To think that people who agree with VAT on private school fees but not on university fees, are hypocrites?

[Blanket601]

If Labour add VAT to private school fees, they should also add VAT to university fees. Or no VAT on either. The principle and rule, should be the same.

Why is only private school education being platformed. I think we all know why.

How about engaging with the evidence rather than the ad hominem attacks? Do you seriously think the IFS is an unbiased source?

Firstly, that private school parents are all working/earning more than they would otherwise simply in order to pay school fees. This might be true for some, but it certainly doesn't apply to the majority of high achievers. Definitely applies to many. How many private school families have you asked?

And lots of people work incredibly hard despite not earning a lot. I know, and what does that have to do with this dimwitted policy?

Likewise, the taxes arising from the staff payrolls at these schools are nothing to do with you. You pay fees in exchange for a service. Your children benefit from that service. You are not paying the taxes of the staff who provide that service. Ah, fully through the Looking Glass. Without parents, no sales, no school, no taxes.

Like I said, the golden goose, and you guys are queuing up to wield the axe.

It seems the resounding opinion on your think-tank predictions is ‘who cares?’ Labour will likely win the next general election by a generous margin. They will likely implement the policy and private school parents will likely cough up the extra. I guess all those high earners you celebrate for their hard work will just have to work harder for it.

I'm not sure that any sort of schooling should be classed as a beneficial industry and revenue generator.

Interesting that you know my employer, employees and customers so well as to say they don't care if I quit.

And it doesn't make any difference if I do, or don't, pay around £45k a year in income tax and NICs? I thought this was supposed to be a good tax-raising policy?

Can everyone quit without anyone else caring? sounds a helluva recipe for the country.

You haven't thought this through.

Really? Not even special schools helping severely disabled children access education? Nothing beneficial about that...?

This is an ugly post. As someone who was brought up on a council estate and sent both of my children to state schools, the vast majority of my friends and my children’s friends were read to, fed proper food, had high expectations of behaviour etc etc. The nasty characterisation of ‘Tyler Lee on the council estate’ smacks of snobbery and if that’s what they’re teaching at private schools these days I am glad we weren’t involved.

I understand people feel passionate about school fees and personally I have no skin in the game. But to say that because VAT may go on school fees, they should also go on uni fees is simply doubling your disadvantage ~ if you go down that route, you’ll to be penalised twice as your privately educated offspring is more likely to go to uni.

I do understand the disquiet though when so many people in public life/ politics have been to private school. There is a sense that it entrenches privilege and blocks out other groups.

@wubwubwub you misinterpret (?deliberately) my statement. I meant in the context of generating tax revenue for the coffers of this once great nation.

Please don't tell posters they haven't thought it through just because they don't agree with your views. It smacks of very classic mansplaining TBH.

The truth is that your posts that are so far off the mark from what is the reality for most in this country that anything else posted cannot be taken seriously. EXAMPLE "instead earn £50-80k with loads more leisure (ditch the second income? go part-time?)" What parallel world does this actually refer to because it certainly is not reflective of the UK right now? It is actually quite shocking that someone thinks that £80k is just a low-achieving kick-back salary!!

Your post implies that you know better than the Cambridge Dictionary. I'll repost their definition

privilege - an advantage that only one person or group of people has, usually because of their position or because they are rich:

You are starting to sound unhinged.

Firstly, I haven't even mentioned the IFS, so I'm not sure why you're asking me about that. I was merely pointing out that the Adam Smith Institute has a very clear agenda.

Secondly, I know lots of high earners, possibly because I am one. Some send their kids to private schools and others don't. Some of them don't have kids at all. Others have kids who are too old for school now. I would say that nearly all of them high earners because they're naturally driven, intrinsically motivated, ambitious people. I'm sure that there are people who are simply working for the school fees (pretty pointless if you ask me, but each to their own) but I don't think that applies to the majority at all.

Why is it relevant that lots of people work hard without earning high salaries? Simply because it is quite offensive when high earners bang on about how hard they work, seemingly oblivious to the fact that there is no direct correlation between high earnings and hard work. It might be obvious but it bears repeating.

And as for your logic that you are paying the salaries of private school staff, and therefore their taxes...where does that end? Arguably, that means that you're not actually paying for your children's education at all, it is the people who pay your salary that are ultimately funding it. Or perhaps the people who pay ^their' salaries?

Exactly @MrsBennetsPoorNerves my DC have finished school and I'm probably working more hours than I have for years as I have more free time. I really love my job and it is about so much more than the high salary. DH is similar. We are both quite driven and it's just what makes us tick. Different things motivate different people and blanket assumptions about what people will do if they don't have to pay school fees is nonsense....unless it fits a particular narrative that suits one's particular hobby horse of course.

Right we go around in circles and always end up with "who cares" about the economic argument. Because nobody is able to justify it.

And then I point out that you're calling for harm to schools, children and families for no benefit, and I question your motives. Because there's no economic case, there must be a reason you'd insist on this dimwitted tax. And it's probably an ugly reason, and then everyone will resort to wittering on about privilege, because the main thing is to level-down etc etc.

As for "just working harder", what do you think the effect of marginal tax rates of 42, 62 and 47pc is, combined with cliff-edges on the ability "just" to earn the VAT? You're like:

• private education is ludicrously unaffordable
• and it's dead easy for all private school families to pay 20% more (or whatever the school passes on) from after-tax income, which effectively means 30-50pc more based on their marginal tax rate.

@MisterChips surely there can be a reason that is not rooted in finance - an ideological one. One that you may not agree with but that others do.

Erm you can choice is limited but there are 6 private universities in the UK

We've been here before too. I didn't say £80k is a low-achieving kick-back salary. Where on earth did you get that from?

I said if a household earns £100-150k working full time dual income it's easy to earn £60k-80k and have more leisure. Which is true. Tell me it's not true and explain why.

It's nothing to do with "the reality of most in this country", it's to do with the reality of those affected by this tax on education. That's how economics works. Everyone has their challenges, loads of people work hard of course, but economics is about the decisions of particular people affected by this particular tax, not about anyone else.

If you don't see that, I'm sticking with "you haven't thought this through".

You’re missing my point. I’m saying ‘who cares’ because the policy will likely come into play and your predictions are based on the eradication of private schools which isn’t going to happen. I’m saying ‘who cares’ to your irrelevant dystopia.

Couldn’t agree more. This is a completely dehumanising, abhorrent comment.

Whatever you all think the Adam Smith agenda is, I'm still not seeing you engage with the contents.

Good for you being a high earner who likes your job. There's diversity among people's motivations for work. It doesn't take many people "simply working for the school fees" to stop doing so before the economic rationale for this tax is destroyed.

"Why is it relevant that lots of people work hard without earning high salaries? Simply because it is quite offensive when high earners bang on about how hard they work, seemingly oblivious to the fact that there is no direct correlation between high earnings and hard work. It might be obvious but it bears repeating."

And for the millionth time, other people's challenges aren't relevant in microeconomics. Nobody said the hard work of private school parents is unique and I don't know why you imagine anyone did. What I've said is the hard work of higher earners paying school fees is very easily withdrawn, and if it's withdrawn it has an economic and fiscal impact, and that impact is no good to anyone, least of all the poor.

And as for your logic that you are paying the salaries of private school staff, and therefore their taxes...where does that end? Arguably, that means that you're not actually paying for your children's education at all, it is the people who pay your salary that are ultimately funding it. Or perhaps the people who pay their' salaries?^

You're absolutely right. When we do economic activity we support other economic activity. My employer pays me to do stuff that's valuable; that pays the school fees; that pays for the teachers and support staff; that pays a heap of tax and supports a downstream economy that pays a heap of tax. Any break in the chain affects the people upstream and downstream, which has economic and fiscal impact, and that impact is no good to anyone, least of all the poor.

When did I say anything about the eradication of private schools? Although there's a few other commenters who are calling for just that. You do exaggerate.

I'm saying the contraction of most private schools, and closure of some, causes economic harm and the end result is no good to state schools. But as you say "who cares?"

@MisterChips Most people on these threads are left leaning. They want your tax income and want to screw more out of you. My DH payed far more tax than you for years. I frankly don’t care if we acquired some privilege. If everyone could do what he did (now retired) they would earn a lot too. Guess what - they cannot. The best and entrepreneurs who employ others should get more. Or what’s the point?

DD is a high earner too. Same applies. Few do what she does. If everyone was capable, they could get the high money too: she’s also self employed. Earnings are not about working hard. Earnings are related to what you do and, crucially, who else can do it. If few, the returns are better and you expect a certain amount of privilege in that position. DH comes from a family who, 100 plus years ago, were farm labourers and straw plaiters! So everyone can aim high if they are good enough. I’m not apologizing either.

There absolutely can be a non-economic reason. If people are motivated by harming "levelling-down" private schools regardless of believing in the alleged benefits to state schools, just say so.

Then let's talk about what emotions lie behind that desire to kill the golden goose.

thank you.

I wish ppl would understand that currently private schools cannot claim back VAT paid once they start changing VAT they will also be able to recover VAT paid so the next benefit to the the tax pot is not the big win labour are selling...

Then it sounds like these private schools at risk of closure will have to make some tough cuts. Slack is ample in luxury establishments.

Trickle down economics, eh? It’s almost as if the majority of the country can scarcely afford housing and food! Crazy!

I see it as a positive if some marginal private schools close. Too many parents assume private is automatically better when some private schools are very poor and should close.

No, you make the sweeping assumption that everyone can afford private education if they would only work harder. Also you reference a £100-150k household income or dropping down to just £50-80k and having a lot of leisure is just the norm for families. Our income is well in excess of that and I am fully aware that it is far from the norm in this country. Why can't you see that whinging about having to work hard and pay a lot of taxes and VAT on school fees while many in the country are actually on the bread line doesn't foster sympathy. I think we are possibly diametrically opposed politically. I am happy to pay probably a lot more than you in taxes and I don't even have DC in secondary education. FWIW your posts suggest that you can't be thinking this through beyond fairly elementary economics as the walls of the bubble are just too impenetrable.