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.

Do stop spouting your hysteria as gospel.

They are still dropping!!!!Very few kids are in private education.

You drive further out IF nothing local. Parents up and down the country do it without a whimper when transporting their kids to their private school of choice.

This!

Never once is there any thought of far needier children on these threads.

Why do you think that because you had a poor educational experience it would be the same for your dc?

And private swimming lessons, and anything you pay for your kid to do.

I have one about to go to university. The costs, compared to when I went to uni, are absolutely eyewatering. The total amount I spent doing a 4 year degree (in the days before Labour introduced fees) will not even cover DS's first year these days.

On the other hand, one of the reasons Starmer is doing this is because it's going to hurt a "small" number of people. The 7% or whatever. Therefore, he can get away with doing it. I doubt he would hurt a larger number of people by VATting stuff like nursery or swimming because he'd lose too many votes.

There is no hysteria. Why do you keep repeating that? Just factual arguments. Some places have much lower capacity than others and, if like the city that my DC’s private school is based in, there are no places whatsoever in some school years, what do you expect people to do? Also, what about parents with multiple children that need a place. It may not be possible for them to “drive out” to multiple schools. It’s a very ill thought out policy with no proper planning.

Hmmmm I dunno, in principle I'm against using wealth to entrench privilege at the expense of society, but in practice I really didn't have any strong feeling towards private schools.

If you'd asked me a year ago I'd probably have said there are better ways the government could tackle wealth inequality and could even have been persuaded to side with private school parents on this.

But after months of almost daily threads on the topic, where private school parents have revealed themselves to be some of the most entitled, patronising, rude and dismissive people I've ever heard from, you're now so far down the list of groups I'd like to see the government support that even ex-tory mps struggling to find a new job are above you.

If anything it's been an excellent example of how not to win people your cause.

You're right, you don't need to 'give a shit'.

Which is precisely what I was referring to in my initial comment: that people who've always been jealous of those who can afford PE are now delighted that they might not be able to.

That's not a personality trait I'd be proud of. But you do you.

@Curryle3af

The "needier children" aren't going to benefit from the policy though. If they were, perhaps parents would be more accepting of it. The IFS admits it will make no meaningful difference to public services. 1 extra teacher per 5 schools and a couple of slices of free toast for breakfast is hardly going to transform the lives of the needier children. If people really want to make a difference to those children, it's about time people admitted that the bulk of the population need to pay more tax, rather than obsessing over VAT on fees which will raise very little (if any).

Just focusing on fencing, if you want private schools to pay VAT on fencing lessons - which will be extra curriculum activities, then state children carrying out extra curriculum activities will need to pay VAT too, if the provider is VAT registered.....careful what yoy wish for.

Because he is very similar to me, has suffered from severe school refusal (as I did), has anxiety (as I did) and hates noisy, large groups of people (as I do). A large comp would destroy his mental health, like it did mine, even if it was “outstanding” as mine was.

One could take a look at their accounts at the Charity Commission or Companies House as appropriate.

For instance one school that is a charity I happened to have just looked up spent 101million pounds last year, of which 49million were staff costs.

Yes +1 for this being the worst PR job in history. I have lots of friends with DC in private/public school, and totally respect their choices. The MN whiners have made me waaaaay less sympathetic to this cause!

This exactly!! Parents who use private schools have already paid tax for a state school place that they don’t use for each child. The government could choose to add up how much that amounts to across the country and share that cash with state schools to help improve them. They don’t. It’s gets channelled elsewhere. Parents with kids at private school pay twice for education. Not paying VAT is not a loophole or a benefit.

also worth considering that existing school campuses are unlikely to be able to cope with even slightly enhanced student numbers, and there have been no mention of money to fix this. It will be crowded classrooms or extra temporary buildings, and no doubt rising class sizes (which will probably be blamed on ex-private school parents!).

@Dibblydoodahdah "And stop with the “oik” language. No private school parent that I have ever come across would use such a derogatory term"

I agree that very few, if any, would actually use the term. And I don't think it helps the discussion to suggest they do. But it is true that some private school kids and their parents do have a very stereotyped view of state school children. My children were state educated, while belonging a socio-economic group where private schooling is common. I got used to the hastily concealed surprise when they turned out to have nice manners or cultural knowledge or, indeed, excellent GCSEs! And certainly, private school sports teams were always surprised to be beaten in
local leagues by state
Schools!

I don't have kids at private school. I just have sympathy for those parents in this situation. You don't, that's fine.

Every little counts and it’s a start. I think I’d rather listen

IFS- “Combining estimated tax revenues and extra public spending needs, our view is that it would be reasonable to assume a net gain to the public finances of £1.3–1.5 billion per year in the medium to long run as a result of removing tax exemptions from private schools. This would allow for about a 2% increase in state school spending in England, which Labour has proposed would be targeted at disadvantaged students.”

Sounds great!

And re the impact on state schools hysteria.

IFS again
“Finally, 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 – i.e. a total drop of more than 700,000, which is bigger than the total number of children attending private schools.”

So just stop it.

Am I right in thinking that academies are also for-profit businesses?

The entitled, rude, patronising and dismissive people on this thread are not the private school parents. There not the ones making stupid comments about straw boaters, hay and oiks.

I agree with this. Even the well reasoned arguments are often laced with rudeness.

No.

@CurlewKate that's my experience too.

It is I have to agree a great shame that we don't have in each local area a well resourced body responsible for education, whose job among others could be to ensure sufficient school places.
We could perhaps call them a local education authority.

Do those people care about those who would never have the option to send their children to private school? Cleaners, retail staff, binmen?

Going by the posts on Mumsnet on the subject, id say not at all.

They're still incredibly privileged people.

The IFS report is a year old and flawed in many places. It said that there would be a drop out rate of 3-7% (with no evidence of why this would be) but private school admissions have already dropped by 2.7% in the last school year.

The DfE have recently revised their figures for the reduction in state school pupils and it’s not going to be as high as first thought.

Exceptiona to VAT have already been announced for state boarding schools and pupils with an ECHP so the revenue estimates are not accurate either.

@Curryle3af

The IFS have since said

"It's not going to raise a very large amount of money. Now one and a half billion isn't nothing, But in the context of the overall national budget, in the context of how much we raise from taxes in general, which is more like a trillion, this is a tiny, tiny amount of money. So you might want to do this for reasons of social justice or equity, or because you think it's appropriate to charge VAT But don't be fooled into thinking this is going to make any real difference to -the amount of money available for public services."

Even the IFS admit that this is not about raising money to help the needier. It's purely ideological. Let's not pretend otherwise. It could even end up costing the taxpayer money. The IFS figures estimate private pupil numbers falling 3-7%. They fell 3% last year alone. Their figures are already looking pretty shaky.