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?

The vast majority sending their children to these schools won't care.

I'm sorry but high earners need to be taxed. We need to increase taxation on those that can afford it rather than squeezing the lowest earners.

@EasternStandard "the majority of which will not investigate the nuance of net fiscal gain"

I think the problem is, you'll find it fairly hard to argue when your calculations involve a lot of wild speculation about the impact of VAT imposition on parental decision making.

This again!

how about people start to consider the impact on all the support staff at this schools? The schools employ a lot of maintenance people, kitchen staff, cleaners, office support, IT, theatre technicians, DT technicians etc. These people are skipping over to state schools as state schools don’t have the budget

Yes we should be taxing high earners more but the bands are out of kilter after years of fiscal drag. The middle can only be squeezed so much

plus there needs to be a push on corporation tax collection.

Just so depressing to hear you framing criticism of Conservative policy as 'moaning'.

How do you expect people to respond to a huge fall in living standards, and such disastrous public health policy that for the first time in decades we're now actually seeing a rise in infant mortality and shrinking life expectancy in low income communities? 😞

It’s not really if the outcome is poor economically and educationally

It’s only serving as GE fodder

You do actually need it to have a positive outcome

Whose calculations?

The main problem will be this is a voter policy and the behavioural impact is last to politicians

That’s not good for education or funding

Our lower earners are paying lower tax rates than many other European countries. That’s one of the reason we are in such a mess. The majority of the tax is being paid by a very small group of people.

@DayDreamer7979

I'm not a Conservative advocate so that intimation holds zero relevance to me.

I haven’t assumed anything about who you vote for.

There is circa 10,000 - 14,000 children benefiting from this fund, across every department, including those who are having fees paid at schools abroad.

I have the MoD and FDCO figures as provided in the HoC written answers:

4210 MoD children in UK schools
510 FDCO children in UK schools
1188 FDCO children in overseas schools

Perhaps you have the details of these other 3000 - 7000 children?

There is a distinction between full time boarders and weekly boarders. Most boarders are weekly (although described as full time as opposed to occasional up to 3 days per week). MOD families pay termly boarding fees, and make up the larger percentage of total boarders in most prep and senior schools outside London.

I understand the difference between full, weekly and flexi boarding, hence I gave the ISC figure of 80% of boarders are full boarders.

There are around 55,000 full boarding pupils in the UK according to the ISC’s own data. If there are only 4,210 MoD CEA children in the UK then they can’t make up the larger percentage of total boarders in most prep and senior schools outwith London.

That Government review 14/15 years ago had a delta of £180million. At that time the majority of claimants were higher ranking officers. Today many MOD families have caught onto the fact they can receive private schooling not just officers.

And yet that review was setting the baseline against which to cut the number of MoD CEA recipients, not increase it, which has happened to some extent as demonstrated by the HoC written answers and FOI requests?

Labour should also look to abolishing school distance and catchments as an entry criteria for state schools. We have a mini private school system in this country, whereby the house prices surrounding the very best state schools are astronomical compared to houses just outside the catchment. This system still caters to those who have the means, just like private schools.

This won’t happen but your mini private schools are about to get harder to access

A lottery approach to get into schools would be an environmental disaster. Kids being driven across towns passing several schools in the process is not acceptable environmentally. Children should attend their nearest high school. All schools should have the funding they require to manage the needs to the children who come through their doors.

Ok now I understand what you are trying to say… however people do not send their children to private school because they don’t want them to socialise with the riff raff… perhaps some do but I assume most send them because they deem it provides a better level of education, more facilities, more specialist teachers etc..

@Jessie21

"I'm sorry but high earners need to be taxed. We need to increase taxation on those that can afford it rather than squeezing the lowest earners"

Out of interest- what would you define as a high earner?

For most people, a high earner is defined as "anyone who earns more money than me."

The policy isn’t about taxing high earners though. It’s about taxing people at a certain type of school. You could be earning £5m a year, use the state education system, and not have to pay a penny more in tax with this policy.

As pp says this policy is not about penalising high earners. The genuinely rich won't care and many of them don't use private schools anyway.

The real casualties of this policy will be families with some disposable income who decide to spend that on education rather something else. By making it harder for those families to send their children to private school it seems labour would rather they spend that money on new cars and holidays rather than their children's education.

And that is how we know it is ideological. It is nothing about raising money for state schools or asking those with the broadest shoulders to contribute more. As we can see, it probably won't raise much money. It won't make a jot of difference to state schools. I can't vote for this spiteful Labour Party that would advocate for a tax on learning just because they hate private schools.

@SabrinaThwaite could you link where you got these figures from, I’d be interested to see. I assumed MOD numbers were much higher.

I can't vote for this spiteful Labour Party that would advocate for a tax on learning just because they hate private schools.

I think people are forgetting that Labour are going to win, because the other party in the race constantly hit the ball in the net. They aren’t going to lead because of their manifesto, they are going to be in because the Conservatives f&cked it up.

Labour are just as big a pile of shite as the other lot. They’ll screw us over. Yes, they are spiteful. We are replacing one shit show for another.

As soon as KS gets in, just watch people like Diane Abbot, and Jeremy Corbin come sniffing around. Even if KS is a half decent bloke, his party are another bunch of infighting incompetents.

They are keeping quiet now, but once they are in power, we’ll have to suffer listening to Jeremy, Diane AND Tony Blair.

I don’t think it matters greatly, I expect most current parents will make it work, but a few less may join. Boarding schools will recruit more Chinese kids. A few day schools may close or become state schools. Coupled with birth dates falling it will be gradual and imperceptible except for a few places where they close and there is some local disruption. A few more engaged parents in the state system won’t hurt. My kids were never going private and now there is even less chance.

I really hold those who are complaining about this in the highest contempt.

If you can’t afford it, either get a better paying job, make other sacrifices or accept you can’t afford it. Deal with it.

It would appear this isn’t the thread for you…try some other ones, I’m sure you’ll find one to suit you…

Or move to one of the best state schools. Motivated and wealthy parents will deal with it.

It won’t do much more than increase house prices and decrease access for others though.