Page 20 | To not see how the gov will make any money from taxing private schools?

AngryHedgehog · 2024-05-30T07:32:26+00:00

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?

BoDiddlySquat · 30/05/2024 22:19

HeartseaseGarden has actually nailed it.

It’s not schools that are the problem, it’s piss poor parenting by a large portion of the UK population.

If more parents took an interest in their DC’s education, and instilled some discipline in their DC’s lives, people wouldn’t have to resort to private schools to get an environment that was conducive with learning.

HeartseaseGarden · 30/05/2024 22:20

For those who are adamant that this will not affect SEN pupils, can you explain how independent schools which will have to charge VAT to non-SEN pupils can ensure that those children are not withdrawn from the school by their parents?

Unless the whole independent school is exclusively SEN provision, then they will likely lose income as parents find the fee increases too steep. At some point it becomes impossible to balance the books as numbers on roll fall and the school is at risk of closure.

How are places for SEN children safe if their school closes?

Stop claiming this will not affect SEN pupils unless you have some insider knowledge you care to share.

Sloejelly · 30/05/2024 22:24

HeartseaseGarden · 30/05/2024 22:20

For those who are adamant that this will not affect SEN pupils, can you explain how independent schools which will have to charge VAT to non-SEN pupils can ensure that those children are not withdrawn from the school by their parents?

Unless the whole independent school is exclusively SEN provision, then they will likely lose income as parents find the fee increases too steep. At some point it becomes impossible to balance the books as numbers on roll fall and the school is at risk of closure.

How are places for SEN children safe if their school closes?

Stop claiming this will not affect SEN pupils unless you have some insider knowledge you care to share.

No one has been able to explain how they will implement any SEN/ASN policy across the whole of the UK yet….

WittiestUsernameEver · 30/05/2024 22:47

Uplift · 30/05/2024 10:09

So those enjoying the inequality a private education brings is helping those children by…..?

He’s not making private education more elitist, he’s raising money, whatever the sum and beginning to reduce the numbers of people gaining advantage by inequality.

I hope they go further with other measures. You’re just annoyed because you’re at risk of no longer being able to buy elitest priviledge for your children and will be one of the majority. Funny how we heard nothing from all these parents when they were quietly enjoying the unfair advantages private education brings for their kids.🤔

Show quote history

It is making it more elitist..the uber wealthy really won't be priced out if a school they already are paying £42k+ a year and sending their 3 kids there.

People don't understand just how wealthy some families are...

YourPinkDog · 30/05/2024 22:58

Why would it make it more elitist? In these threads we are always told how lots of children get scholarships.

HooverIsAlwaysBroken · 30/05/2024 23:03

YourPinkDog · 30/05/2024 22:58

Why would it make it more elitist? In these threads we are always told how lots of children get scholarships.

I am afraid that the scholarships will be cut, as will any lending of the facilities as renting them out instead would raise more money.

but I am sure Eton will be fine, it is just the smaller independent schools and probably SEN schools which are tighter on the margins which will close.

YourPinkDog · 30/05/2024 23:06

Why would scholarships and community use of facilities be cut?
Are you saying schools will cut scholarships for poorer pupils, so they do not have to increase fees for wealthy pupils?

FTPM1980 · 30/05/2024 23:09

HeartseaseGarden · 30/05/2024 22:14

@FTPM1980 ”If there is sufficient movement to mean fewer teaching jobs in private those teachers could end up back in state schools.“

They won’t.
They’ll go into private tutoring.

If they wanted to teach in the state sector they would already be doing so.

Edited

Show quote history

Rubbish!
Tutoring is limited and unsociable hours. There wouldn't be enough work to go round.
They have chosen private for the money/benefits because they can. If that's no longer and option of course they will look at state. Teachers move between both all the time

Skyedancer · 30/05/2024 23:29

YourPinkDog · 30/05/2024 23:06

Why would scholarships and community use of facilities be cut?
Are you saying schools will cut scholarships for poorer pupils, so they do not have to increase fees for wealthy pupils?

As they weren’t doing it out of the goodness of their hearts like they all claim they are.

YourPinkDog · 30/05/2024 23:30

@Skyedancer who knew!

ExasperatedDancer · 30/05/2024 23:32

“Tutoring is limited and unsociable hours. There wouldn't be enough work to go round.”

There will be plenty of work if Starmer’s policy forces independent schools to close! 😂

Plus, what makes you think those teachers will stay in education if they lose their jobs? Much better to switch careers as will likely earn more, plus they won’t then have Daily Mail readers complaining that teachers are lazy public sector drones and only work part of the year!

Skyedancer · 30/05/2024 23:33

YourPinkDog · 30/05/2024 23:30

@Skyedancer who knew!

Not from here aye 🤣

Wherearemymarbles · 31/05/2024 00:01

Well if they cuts costs to absorb some of the vat then yes, they may well reduce the number of scholarships.
also most schools require a deposit which is repaid when your child leaves. Ours was £4000 or so. Most parents let the school keep it so it can fund scholarships etc. Indications are that now most parents will ask for it back. Thats potentially about £750,000 per year less to provide scholarship's

YourPinkDog · 31/05/2024 00:04

So you are saying well off parents will stop supporting scholarships to get their own back?

Barbadossunset · 31/05/2024 00:09

@FTPM1980 · Today 22:07
Any movement from private to state school will overall increase standards in state schools

How will it increase standards in state schools?

EBearhug · 31/05/2024 00:19

If there is sufficient movement to mean fewer teaching jobs in private those teachers could end up back in state schools.

Regardless of factors around finance etc - not all are qualified to teach in state schools, for which you need a PGCE or BEd.

bakebelieve · 31/05/2024 01:05

Dotjones · 30/05/2024 10:58

I think that from Labour's point of view it doesn't really matter that it will cost more than it makes, that's not the purpose of this policy. The policy is about being seen to increase tax on "the rich" because many core and wavering Labour voters see those who can afford to send their children to private school as being rich. They're not rich of course, many of them, they struggle and make sacrifices in other areas because they think paying for a decent education for their child is more important than having all the sports channels and having holidays abroad.

This plan is about style over substance - Labour know it will win them more votes than it loses them. That's the important thing in politics generally, but especially in the run up to an election, even an election they seem bound to win. Get the votes, get the power, the inevitable mess comes later. Labour will use "it's the fucking Tories" as an excuse for the country still being in a state at the (presumably) 2029 election. By the 2034 election this crop of would-be cabinet ministers will be stepping down anyway, they'll have made their names and will be moving on to more lucrative endeavours like after-dinner speeches. Shit, even Liz Truss is coining it now - all that matters is being at the top of British politics and you're set for life.

Why is this allowed? Because us, the stupid public, are willing to accept it. We need to stop thinking that politicians are trying to do the best for the country, they are only out for themselves. They might dress things up as doing their best for their country - occasionally they might even do something that actually does help - but only as a secondary concern to the real priority: get power, then make money.

This.

coupdetonnerre · 31/05/2024 03:18

This reply has been withdrawn

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ at the poster's request.

ageratum1 · 31/05/2024 04:40

Mostlycarbon · 30/05/2024 20:09

The private schools round here are planning to absorb 10% of the cost and pass 10% on to parents.

It won't just be 20% vat though.There is also the introduction of business rates for private schools, the increased cost per place as numbers drop,as well as normal inflationary pressures.

Another76543 · 31/05/2024 04:50

EBearhug · 31/05/2024 00:19

If there is sufficient movement to mean fewer teaching jobs in private those teachers could end up back in state schools.

Regardless of factors around finance etc - not all are qualified to teach in state schools, for which you need a PGCE or BEd.

Qualified Teacher Status is not required to teach in academies or free schools (around 80% of secondary schools).

AhNowTed · 31/05/2024 05:38

Accommodating pupils who would otherwise have gone to private schools in state schools would require extra funding. But the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) says that falls in private school numbers as a result of Labour’s policy are “likely to be small” in the short run.
The IFS estimates that Labour’s policy of levying VAT on private school fees could lead to a reduction in private school attendance of 3-7%, which it says “would likely generate a need for about £100–300 million in extra school spending per year in the medium to long run”.
However, it also estimates the policy would generate around £1.6 billion a year in revenue, meaning Labour’s policy could result in a net gain of £1.3-£1.5 billion a year in the medium- to long-run. Altogether it says this “would allow for about a 2% increase in state school spending in England”.
This analysis has been challenged by the Adam Smith Institute, which in its own report argued that it would be “reasonable and cautious”, to consider a “less optimistic” scenario of 10-15% of pupils migrating to state schools, under which it estimates the policy would generate no net revenue.
It’s also worth noting that the total number of pupils in state schools is expected to fall in the coming years (and is projected to have fallen this year compared to last year), so any influx of pupils from the private school system would take place in the context of otherwise decreasing demand for state school places.
The IFS says: “It is possible that the state sector could easily accommodate extra pupils given that overall pupil numbers across England are due to decline by at least 100,000 per year on average up to 2030.”

fullfact.org/news/question-time-30-may-fact-checked/

Lenoftheglen · 31/05/2024 05:41

Everanewbie · 30/05/2024 20:17

That’s a real slap in the face to mothers here who want what is best for their children and make sacrifices to do it for them. I don’t see people on threads where provision for low earners has been cut displaying such contempt. “Oh your free school meals have been cancelled? Boo hoo, you useless scroungers should have been grateful you had it for so long in the first place” Yeah, you’d be horrid. Why is it ok to gloat at people who struggle and graft to give their kids the best opportunities?

Show quote history

I was reading this thread yesterday and felt there were salty comments on both sides. Your comments particularly so, but this is really quite something.

You could have just ignored that somewhat puerile 'boohoo' but instead you chose to reveal your true self - which is dripping with unpleasantness.

PS, @Everanewbie, we send our dc to private school. I don't consider us anymore hardworking than the 93% of parents who send their children to state school. I do not consider myself a better mother because of certain sacrifices made in order to access the education dc are having. It just wouldn't occur to me to think that way. I recognize the privilege, that is as far as it goes.

AhNowTed · 31/05/2024 06:18

Scholarships do “remarkably little” to make private schools more socially inclusive, study finds

Parents of just 6,118 students, around 1% of all private school students, received a full scholarship and the parents of a further 2% received remissions of 75-99% of fees.

“Given the levels of fees, the overwhelming majority of scholarship students still require very substantial family contributions,” said Dr James. “Many scholarships may, in practice, be awarded to middle- or upper-class families. Scholarships may therefore do little to make schools genuinely more socially inclusive.”

www.britsoc.co.uk/media-centre/press-releases/2021/april/scholarships-do-remarkably-little-to-make-private-schools-more-socially-inclusive-study-finds/

toastandtwo · 31/05/2024 06:18

Skyedancer · 30/05/2024 21:14

neither do I - crack on if you can afford it.

I also would if I we had the cash. We earn around £125k combined and it’s nowhere near enough to pay for two children to go to private and live in the SE.

If they want to give up stuff to pay for a huge purchase fine. But don’t complain if it becomes more expensive due to a ridiculous charitable status loophole being closed

Show quote history

For the hundredth or so time on this thread - it’s not a charitable status loophole being closed. This is nothing to do with charitable status.

Under EU law it is illegal to tax education. We are no longer in the EU. That’s where this has come from.

goodkidsmaadhouse · 31/05/2024 06:29

HeartseaseGarden · 30/05/2024 22:00

Why do parents send their children to private schools if there are good state schools around?

Well, ‘good’ is relative.

State schools are generally short on staff, either unable to recruit (hello recruitment crisis) or have significant numbers off on long-term sick. It is far rarer to find supply staff in independent schools than in state ones. If the schools were equivalent you’s expect the same proportions. So there’s clearly a reason for the difference.

I’ve taught in both sectors. Forget the financial status of the parents, that’s irrelevant. What really matters is:

Behaviour. Independent schools enforce behaviour policies, state schools rarely do properly because parents often head to the press and complain about ‘draconian rules’. Cue sad faced photo and a £250 interview fee with the local press.
Spend per pupil. This one is down to governmental policy. £7k per pupil isn’t a lot when you consider this has to cover staffing costs, supplies, building maintenance and insurance. State school teachers are familiar with ‘order in April’ because the budget is extremely limited. In the private sector if you want to order a set of fossils to show your class, go ahead and order them. State schools look at photos online. Unless you request around April…
Class sizes. State sector classes of 30+ are common. For an hour long lesson with 10 mins introduction and 5 mins plenary that’s 45 mins of time to get round whole class doing independent work and check they’re on track. Fingers crossed most are because then you can speed by them to help those who are struggling. Divided equally that’s a maximum of only 1.5mins per pupil. Independent sector classes of 15-20 are not unusual. You do the maths.
Parental support. This is a HUGE part of the success of independent schools. That’s not to say that the parents of state school pupils don’t value education, many of them do. But those parents who don’t think education is important and who tell their kids they don’t have to listen to the teacher if they don’t want to, well, they’re not going to spend on private fees if that’s their attitude, are they?
Tolerance of problem children. Linked to 1 and 4, Independent schools can expel unruly, disruptive or violent children. They have a reputation to maintain and if parents complain that they will remove their children from Year 2 because Tarquin keeps kicking out, then little Tarquin will likely find himself out on his ear. In comparison, it is extremely difficult to remove problem children from state schools. The school has a responsibility to provide education for the children on roll, and there are penalties if pupils are denied access to a school. Better to employ a TA as extra support and sit Tarquin next to a well-behaved girl to try to get him to follow her example and become a decent person. Rotate the girl every term or half-term so there’s less chance of one getting a blood clot from repeatedly being kicked in the shins.

As others have said, this policy won’t actually raise much money, so the guff about ‘fairness’ in using tax revenue to bolster state education is a soundbite, not a rational claim.

Over 90% of children in the UK go to state schools. If the will was there to improve state education it would already have happened. But it hasn’t. This isn’t about money, it’s about attitude.

One state funded school who has tried to replicate the independent model is Michaela in Brent, headed by Katherine Birbalsingh.

A quick Google will show you how much hate she has received for trying to give poor inner city children the same breadth of education that their wealthier contemporaries receive.

Frequently the argument is ‘poor kids can’t do that’. Well, why? If their parents suddenly won the lottery would they magically be able to achieve more? Conversely if wealthy families suddenly lost everything would their children immediately think it acceptable to tell the teachers to f*uck off?

No. Because the difference between state school pupils and independent school pupils is NOT the level of parental income.

The reason there is a divide in the educational outcomes of the two is not something Starmer can fix by making independent schools unaffordable for most.

Parents who support their children do so irrespective of their income. If they can’t afford to send their children to private school they pay for tutoring or sit down with their own kids and help them with homework when they struggle. They take an interest in their children and the education they receive.

Parents who don’t care, who can’t be bothered to potty train their children before starting school, who don’t sit and read with them, who think it’s reasonable for children to answer back to the teacher, who think uniform rules are for other people, who don’t turn up for parents evenings, who frankly couldn’t give a sh!t about their own kids or their education, does anyone really think they’ll have a damascene conversion and suddenly become educational cheerleaders the moment state schools are subject to VAT?

Really?

Anyone?

Because forcing private school pupils into the state sector overnight isn’t magically going to improve the educational outcome of those already in those state schools. How could it?

But then again, money - or the lack of it - isn’t the real problem.

The problem is people.

Quoting this again because it’s one of the few sensible posts in the latter half of this thread. I work in state, have one child in private, two in state. I couldn’t agree more with this post. And I would add that any government who really cares about equality needs to be looking at prenatal and postnatal education and intensive early years intervention. This policy is just a headline grabber and I can’t see it achieving anything in the way of improving educational outcomes across the board or the government’s fiscal position.