacrifices to afford these fees if they really needed to. People are also more likely to just send one kid to this school and leave their other kids who are managing perfectly well in mainstream in mainstream. Ok adding vat will only push fees up by about £600 a term so much less added than if paying £15k a term so hopefully majority could still afford it. I think the danger with this type of school is that as it’s a limited market any increase will effect pupil numbers to some extent which then may make the school not financially viable at all in which case it’s lost to all. These are the children who would suffer and not those at Elton or harrow whose fees are paid for from a trust fund.

I will add that my child isn’t in this school, he deteriorated in mainstream and is now at a special school that is funded by the la at £30k per annum

I’m a bit intrigued.
How do they provide smaller classes on the same money per pupil as the average state school gets per pupil?
Is it a charity?