I genuinely want pro-VAT people to answer these two questions

[Seenandheard]

(1) Do you realise that a private school child saves the tax payer/government thousands of pounds per year by not taking up a space in state school? Not to mention the space in the classroom/competition for places? (Do you care about this point or gloss over it in your minds?!)

(2) Do ypu realise that taxing education is illegal in the EU?

Yes or no to both points, please.

I do not want reams of uninformed angry opinions. I don't want this to turn into a multi page thread/bun fight. I just want to understand whether people realise these two points, really, truly understand them. Because it seems to me that there is a mentality of "they're getting a tax break" (WRONG) or "they're taking something away from my child" (WRONG) or "they can afford it so they can spread their wealth a bit" (I'm not going into the fact that my family spend more on taxes than Nordic countries, who have a far, far higher standard of living. We give so much, get almost nothing in return- but apparently we need to give more. More. More.)

I think my deep rooted anger here is to do with people's attitudes and uninformed opinions more than the policy itself. I need to know if people are aware of the facts.

Wanting better for my kid and paying for it! What a cunt i am

1. Yes, and hopefully any increase in places needed in state schools will be covered by the new VAT… But with the benefit of also improving education for the more disadvantaged
2. No I hadn’t considered legislation in other jurisdictions as part of this debate

Parents of those children in private education - this message is directed at you.

1. There’s a fantastic, informative Facebook group you can join which gives up to date information about the policy and also weekly updates about the motions in place to contest the policy. It didn’t get passed before due to these contested issues- there is a council opposing it and going down the legal route.

1. If the policy gets passed - private schools will look at reducing the fees they currently charge and then (as it will be a legal requirement to do so) add the VAT on so it’s inline with the current fees. They will potentially take away bursaries and scholarships as to not increase the fees further. (Appreciate that’s not ideal for those children who currently have them but they can’t justify increasing fees and others having it for discounted or free).

1. If the policy comes into place, private schools can now claim back the VAT from building work from previous years and going forward, this will allow them to absorb some of the costs. Articles have come out this week suggesting the schools may actually become wealthier due to this so level it out.

1. Those parents of children who have put their child in due to SEN needs - two points- firstly - if your child needs an EHCP start the process. There’s some brilliant third parties who will help you get this and help you with the tribunal appeal. This means the EHCP can go to state school with you if you move OR it means you won’t pay the VAT as labour said children with EHCPs are exempt.

Secondly, if your child doesn’t have the need level and wouldn’t get an EHCP talk to the school, I’m sure they would prefer to keep you than lose you over a relatively small about of money.

1. Those parents with their own businesses- get an account and use your child allowance gift aid that is tax free (just this alone pays for the VAT in one year).

1. If you need to move into state schools- you can move location to a Grammar school area or better school. If you do this before the natural period of transitions you’ll be guaranteed a place. Don’t panic!

1. Lastly- private school parents - I’m not sure Mumsnet is the best place to discuss a policy that doesn’t apply to many and doesn’t involve them. Parents who oppose it need to be on the plenty of forums who are taking action rather than arguing with people who are against private schools/ have no political sway either way/ it’s not their personal business and argue when those in private schools put forward logical , backed up arguments.

It will be interesting to see if the ‘charitable’ private schools reduce fees before adding the VAT for parents. As their net won’t be the full 20% after offsetting

Yep and here's the petition

www.change.org/p/stop-labour-from-adding-20-vat-to-private-school-fees-and-forcing-kids-to-change-schools

Actually it seems to the opposite. Looks like schools will be snapping up any extra pupils.

www.theguardian.com/education/2024/apr/11/english-schools-could-lose-1bn-by-2030-as-pupil-numbers-fall

I think its hard to say it's 'wrong'. People can say I don't agree with it, I wouldn't chose it. But to say 'it's wrong' is so absolute. There are cases where it's absolutely the right thing for a specific child, and they benefit greatly from it in terms of their mental wellbeing. We have definitely considered it, as our daughter struggles in a noisy busy class, we have considered whether she might be ND. All the thinking around ND is that it is the environment which should be changed, not the person, so yes as parents we have a responsibility to make sure she is in an environment where she can thrive.

And there will of course be the calls of 'but what about the other children who can't afford it'. I am responsible for my child, as others are responsible for theirs. So if making a choice in the best interests of my child makes me selfish, then go right ahead, call me selfish. That doesn't make me wrong, or a bad person, or a bad parent. It's no different to the parent who goes and fights the council for the support their child needs, we are all fighting for the best for our child, as is our right and our responsibility.

I actually don't think for a second this policy will happen.. i was worried but i'm not now I've seen whats going on in the background to prepare to challenge it. And Starmer wont want hundreds of children unable to find a school place anywhere near their home when it's re-election time.
It wont look good will it?

But unfortunately risk adverse patents are uprooting and tearing their children out of their beloved schools now in fear and that is a problem for state schools, private schools, families and communities.

But you witch hunters carry on waving your pitchforks in the ignorant bliss you exist in

1. Yes, I understand that. But I would still prefer the govt to raise more money from private schools and I don't think they ought to have charitable status. Parents will still be able to send their kids to private schools; they will cost more than they do at the moment. That will mean some families have to make very difficult choices, and you can feel sympathy for those individuals while still approving of the policy.

1. No, I didn't know that. I'd rather we were in the EU, but we're not.

To the person who asked, we could probably just about afford private school, though it'd be a stretch. I'm state educated, DH is privately educated. Neither of us would choose private education for our kids.

1 - Yes, but I don’t gaf. I’m happy for my taxes to pay to educate 100% of children, not merely 93%

2 - Yes. I knew that and I can see that there is and argument against taxing “worthy” purchases. Lots (but not all) food is exempt from VAT. Fuel/energy is a reduced rate. Children’s clothes are exempt - but only if the children are smallish and it’s preposterous that stuff like a £3k gucci dress for an 8yo is VAT exempt but a primark jumper for a big 15yo isn’t. However I run a business that dutifully hands over close to 20% of turnover to HMRC every 3 months on the dot and I’m pissed off that some businesses are far more profitable and dodge the tax. The VAT system needs a huge overhaul generally but idk how you can’t see how tone deaf it is to say things that rich people only can afford should be exempt because reasons when we are paying VAT on the fuel that poor people use to heat their homes through the winter. Pay your fucking tax like everyone else.

1. Yes I know. No I don't care.
2. We aren't in the EU, there was a bit of a thing around this, did you miss it?

No they are not a "token few". There are about 120 kids with SEN in my DC's school (about 10%). I recently looked at another private school for him and about 20% of the pupils there have SEN. Many of them were previously educated in the state sector who failed to support their needs.

People thinking you should pay tax on luxuries doesn't mean they think you're a cunt. Many posters on this thread (and the many others about the same topic) have said they don't think private education should be abolished, they just don't think people who choose to pay for it should be entitled to a tax break. Even those who do fundamentally oppose the existence of private schools aren't doing it 'at' you.

How is 'exemption for VAT' different from 'a tax break'?

Any business providing a service for money over the VAT threshold is expected to charge VAT. That's the default. I would say any deviation from that (exemptions etc) can be considered a tax break. Tax breaks aren't necessarily a bad thing - it's a way of encouraging or discouraging certain behaviour, but it is still a tax break.

Yes

and

Yes

and I work in a private school and can't wait till none of them exist and this giant con can stop being perpetrated on an unaware customer base.

Are you saying that the local authority lied on their response to the FOI request?

That's an old article and the DfE have recently revised their figures.

As a general point, it's of no help if there are spare places in Hull but a private school in Kent closes (just picking two random places).

I don't think VAT exemption it's different from a tax break. But I do think it's different to 'tax dodging'.
Tax break/exemption is something legally allowed.
Tax dodging is something underhand and potentially illegal, so those calling parents who haven't paid vat on their child's school fees tax dodgers is the issue, when they haven't done anything illegal.

Edit: sorry, I thought you were asking a question but just realised you were answering one. I think 🤔

I'm a supply teaching assistant in a deprived area. The children mostly are not even arriving in cars, they are walking. The last school day trip was voluntary contribution only to cover costs. The parents didn't understand the 'voluntary' bit, and were falling over themselves to give the money in with the permission slips. I remember a parent apologising profusely for having forgotten, promising to bring it in the next day (which she did) and being embarrassed by my gentle reminder that it was voluntary. Not one parent out of the 35 children going didn't pay.
I know you people think everyone who doesn't have a 3 figure salary has no pride these days, but it isn't true at all in my experience.
I am saddened by the attitude that comes across from some of you that only private school parents are invested in their children's education.
As though spending a whackload of money is the only indicator. Believe me, many of our parents are just as concerned about how their child is getting on, and often ask at parents evenings what they can do for little Johnny who is struggling. Of course, some couldn't care less, but let's face it, it's not like private schools don't have parents who aren't interested. Some just pay the money because it's the 'done' thing in their set, do nothing with them at home and rely on the money to keep their child there. I went to college with a boy who attended a very expensive establishment. His parents were away most of the time, didn't care about his increasingly poor performance or show any interest in him. It was a boarding school, he was dumped there for their convenience and only turned up at our lowly state sixth form when the parents could no longer buy their way out of his inevitable expulsion. I felt sorry for him, but he said it wasn't uncommon in boarding schools for parents to do nothing but chuck money at the school.
But we don't hear about that, do we? It's always been acceptable for those with money to hand their kids over for a whole term. Too posh to parent, since some of the time it isn't even that both are in full time work. When working class mothers use a nursery 5 days a week, there's always a pearl-clutcher gasping about mothers not parenting their own kids. 'Oh, when do you SEE the poor darlings! How awful that you don't eat breakfast with your child but put them in breakfast club.' Change 'nursery' to 'nanny' and 'breakfast club's to full time boarder and suddenly all the objections vanish. Being uninvolved has always been acceptable in society if you have money to buy the very best people to do your parenting for you. It's only unacceptable if you are working all the hours to provide the basics and have to use state provision for a few hours to enable you to do that.
But of course, every single 'sink estate' parent just wants a free fucking lunch. None of them are sat up with their SEND child night after night because they aren't sleeping. None of them are begging the teachers for support in helping their child who struggles with reading at home.

@Dibblydoodahdah how many current private school pupils do you see being withdrawn and sent to state schools instead? As a rough percentage?

We don't resent anybody - we just don't care.

1. Yes, no

2. Yes, so?

I didn't say that no state school parents are interested in their child's education, a good proportion are. I went to state school, my children go to state school, all my children's friends go to state school and all are interested in their child education.

My question was why do private school parents need to be the ones to improve state schools. The comments on here are very much that it takes either money from private school parents or 'sharp elbows' from private school parents moving into state schools, for state schools to improve, which i think is really insulting.

Why can't state school parents and staff be the ones to improve state schools, if we care about it we need to be the ones improving it, rather than relying on others to do it for us. That's the bit I think is sad, that state school parents and staff aren't thought capable of doing it, we need 'rescuing'. We absolutely flippin don't!

My children go to a fabulous, very economically diverse state school, with a larger than average SEN provision, higher than average FSM and pupil premium. An amazing leadership team has pulled the school from requires improvement to outstanding, with no extra money from the government, with the same cohort of pupils and families, with the support of some very engaged parents and a proactive visionary approach.

@stonedaisy "Possible but ignorant"

Fair enough. I would be happy to engage in a polite and respectful discussion. You obviously aren't. Possibly because you know that your views are untenable and can only be maintained by fingers in ears and lalala ing.

No one has a clear idea, which is one of the big problems with this policy. The IFS report from July 23 estimated 3-7% but that report is flawed in many others ways and it's just sticking a finger in the air. Some surveys have said up to 25%.

What is clear is that is going to be more problematic in some areas than others because the "spare" places are not spread evenly around the country and some areas have a higher number of kids in private school. The MP for Rutland has spoken about this issue in the HOC today because 1 in 8 go to independent school in her constituency.

A number of Labour MPs have been challenged regarding the lack of spare places in certain areas but they never answer the question properly.

I am prepared to put money on a) this policy coming in the next parliamentary session and b) it causing very little movement between sectors.