To be glad that the VAT on school fees

[Shaketherombooga]

Is now going to be happening in January? what’s the point in stalling it? I think it’s one of many decisions that we just need to get in with.

YABU - it’s SO unfair. Labour hates ‘strivers’ etc etc

YANBU - Yup, Labour said they are taking away tax breaks for private schools, so let’s get on with it.

I don't know where you live but schools are full to the brim where I am. Sadly the parents not sending their kids to private schools will be the ones to use money and influence to get their kids into the best state schools. A bit like Keir Starmer's wife who joined the board of Governors at a top state school so she could get her kids in.

There is a state school in Tottenham which has educational sponsors from local top private schools. Who provide full time teaching staff. In a very underprivileged community. Wonder what would happen to that if private schools lost their charitable status. I think that school really depends on the private school so it’s ’proper’ charity work I think. Doubt these schools would continue ‘sharing’ their staff if they didn’t have to… They must be worried about their future.

Absolutely agree with you. Also the VAT is to train 6,500 new teachers. But what will happen in the meantime? State schools will become oversubscribed now.

also whilst paying for school fees, patents are still paying for the state system through taxation. All seems very strange to me.

@whoseturntostackthedishwasher i guess we are just waiting for you to be told you’re also immoral and don’t care about other kids etc etc then 😃

There won't be as much money rolling into the government from the vat on school fees as people think. For every child in state school, (the schools are funded based on pupil numbers) £7,500 is paid to the school per child, so its going to cost the government that for each child leaving private and going to state school. With private school fees ranging from £15k to £45k who knows if the books will balance.

No but it is a step in the right direction.Its good for your kids too. They will have to stand on their own merit instead of you paying for advantage for them.

My children are both at private school. I’m not “paying for advantage for them”. Whatever that means.

I have no expectations for their futures. They can chose their own paths. I want them to do whatever makes them happy as adults. That’s it.

I send them to private school in order that they make it out of their childhoods unscathed by their school experiences. I was bullied relentlessly at the state school I attended for “thinking I was better than everyone else”. What that meant, is that I did my homework, enjoyed learning and was a smart kid. I wouldn’t wish that on anyone.

I’ve read through a lot of this thread and a thought struck me. Why did Tony Blair and the Labour Party in 1997 with their “Education, Education, Education” focus not put VAT on indie education?

Surely, if this VAT is the answer to all the problems why wasn’t it introduced in 1997? I assume, that Blair knew it wasn’t a viable policy. It must have crossed the minds of the left think-tank but assuming they didn’t think it would bring in any real money.

.And get ready for the next change of the charity status going -

Op the Labour Party were very keen to remove charitable status but apparently this would be too difficult.
Please tell me how charitable status is going to be removed as you obviously know something the Labour Party doesn’t.

Given all the walking around thinking how to make things better that she does, I wouldn’t be surprised if she actually does know something that the Labour Party doesn’t.

They’re obviously not walking around thinking how to make things better as much as the OP is.

How rude. The country relies on people to choose to do jobs that are less well-paid but require a high standard of education, because they want to do something worthwhile. Teachers, nurses, social workers etc. These jobs are essential and are done by people (mostly women) who want to contribute something to society as well as earn a living.

I presumed she was being sarcastic (hope so anyway!)

Paying a salary for educating one child is not mildly comfortable, it’s very well off.

You may find some of the staff working at the school get a discount for their dc to be in the school.

They may be a single parent or non teaching staff

Of course we should investigate. But until then we should definitely give them money, maybe by increasing teacher salaries in those schools?

Lower funding to higher performing schools and higher funding to lower performing schools could make it a bit more equal in the shorter term.

I appreciate the comparison with the NHS and that we need to look into that. But the answer is not to give them too little money until it all is figured out.

Seriously… I don’t get the jealousy with the private education system in this country, when did we become a nation that didn’t want people to aspire to work hard and do better?All the parents are tax payers and actually helping the economy as the state doesn’t pay for their children’s education (when it should). Just think of the burden to our schools if every child in private system needed a state school place and costs involved. Also a lot of these children are SENCO and would be lost in the state system including my daughter, she has dyslexia, a language processing disorder and ADHD (well behaved and a lovely beautiful little girl, well liked with her friends and teachers, just struggling with certain aspects of learning and her disability). We don’t claim a penny from the state not even child benefit, even though entitled to it. I also have dyslexia, adhd and a disability which I don’t claim a penny for. I work hard for my salary not high we are middle earner's. We choose to privately educate our daughter in a non selective private school, where she gets one on one support in class. We are both from poor council estates with zero money growing up and have worked extremely hard and make massive sacrifices to afford the fees.
All this elitism jealously is only harmful to normal people who are aspiring to do better for their families. Not the rich.
Now it appears this policy is just going to cost even more as the schools can claim back all the VAT for costs and back date it years… well done labour for another complete waste of tax payers money.
An article in the press just shows how poorly the Labour government have looked into the consequences of their own policies. Just ignoring the fact that all the money made from the VAT and more, will be needed to be spent creating more places, teachers and schools for the displaced children forced to leave their private schools (all middle class children and the SENCO children). The top 100 schools, rich and super rich won’t care or be affected. Just the middle classes, non selective independent schools forced to close and senco support offered lost to the children who need it most.
Sir Keir Starmer's decision to slap VAT onto private school fees has conjured an image of punishing elite institutions and their patrons.
But the flagship Labour Government tax policy, which was confirmed in the King's Speech, could actually result in a reality that few criticising the policy considered.
Financial experts say that the decidely left-wing move could actually end up benefiting not just HMRC, but some of the elite schools targeted, by increasing their wealth even more.
David Gage, head of VAT at Old Mill, told Headline Money that the 20 percent levy will change the schools' status and will mean they are now able to recover costs.
Mr Gage said: "Currently, private schools are unable to recover VAT on their costs because the provision of education is VAT exempt. However, when the government removes this exemption and makes the provision of private school education taxable (VAT at 20 percent), schools will be able to recover VAT on their costs."
The finance expert says this means that schools will be able to delay capital expenditure (CapEx) or any other significant spending that is subject to VAT until the tax becomes chargeable on school fees.

It also means they can claw back VAT on historical expenditure going as far back as 10 years and opens up the door for schools to become corporates that pay shareholders.
He said: "If schools defer any large CapEx or other VATable expenditure - for example, property projects or large IT projects - until after the rules come into effect, they will be able to benefit from full - or near full - VAT recovery, which, assuming inflation doesn't rise significantly, could mean savings of up to 20 percent."
"Furthermore, if private schools have incurred any historical VATable expenditure on any large property projects including refurbishments or computer hardware, once the rules come into effect, they should be able to recover a proportion of the VAT incurred under the Capital Goods Scheme, which could mean recovering VAT from as far back as 10 years."
So, though these possible paths for private schools don't solve the problem for parents paying the fees, they could represent opportunities that end up boosting institutions already at the elite end of education.

What a well written , evidenced and intelligent answer to a bigoted OP. I love
it when people respond with properly evidenced responses rather than the drivel like the OP has written from made up sources and her crass views. What stands out in this thread is the attitude of those who will do well in life and those who won’t - it’s not down to where people go to school but the people they are inside.

I understand that you had a bad experience at state school and bullying is awful. However that doesn't mean all state schools are like that and all bright and motivated children are bullied in them. Why assume it would necessarily be so for your children?

There are several issues if children join a state school after Christmas 25 - the school will receive no funding for that pupil till September 26 (funding for 24/25 is based on pupil numbers in October 23 and for 25/26 on the census in October 24).

There is as much SEND in independent schools as state - more diagnosed, because parents more ability to fund private assessments and acknowledged by schools as they charge for the support.

House prices near good/outstanding schools will increase as those that can afford it will pay (already happens) particularly grammar areas.

There may be surplus spaces, many in London as school rolls fall as families leave London, but there are plenty of children/parents not getting their school preference, the places are often in the less desirable schools because they are not preferred.

Average class sizes at key stage 3 are around 32. Independent schools have between 16-25 at the same stage.

Not all deficit schools are under subscribed.

6500 teachers 1 split between 4 schools is not going to go far (approx 24,000 state schools in UK).

The wrap around care doesn't exist in the required amount now, many parents deciding on state/ unable to afford private, will need provision that is limited since the pandemic and the potential increase in numbers at primary in state, needs time to adjust (primary is most likely to be first impacted as parents decide to wait for secondary).

When this is introduced it needs to be fully funded as the change happens, but it could be a way of delaying impact on spending by allowing the census to catch up with funding.

St Paul's is on the bracket of v v elite schools that operate a needs blind admissions policy because they can afford to. The vast majority of private schools are nothing like that. An awful lot of these debates would go a very different way I think if people with little or no experience of the private sector actually understood what a typical smaller, provincial non selective private is like and saw their margins. OP you also just said bursaries get given to those that don't need them. Totally wrong. I asked you pages ago to please give me concrete factual figures about precisely how this policy will help state. You haven't yet.

For those who genuinely want to see a more level playing field, with equal facilities etc, how about Labour does away with catchments. All state schools within LA control and places ascribed using SATS results and demographic markers like FSM to ensure a social and academics mix at each school. Fund a connected transport system to overcome geographical issues. No more buying a house near a leafy comp. Your child can go to whichever identikit school the LA puts them in with whatever mix of kids the luck of the draw gets you. You'd still have huge inequality in parental input and attitude but surely that would be a much more effective and wider reaching levelling? What about that? Or is it only ok if Jocasta and Sebastian are disrupted and uprooted 'cos they're poshos who deserve it?

@bellewilson

"when did we become a nation that didn’t want people to aspire to work hard and do better?"

When the left became more left wing, angry and vengeful deciding that rather than addressing inequality by helping the less well off to become better off to instead just bring the well off down to the same level.

The problem with this is that a) it creates division b) destroys ambition and personal responsibility and c) ultimately fails.

I'm still reeling at the idea that an 'elite' private school would be upset that they weren't allowed to use photos of the local state football team in their brochure 😆😆😆😆

@BibbleandSqwauk

OK that would be a start but unfortunately 60 to 80% of intelligence is hereditary:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritabilityoff_IQ

So to create a more level playing field those with high IQ should only be allowed to have children with those of low IQ in order to average out the intelligence genes.

Very well said, I haven’t gone to school in the UK and I am genuinely baffled by the catchment system here, such an obvious way to game the system, and yet everyone makes the private schools being the problem for inequality, when so much inequality exists in the state system itself. I especially like the argument that the private kids should go to failing comps to improve them, when literally everyone packs their whole life and leaves for a better state school. Why don’t state school parents stay and “improve” a failing comp but move to an expensive catchment instead?
As I said, baffling really, especially in the light of posts like this.

but surely you'd be fucking pissed off if your child had to leave at 7am, travel 12 miles, on 3 buses, walking past the school 300m from your house, going past 4 other schools on the way...and then your younger child gets out in the school 7 miles the other direction.