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.

It won’t come in next parliamentary session. Well they can announce it but I expect post due diligence they’ll realise it’ll cos more than it’ll make.

I agree that some of it is semantics - tax break, tax exemption, whatever really. I do think there is a nuance here that no-one pays tax on education currently so there isn't a tax break for one group over another which is what the phrase implies. There is just no tax applicable full stop.

However, the language that Labour has been using has been divisive, also referring to it 'closing a tax loophole' which is wrong.

There seems to be a wide range of misconceptions about VAT, charitable status and private schools. Private schools already pay input VAT which they cannot currently reclaim so they are not avoiding VAT in this regard. (this is something state schools do not currently have to do - maybe they are the ones getting a 'tax break'?)

And finally, it is not the school which will be charged the VAT, it is the parent. The school is merely passing on the charge just as any shop or your builder would do. We don't ask any of those businesses to absorb the VAT on behalf of the customer but Rachel Reeves seems to think private schools should be doing this. It's not clear (at least to me) why this is.

Agreed. It's not as simple as number of kids leaving private needing to balance with number of spaces available in state. A private school may reach a tipping point if 10% of their pupils leave meaning the whole school closes down even when the remaining 90% hadn't intended to leave. Some of these will go to other private schools but the world isn't a perfect jigsaw which can be neatly slotted together.

It will be logistically challenging to find spaces in the right schools for all the children potentially affected. I am also reading on other forums about parents giving up work to home educate as an alternative (especially in the SEN space) thereby having a knock-on effect on the economy and income tax generation. I don't know if the IFS report considered all of these unintended consequences.

@Bushmillsbabe I had this very conversation recently with a family member who supports the policy. I asked her why it was ok for a state school parent who was a higher-rate tax payer to not be asked to support the state school system through their taxes when private school parents are effectively being asked to pay twice. Her answer? They already do pay through their taxes! There was just no logic.

State school parent: pay higher-rate tax, take advantage of free school place - minimal gain to the exchequer

Private school parent: pay higher-rate tax, reject offer of free school place (gain to the exchequer), pay fees (contributing to a business which employs in the local community), pat VAT on fees (more gain to the exchequer)

One kid from my kid's class has already decided to transfer to tbr local state in anticipation of the fee increase. I think there won't be a big jump across but I think numbers will just reduce in private. Also in our town, there is outstanding state and an excellent private secondary. I would imagine that anyone who was in tbr fence will go to the state secondary.

I agree absolutely and I would like to see that Labour have a proper plan for this…but they don’t. It’s infuriating to read repeated posts on these threads saying that it’s fine because there are enough spare places in the state sector to accommodate pupils from independent schools when it’s clearly not as simple as that.

@TeenagersAngst
. I do think there is a nuance here that no-one pays tax on education currently so there isn't a tax break for one group over another which is what the phrase implies. There is just no tax applicable full stop.

This is not true. All the tutors I hire via a tutor company for my DC are charged with VAT on top. Tutoring companies are not exempt from VAT. Tutoring is education.

I cannot afford a private school. My DC go to a state school. But because the teaching is so poor, and I can afford it, I have maths, science and music tutors for my DC. I am privileged compared to the many parents who cannot afford tutors. But parents who can afford private schools are privileged compared to me and they get to buy education tax free. This is unfair. This is a tax break for education that only the most wealthy get.

OP - I think this post sums up most of the responses.

Basically, people who can't afford private education are frankly delighted that those who can (some only just!) will now experience some of the hardships they've had to.

It really is a race to the bottom isn't it!? 🙄

Not all private tuition is VAT-able, it depends on the institution that is delivering the tuition. But I do take your point. You want the best for your children. So do I. I live near a shite state school and wasn't prepared to send my children there. We all do what is best for our kids.

Education should be improved from the bottom upwards, not diminished from the top down. It's not a race to the bottom.

Fund state education properly from general taxation not by dividing families, many of whom are only trying to do the best by their kids in whatever way possible.

State education isn't a "hardship". You are not being oppressed by any of this.

Give us one reason why we should care.

All tutoring is VAT liable if the business turnover is over the VAT threshold, just like any other business.

It’s not a hardship to require those who can afford it the most to pay VAT when those who can afford it the least already do pay VAT for education above and beyond the state education.

No, it's not. The VAT liability of supplies of private tuition can vary according to the subject being taught and the legal entity which is providing the services.

it’s a horribly divisive policy

Well not really. The vast majority are in favour of it or not interested in it. It's just that the tiny minority who don't like it happen to be very loud on MN and perhaps over-represented in certain parts of the media, whose journalists or editors presumably send their own kids to private schools. Most of us don't even know anyone with DC in private schools.

Education should be improved from the bottom upwards, not diminished from the top down. It's not a race to the bottom.

Charging VAT on private schools doesn’t diminish education! It simply means you now are being asked to pay the full cost of it. The tutoring I pay for is in no way diminished because I pay the full cost of it. Why should you enjoy tax free purchase of education when I don’t?

Yes state education does need to be improved, but this idea that paying VAT is going to “diminish education” is just silly.

Yes, this is what Labour is relying on to distract from the fact that they don't really have a plan to improve state education which doesn't require income tax rises.

Have you really not realised that yet?

93% of people in real life either support the policy, or couldn't really give a shit.

Probably one of the least divisive policies any party could ever come up with.

@SugarandSpiceandAllThingsNaice of course it will. It's naive to think otherwise. This will have an impact - Labour have considered penalising private schools before and rejected it. But this Labour government has no money - they need to raise it in more ingenious ways.

No-one was crying out for VAT on school fees before, I think most state school parents thought paying the fees alone was enough on top of the tax we already pay. Now, all of a sudden, the rhetoric is 'pay up what you owe, you greedy bastards'

Honestly, the tone of this question. "Do you ignorant proles understand this? I don't suppose you do so let me throw some propaganda at you and see if I can get into your thick skulls why I am stamping my feet. Because my massive sense of entitlement means that I do have a right to your sympathy. Nobody needs food banks anyway."

And one of my kids went to private school. As I did, on a scholarship.

93% of children are state educated. It's hardly a race to the bottom.

You are not being asked to pay twice.

There's a state place if you want it. Your income tax is paying for that. You are choosing not to use this. You've paid for it once.

Instead you are choosing to pay for a different, luxury and elite product. That product is now going to be liable to VAT. You are paying for that product nice via a different tax.

Your choice.

You

Makes a refreshing change from the usual rhetoric about benefit claimants being grabby bastards, doesn't it.

I'm not sure why you think you know what most state school parents thought though.

You are incorrect. It doesn’t vary according to subject at all. It only varies according to whether business providing it has turnover exceeding the VAT threshold. Just like every other business.

Tutoring companies are not eligible bodies for VAT exemption. The only legal “entities” in education that are VAT exempt are those that do not charge for their services, and are therefore not business activities.

Can't be bothered to argue but google it. You can read articles in tax magazines about the vagaries of private tuition and VAT.