To think taxing private schools...

[maddening]

I have no skin in the game, my dc is at a secondary state school. I have no strong views on private schools - although I think state should offer the same level for all dc.

However, looking at the maths I am not convinced the cost and benefits of this proposal works out - apparently vat will bring in 1.3 billion - however if the 554,000 children in private schools had to be schooled in state schools that would cost 4 billion - aibu to think this is not the win that many are led to believe? It is more divisive imo and driven by ideology.

If the private school parents are saving the state 4 billion a year then I don't have an issue with the vat personally.

I think that there could be more requirements placed on private schools in order to retain the vat free status, such as sharing facilities with local state schools and more subsidised places perhaps, or means tested vat relief for parents?

Spite and jeering ? Like when Tory MPs jeered at Nurses when their pay rise was blocked ?

But how does that help anything? And who is having a go at you?

Those of us who send their children to private school are in the main financially privileged. I’m not sure rubbing other people’s noses in it is needed in any way.

@LittleBearPad Read this entire thread, and the balance is clearly in favour of a gleeful spite towards us fee paying parents in relation ti this ill thought out policy.

Frankly whether I'm rubbing anyone's nose in it or not has no affect on that prejudiced view.

They are happy we are being forced to pay more, I am happy they are clearly upset by the fact we can.

Few seem to mention that if people who would have sent their children private instead buy near the ‘best’ schools then you will simply get private schools by proxy where it’s no longer possible to gain a place out of the catchment as the ‘extra’ money is in time spent on a home in the right location. These children would also still have additional resources for extra curricululars, tutors etc. so the gap is still there come exam time. It would make the state system look a little better on paper but the same children benefit. It won’t affect the hnw families, they can afford the vat. The idea of taxing education is immoral - where is the final line drawn? Nursery, swimming lessons, sports clubs, university tuition? All ‘choices’ open only to those who can afford them beyond the basic government provision of the state school system.

@Gigi606 it already happens.

Well it’ll be even harder with ex private parents and more funds in competition

I'm just surprised that they seem to think this is such an important issue, this and enfranchising 16 and 17 year olds, are the only remotely definite things I have seen them mention.

Neither of them seem like top priority policies to me.

No it won’t. Tiny tiny minority. And surely if you are the parent of state schooled children more money diverted into the state school system is a good thing ? Many schools are struggling horrendously because of cuts to funding, losing TAs, often providing SEN support, reducing subjects taught like drama and music, curtailing enrichment projects for the neediest. And yet the tiny minority are more important.

No it mostly will go to the house price near the best schools.

It may go to the PTA in small amounts but it’ll be more inaccessible to those who can’t access by house prices

As pp said you get private by proxy. That competition will increase

No, but moving a happy kid is still shit.

You pay school fees with NET pay after tax, so you need to earn roughly double GROSS.

Like I said it already happens. Sharp elbowed middle class families already do it whether by buying in the right catchment area or church attendance. They plan years in advance and play the system.
Most kids from poorer families end up at the local sink estate comp (the ones I presume you’re worried about).They almost never get into the best local schools/grammars as they can’t afford the private tuition costs, aren’t aware of how the system works or don’t appreciate the benefit. Those ex private schooled kids will never step inside a school in special measures or needing improvement as their parents have choices. So funnel the extra funding into struggling schools, enrichment projects, literacy improvement, SEN education.

So you can see the issue. More ex private school parents will make the problem bigger.

It won’t help education or funding. Just uplift what you have described in your post.

@Motheroffourdragons

"Not politics of envy or how much it will raise in tax receipts."

It is basic fiscal policy that any tax that costs more than it raises is a really dumb idea.

This should absolutely be the most important factor.

It’s a tiny number.
What you seem to be saying is that the children of MC families will be mainly affected because they’ll be pushed out by would be privately schooled children.
Who knows. School numbers are dropping.
But there’s all kinds of unfairness going on already. Deserving poorer children are excluded from state grammar schools because prep school kids are better prepared. Grammar schools are now for heavily tutored kids from mc families in the know. Maybe fight for better funded state education as a whole rather than campaigning for already privileged children. Like I say there’ve been huge cuts to state education, maybe get cross about that.

You are highlighting exactly what I’m talking about. And extra ex private parents will follow similar behaviour because they have the extra funds to do so.

I would prefer politicians to look at keeping education budget as is and embracing falling rolls. The end result could be smaller state class sizes and higher per pupil funding

I don’t think the policy you want will give you the results you are after, and you’re half way there with describing how parents select top state schools

I think we can and should do better for state students, not this

Ah so maybe one policy should be state schooled kids get first dibs on grammar school places. No seven years in private then miraculously discovering state grammar schooling. Now that would go down well 😂

Lots of kids have to move schools because of poor parental choices. The state isn’t responsible for your choices. Should have planned ahead. I’m sure with your £100k a year you could have find a house near one of the many ( 86%) good or outstanding state schools.

I think state kids should have first dibs on all uni places or the percentage of state kids applying should be the percentage that get places ie a
percentage is reserved for state kids. Foreign students and privately educated can squabble over the rest.

And how do local councils embrace falling school rolls ? It’s not uniform all over the country. We have large numbers of migrants in our town, often speaking no English. We have considerable economic deprivation, low attainment, low aspiration in some communities. And yet funding has dropped. Schools say they need more. I believe them.

Umm. Ok sweetie. Sure.

@Underparmummy 🤮

The education budget stays as is and higher funding per pupil as fewer students in state

It’s pretty easy

I don’t think it is. Why shouldn’t we pour money into state education. The future is our kids as they say.
And more money funnelled into poorer areas. Those with areas of high private education use get less than areas of deprivation and universal low achievement. Tunbridge wells has advantages that Barnsley or Oldham will never have. And yes it could have been part of the much vaunted levelling up that never happened.