To not see how the gov will make any money from taxing private schools?

[AngryHedgehog]

All the other threads seem to have descended into bunfighting over the ethics of the policy, yet I'm not really understanding how this stands to benefit the government as surely they'll be footing the bill for all the kids that move to state schools?

As a disclaimer, I don't have kids and wouldn't be able to afford to privately educate them even if I did, despite earning a half decent salary.

I'm reading that it costs around £7k per pupil per term, so it would take the VAT from around four families to fund each additional child moving to state education.

Given that this may be 4/10 kids in private education moving to state schooling, I don't see how this doesn't create a net loss as there will only be 50% more kids left in private education and there needs to be multiple times that for the VAT increase to foot the bill.

Surely I'm missing something here?

I don't follow your logic.

Essentially they're been subsidised by the tax payer for decades, and why should the tax payer be paying for children that aren't their own to get an elite education?

Can you explain how this works?

You want to charge VAT on education? You will be pleased that we are no longer bound by EU regulations on this then.

Because they've not being paying the same level of tax as state schools, that ARE charged VAT. That's money that could go towards paying for a better education for everyone, but isn't, so tax payers have to make up the difference. The private schools are also not doing anything to earn the charitable status that is the reason they're not charged VAT. It is a lose-lose situation for the tax payer, obviously unfair, and leads to an unequal society.

My SIL discontinued her teacher training when a pupil threw a chair at her. That was only the proverbial ‚straw‘.

One of my exes discontinued his teacher training at secondary when a student threatened him with a knife.

The secondary school down the road had to cancel its own open evening because the students decided to riot.

My catchment school had to call the police to break up a fight.

Chatting with kids down the road reveals a blase approach to the lockdowns they have weekly because of violent students, people bringing knives, etc. It truly doesn’t faze them at all as it’s so common.

Many schools are not ‘naice’ and dropping a handful of private school kids in isn’t going to change that.

Perhaps we are just unlucky with the local offering. Perhaps.

why the hell aren't private schools paying VAT in the first place

They are. They are paying input VAT which they can’t reclaim (unlike state schools). This policy is about output VAT which parents, not schools, have to pay.

The fact they get charitable status is ridiculous.

Around half of schools don’t have charitable status. That status has nothing to do with VAT.

Essentially they're been subsidised by the tax payer for decades

They’re not subsidised. My children’s education costs the taxpayer £0. A state educated child costs the taxpayer £8k per year.

Private schools are run for profit. They are businesses.

Around half of private schools are run as business and pay corporation tax on profits. The other half are charities and cannot make a profit.

Hopefully the additional parent power (and of course a Labour government) will actually see some of the schools improve.

If the “parent power” of the 94% hasn’t made a difference, why would any other parents make a difference?

The misunderstanding on the basics of this policy from people with such strong opinions on it is astounding.

VAT is already charged on education. Just not for private schools.

@horseyhorsey17 the reason they don't charge VAT is that under EU rules education was an exempt supply, nothing to do with being a charity. Now we are out of EU Government can change the rules.

Private schools are not losing their charitable status under this policy

Because they've not being paying the same level of tax as state schools

Correct. Private schools are paying MORE even now. Private schools are paying input VAT. State schools aren’t as they can reclaim it. Private schools are already paying more.

state schools, that ARE charged VAT.

Incorrect. State schools reclaim that VAT. Private schools can’t.

charitable status that is the reason they're not charged VAT

Incorrect. VAT and charitable status are separate issues. There are plenty of non charitable private schools who don’t have to charge VAT.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/vat-on-education-and-vocational-training-notice-70130

you might find this helpful to read. Your understanding is factually inaccurate.

It's the local authorities who reclaim the VAT on behalf of LA-run state schools and it's not necessarily given back to the schools. Also VAT is complicated and it's not always straightforward to reclaim.

Yes tax payers are subsidising Tarquin and Cressida's eduation, because the fact that private schools are not paying their fair share to the Treasury in terms of tax means that the tax payers are making up the difference.

Not being able to make a profit doesn't stop 'charities' from paying large salaries and bonuses.

I spy with my little eye something beginning with Conservative press officers...

Exactly that. You HIRE out your swimming pool, we give ours up for free. To the benefit of the state schools using it.

It's the local authorities who reclaim the VAT on behalf of LA-run state schools and it's not necessarily given back to the schools.

It’s accounted for in the budgets so, yes, they do effectively get the benefit.

Yes tax payers are subsidising Tarquin and Cressida's eduation

Another childish name calling post.

private schools are not paying their fair share to the Treasury in terms of tax

Private schools schools are already paying more than state counterparts (funding the TPS, input VAT, sometimes corporation tax)

Take 2 families. Family 1 earns £100k and funds their child through private school, costing the taxpayer £0. Family 2 earns £2m and uses the state school system at great cost to the taxpayer, but not a penny cost to themselves. Which family isn’t paying their “fair share”?

In response to your edit: I’m not a Conservative press officer. You can believe this policy is wrong without being a staunch Tory.

But inevitably true. My job as a mum is to raise my child in a safe secure environment, to be well educated, civilised, hard working and kind.

In order to do that, I will do whatever it takes. And if that meant moving to keep him away from a poor quality school, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

It's the private schools that aren't paying their fair share of tax. Again, the question is why they should be exempt from VAT. Private schools don't offer net benefits for ordinary tax payers, particularly as private school educated kids hoover up all the best-paying jobs in just about every industry (and then moan about paying tax themselves and think they are above all that, as your responses on here show). It's such a classic Tory argument about a low tax state, I really can't be bothered wasting time arguing with someone trying to score points for the Conservatives ahead of a GE. Private schools embed inequality and if this means a load of them shut down, then good. (I doubt it though, sadly).

well since many of the kids in the private school where we live are the children of drug dealers, dodgy “businessmen” and general gang types, I expect the cost of a baggy/cocaine to go up ditto the protection money paid for “security” at building sites, for restaurants etc.

Bollocks. 🤣

How many private schools need metal detectors at the gates?

I work in a private school (top tier) and send DC to a private school (second tier).

I know several colleagues who will need to withdraw their DC from the prep school or not progress to secondary.

Something that no-one has mentioned is the private school boarding places subsidised by the Govt for military families. I realise this is a small amount I comparison, but presumably the govt won't stop paying these fees which does wipe out some of the gains too!

The exodus has already started. And 20% isn’t a ‘tiny’ increase

Exactly, the same as our schools bursar. To the dismay of many envious people independent schools will continue to prosper. Why shouldn’t I be able to give my child a better education than the one being offered by the state? If I can afford to do so. Surely it frees a space for another child. Especially in our location, where all state schools are oversubscribed.

@horseyhorsey17 how do you feel about grammar schools?

Nonsense. Given the small percentage of children in private schools there are already a lot of children from educated high achieving families in state schools.
If they have not been able to resolve the issues, how are a few more going to help?

This^

Why do state school parents expect private school parents to come along and improve standards at their schools, or their DC to improve the behaviour?

Why haven’t they done it themselves. My private secondary has 500 DC, our local state 2,000. Why does it take a handful of our parents and DC to change the culture at your school.

Do it yourself. I might be moving my DC to state, I’ve not decided yet, but if and when I do I certainly wont be spending any of my time lobbying for improvements or on the PTA.

I have mixed feelings! But don't have time to write the necessary essay on the subject.

None of that is actually true. State schools do not pay VAT. They pay VAT on purchases which they can then claim back in full. Currently, private schools are not allowed to do the same.
Only half of private schools are charities and it is an entirely separate issue from VAT. They will not lose their charitable status with this policy (on a side note, some of them don’t do much for that status and others do a hell of a lot). As it stands, it’s a win-win for the taxpayer but if the policy goes ahead, the taxpayer will almost certainly lose out. Fiscally, this policy makes no sense.

My dc goes to the local state school. DC costs the tax payer approx £90,000 for his education from reception to leaving.

Friend’s DC goes to private school, his education costs the tax payer £0, tax payer benefits from VAT paid by school for purchases and income tax and NI for all the employees at the school. Local tax payers also benefits from free use facilities at the school. Some of the parents live overseas so tax payers benefit from money coming into the country. But I suppose as window tax was abolished the tax payer is losing out on the money they would have paid if it hadn’t been abolished so they must be being subsidised….

I actually spent a few years in private education and would've probs struggled without tbh. I'd spent quite a few years struggling with undiagnosed ADHD in the state system and was only assessed (parents paid for it) after being removed from mainstream education.

Once I was on medication and had a couple of stable years under my belt I went back to state schooling and did fine.