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.

It’s because private schools are really businesses not charities therefore the issue of vat is about removal of charitable status. Universities are part of the state education system.

Charitable status and the VAT position are entirely separate. Many private schools don’t have charitable status but don’t have to charge VAT because of VAT legislation.

If anyone thinks that this policy will improve anything for state school children then I have a bridge to sell you! The labour politicians will still be sending their kids to schools that are blocked to most.

I would rather see an end to catchment and an expectation that schools must admit a genuine cross section of society. No more buying yourself a house in catchment or selection by stealth.

For example, a local state school which everyone is desperate to get their children a place in has 2% of children eligible for FSM compared to 19% of children in the area. I think preventing this huge discrepancy occurring would be more effective at actually improving standards for all. Surely that is fair?

All schools are businesses.

All schools are VAT exempt because all education is VAT exempt along with tutoring, music lessons, childcare, trips, wraparound clubs etc; also books, sports clubs and private healthcare.

Some schools are also charities. an entirely different matter.

I am absolutely not making stuff up. It is just that I find your posts difficult to piece together. I apologise if I misunderstood and you don't think those high salaries are the norm. However, if you are saying that you don't actually believe that people on those incomes are the norm then you must realise that private school is economically prohibitive for much of the population. If you accept that then how can you say that private school is not a privilege? Once again, you may wish to consider the Cambridge dictionary definition of privilege " an advantage that only one person or group of people has, usually because of their position or because they are rich"

I didn't say you specifically are whinging (stop making stuff up! 😉). I was referring to generic private school parents' complaining about VAT and its unfairness to them.

Your posts suggest that you view everything on this policy through a prism of basic economics. Maybe this policy is about more than economics, I don't know. And for the record I have never said that I am for or against the policy. I actually feel quite ambivalent about it and if I were in a position with DC still in school I would have just accepted it as another tax. What I take issue with is much more the scaremongering on so many threads with trumped up projections of disastrous outcomes for the whole education sector. Nobody knows how it will pan out and to me it all just seems so self-serving for financially secure individuals with choices when the country has much bigger issues to address.

The assumption that I am probably paying a lot more taxes than you are is absolutely not baseless from what you have said in your posts. It is a reasonable assumption if VAT on several DC's school fees is a big financial issue for you personally.

I stand corrected!

I don't think £50k, £80k, or £150 is the norm. Median is £35k or something similar. But that's not relevant.

What's relevant is the economics. And that hinges on the choices of people earning (in the example I've suggested) £100-150k, on marginal tax rates of 62 and 47 per cent.

Those are different choices to those available to somebody else already on £50k or £80k or less; different choices to those of single mums, cancer victims, the recently bereaved or domestically abused, people in Gaza, etc etc. I'm not belittling the various challenges facing any of those people, they just have no bearing on the purely economic problem of "will this education tax raise money and sufficiently so to justify the costs/harms it causes?"

I agree the actual outcomes are hard to predict. Maybe everyone just sucks it up. Maybe more schools close than anyone expects and you get 20k redundant teachers and 100k kids migrating for a loss of £1-2bn and total chaos in state schools. Nobody knows - but economically, the benefits are at best small, and the risks are very large. It's a stupid policy and a colossal distraction from improving state schools.

And I don't think anyone with intelligence and integrity should tolerate crapping on a minority, rich or poor, just because "it's popular" and "there are other causes worth defending". They'll be coming with pitchforks for something you care about next.

If you're so much a high earner, and you're ambivalent about what some would call the "privilege" of private school that you've been able to buy for your kids, will you be paying for the back VAT you were lucky not to pay? Sounds as though you have spare money.

Not all highly paid people are worth the money they are paid and the economy will not necessarily be worse off without them at all.

@B00ksEverywhere and with VAT it will be open to the richest 3% who can afford it.

Hmmmm your post still avoids the question of whether private education constitutes privilege or not. And I thought I had asked it very clearly. Never mind.

Ad hominem not really cricket but I'll answer anyway.

I'm absolutely not ambivalent about my privilege. I am fully aware of it and check it very regularly, particularly when I feel a bit sorry for myself about stuff. And I make sure my DC are very mindful of theirs too.

Of course I won't be paying VAT on non-existent school fees but I do give rather a lot of my spare money to deserving charities and my time to pro bono so you will be pleased to know that I can still sleep well at night (despite your warnings about pitchforks 😉).

Because lifting a few already rich people further is exactly what grinds everyone else down. We need less inequality, not to perpetuate inequality.

If rich children need private schools in order to do well in life, how does everyone else manage? (They actually manage fine in the vast majority of cases! State education is good enough for 95% of the population. It's good enough for your kids too)

Lower earners still pay VAT, council tax, fuel tax, national insurance etc etc.

If rich children need private schools in order to do well in life, how does everyone else manage? (They actually manage fine in the vast majority of cases! State education is good enough for 95% of the population. It's good enough for your kids too)

Yeah, see, thing is, I want more than “good enough” for my son. I did well at state school, got to Cambridge, have had a good career. But my time at school was characterised by bullying and lack of facilities and resources and I was amazed at what I heard from my university friends about how much they had enjoyed school. I don’t particularly care if my son is a high academic achiever but if I can make his 13 years at school happy ones then I will have done what I set out to do. It’s miserable waiting to leave school for your life to start. Why not buy a better experience if you can afford it?

I do agree with that viewpoint and obviously everyone wants the best for their own child regardless of ideology.

But what about the 95% who have to put up with these problems while there's no incentive to improve things as the political elite can always afford to buy their way out.

If politicians kids were forced to attend state schools they would undoubtedly improve pretty quickly

But no, while I agree that state could and should be improved, I would not expect state provision to be as good as you pay for at private. It’s like buying an expensive car, isn’t it? You make the choice to pay extra for luxury.

Another post where there is just arguments between 2 posters 🤦‍♀️I genuinely can’t remember the original OP question!!

We used to have this. Assisted places scheme. Conservatives introduced it in 1980. Tony blair abolished it in 1997. I sat the exams in 1987 and remember over 400 choldren from all over the city and all backgroubds sitting at the school i went to (around 60 places). Lifechanging.

I agreed with assisted places scheme being abolished. The research showed it was mainly middle class children who benefitted.

May be this is part of the point. There is a tendency for many people to see those that are more wealthy than them as a homogeneous group.

The number of families with a net wealth of £1-5m are going to make up a much larger proportion of the group than those which are in the £10m-100m bracket. Especially outside of London.

If you factor in two pension pots and a nice house then many families with even a modest background have 2m in assets especially in the south east ( for clarity I don't live in the south east).

Based on 6.5% of kids ( it's been banded around in the posts here) go to private school then there would seem to be many likely to be in this bracket of comfortable rather than "rich". It would be informative to know how many parents are foregoing pension contributions to pay school fees as this would show the financial stress that they are under.

I can see why you don't worry, you have reached a level of wealth where this is sustainable almost independent of how your children perform at school. The people's who are most effected, and the largest population of private schools are those who have earned their wealth rather than any substantial inheritance. There are likely to be the most driven people in society. Two NHS consultants from working class backgrounds etc.

If this is a resources driven issue why not try to displace more families from state schools. For example 50% of child's cost to state education is portable to other provision?

From the magic money tree that exists in the public sector I assume.

First world problems eh.

@Heather37231 Here we go again.. Democratic Republic of MN, edict #7: comrades shall at every opportunity denounce aspiration, achievement and meritocracy of the middle classes.
.

I think the labour proposal is to specifically make provision of educational; services by private schools VATable rather than make educational services in general Vatable and it seems like they have decide this is easier than getting ird of their charitable status -not because they don't agree with doing that but because it might have had other wider implications.
I do believe they are right ( and not sour grapes /jealousy here) - i fundamentally don't believe in private education (or in any type of education which is limited to a few such as religious education)- it is fundamentally unfair. Uni fees are different as the loan system means that ultimately having cash or not should not stop people going. However i fundamentally disagree with there being fees of any kind for uni (and campaigned against it at the time) - it should be a burden born by society through tax (like the rest of education)

They actually manage fine in the vast majority of cases! State education is good enough for 95% of the population. It's good enough for your kids too)

Do you honestly think the state sector is “good enough”? Many would disagree, including the large numbers of teachers leaving the sector. Many children have tried the sector and moved to private after it failed them. There are huge behaviour problems in many state schools. Personally I don’t think a school is “good enough” unless a child can be taught by subject specialists, and be able to learn without disruption or fear of violence.

In any case, why should anyone settle for “good enough”? That’s a lot of the problem with the state system. Where’s the aspiration? Where’s the desire to do better?