To wonder if Labour really understand the implications of their attack on private schools?

[Bumpitybumper]

I've just found out a private school near me is almost certainly closing. I honestly think this is a disaster for everyone involved. Obviously the direct employees (teachers, caretakers, caterers and cleaners etc) and the suppliers will suffer. The children will now need to find a new school either in the state or private sector. Easier said than done considering many of the good local schools are full so there it isn't like they are applying for a state schools with a full range of options that everyone else has. Most importantly though, I wonder if the government has quite anticipated the type of children that they are disrupting and harming here.

I withdrew my child from this private school because the school was basically acting as a bit of a school that unofficially specialised in SEN and my child doesn't have a SEN so it was a poor fit. Many of the children struggled with behaviour, socialising and needed adaptions to the school day to keep them on an even keel. The school managed this fine as it was small enough to adapt and create an environment that wasn't too stressful for the children. I am seriously worried about what will happen to these kids now. I don't think many of them could cope in a state setting, especially one that is struggling already to deliver a good level of education to the children there. I honestly think these children will either have their own education decimated or they will incredibly disruptive and resource hungry which will impact other kids. I feel really angry on these poor children's behalf. The parents that I know that sent their kids there were doing so as a last resort because they had been failed by the state sector.

AIBU to think that Labour really hasn't thought through who they are impacting with their anti private school policies? They are nowhere near nuanced enough to target the privileged only and inevitably many struggling and SEN kids are going to be hugely detrimented by this.

It's not necessarily a double whammy. An increasing number of maintained primary schools and academies are struggling to fill all their places, and filling prefunded empty places will if anything help those schools. As time goes on, those vacancies will spread into secondary schools.

Because if the school was healthy financially and well-managed, it wouldn't be looking at closing this soon after the introduction of VAT. There are plenty of small independent schools that are not having to close.

I do hope the ‘they were failing anyway’ crowd will say the same about the businesses affected by the tariffs. The only difference is that this is OUR government deliberately hurting OUR country.

But that is what happens time after time. Look at all the businesses that tipped over the brink when fuel prices went up. If you think that event was totally divorced from any action by the then government, you are seriously deluding yourself.

Something like 80% of a school’s cost is staff. So even though the funding is per pupil, the costs don’t work like that - you still need one teacher irrespective of whether a class has 27 kids in it or 30. So if a school gets a handful of new pupils, their costs don’t go up appreciably because they are unlikely to need any more staff. So theoretically the schools could provide same level of service with the same money and a few more pupils.

That doesn’t mean anyone can be certain it wouldn’t have continued without VAT

Why do you think people are concerned about tariffs? Because a tax always takes out jobs and closes some, it’s no different here. People just like it more because it’s education. Bizarrely.

I think is quite a nuanced issue though as potentially some state schools could be closed or merged if there is an abundance of spare places. This would be a huge cost saving for the government and much more efficient way to educate our falling population. Placing private kids in these places may not make much of a difference in the very short term but ultimately could end up keeping schools open that would otherwise shut. This could cost millions of pounds.

I don't think it's closing because it couldn't limp on for a while longer. I think it's closing because they know that there isn't a real prospect of things getting better and there is a high chance that things will get worse as the impact of VAT really starts to bite. This is part of being a well managed business. You don't just run things into the ground.

Are you a teacher? Are you ok with adding some extra workload - more marking, more students in your class to get round in lessons - for no more pay?

All the “state schools can absorb a few more with no problem” posters seem to forget that actual people have to actually do that extra workload - mark those extra books, divide their attention between more students, make resources stretch.

And it’s crazy to think that you can add a few more pupils with the same money for “the same level of service” (is education a “service” anyway?) What level are you happy with? State schools near me are bursting, at 35 a class. Add 5 to classes of 35? Are the parents happy with classes of 40? Are the kids getting the same level of education? If they are, why do people complain about class sizes in state schools anyway, if it doesn’t matter?

All of this is just a version of the same argument that comes out on all these threads. The VAT policy only works and raises money if private school pupils stay put. Even the govt has admitted it doesn’t work if a certain percentage move back to state. Yet supporters of the policy seem to also think it’s great if all those pupils move to state, despite the fact that that means the policy doesn’t raise any money! The very reason it doesn’t raise any money is that then the state school funding per pupil decreases so that state schools don’t get any more funding!

It just doesn’t work to say oh the policy may not raise any money, but if a few pupils move to state their schools will get more money. There isn’t any “new” money. The schools just have to do more for the same funding. And it’s the teachers who will be doing more. Would you be happy to suddenly be told you should do more work for the same pay, but provide “the same level of service”?

They aren't stopping this. They're just not subsidising it either.

What a load of absolute rubbish . It has been widely reported that there has been zero impact on state schools.

Also numbers are falling dramatically in the state sector, there is zero problem!!!!

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

Pic below shows how numbers are falling quite dramatically pretty much everywhere.

I can't recall exactly now but I read a story about 2 Months ago and they said it's affecting loads of DC especially those with an ehcp who live rurally. They have to find them a place in a special school and the nearest spaces are miles away. I foster a DC who a taxi comes to us from 46 miles away, picks up DC, drives him 20 miles to school taking 45 minutes. Then they have to drive taxi back to place it started from. Then all again in the afternoon. Taxi driver told me he is driving on behalf of DC for 4 hours and 20 minutes each day. DC is in taxi for 1 hour 30 mins each day. The cost to county must be astronomical. No idea why they can't use a local taxi firm which would save 92 miles and hours each day. I know other kids in his school who have similar it is not uncommon at all. They have always gone to a state special school but same principles apply to those moving from independent to state schools.

Bullshit!

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2025/mar/10/no-exodus-to-state-sector-after-vat-added-to-private-school-fees-say-english-councils#:~:text=in%20a%20row.-,London%20Councils%2C%20which%20represents%20the%20capital's%2033%20local%20authorities%2C%20said,pick%20of%20schools%20for%20September.

If there are “loads” of state educated kids with EHCPs having a private education funded by the taxpayer this should have been stopped ages ago. However there is only 1% of EHCPs in main stream private education- thankfully.

Bullshit yourself. It’s impossible to tell just by the application numbers as private school parents have always applied for state places as a back up in transition years. In fact, many private schools tell you to do just that in case your child doesn’t get a place at a private school. We won’t see until September as to how many parents actually take those places up and whether there’s a significant increase.

However, if you are fixated on applications, record numbers of private school pupils have applied to state sixth forms this year:

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/state-sixth-form-vat-private-school-fees-l5c0zlcnj

Not true at all. In order for fees to be exempt you have to have EHCP and thenLA has to be paying fees. How many LA agree to this? Pretty much none. And if your child has SEN and there are no feasible state options and you can scrape together private school fees, why piss around applying for an EHCP? I’m pretty sure private school don’t help with EHCPs anyway as it doesn’t even help you.

Is anyone out there at a mainstream private school where the LA pays your fees and therefore the fees are VAT free? I’d imagine nobody.

Subsidy: “money given as part of the cost of something, to help or encourage it to happen”

A VAT exemption is not a subsidy. The Government is not giving private schools a sum of money.

You seem to be very bad at extrapolating. You won’t see any impact until the next academic year, obviously, as the VAT has only been applied since January, and most private schools require two terns’ notice of removal. And the impact will be felt mainly in secondary and sixth form, not primary!

How are you simultaneously arguing there’s been no impact when it’s only been applied for three months, but pointing to primary data projections for 2030?

It's still costing the taxpayer, 93% of whom aren't able to access private school for their children.

@Purplefoalfoot I know of one school in north Essex and one in suffolk that I think are in a worrying place financially, feel free to pm me if that's the area you're thinking of.

I've been watching Ana Boulter's youtube shorts on this (think she used to be a TV presenter) - it seems that the education secretary was briefed that this policy would hit poorer children with SEN and basically she didn't give a f* - so nope I don't think overwhelming the state system is a good plan - and that extra money that the policy is meant to raise isn't actually ringfenced for the education sector and even if it was it doesn't help solve the thousands of teachers that leave every year because of burnout.

Ana Boulter - YouTube

Something that has always historically had a VAT exemption is not a subsidy. Is the taxpayer “subsidising” books because they are zero rated for VAT?

I know plenty of middle class parents who could afford private school for their kids, who are in state education instead. Many of these families earn a lot of money and have very nice lifestyles — I know a few with kids in selective state schools who have big houses, luxury holidays and so on, who could absolutely “access” private education. They just choose not to because they’ve bought an expensive house in the catchment of a great state school.

Houses in the Outstanding state school catchments where I live in the south east cost millions, no joke at all. We live in a shared ownership house part-owned by a housing association and send DD private with a bursary because our catchment school is not a good fit for her. If we could afford £1m plus for a house in an Outstanding catchment we wouldn’t have to. Why do you act as though anyone in private is by default richer than any family in state? It’s patently just not true.

It was not 'costing the taxpayer'. The government could introduce all sorts of taxes on anything they choose. We don't call the taxes they choose not to introduce lost tax revenue. In the past the government didn't require private schools to charge VAT on school fees. Now they do. That doesn't mean in all the previous years the government was losing out. For a good few years recently they couldn't have applied VAT to private school fees because of EU rules.

No it’s not costing the taxpayer anything. Private schools save the taxpayer money because they don’t have to fund a state place for pupils in private schools.

I would also argue that some of the 93% of children that attend state schools could access private schools if their parents wanted to. In fact, even in the top income bracket, about half of children are state educated. Their parents have the funds to pay private school fees.

I’d say at least 50% of the parenting state school kids could put them in private school if it was that or home schooling. This is the decision lots of SEN parents have to make all the time. They raid their savings, they get loads from relatives, they sell their house and rent. Anything to ensure their child gets the education the state can’t be bothered to provide. It’s these people who really can’t afford private but are desperate and so it is these kids who will now end up being failed in state schools again, stretching resources for other SEN kids.

So true! The government knew this would happen, but they can't stand a world where anybody has more than somebody else.

If it was possible to create such a world, we would have done it by now. If their was a huge tax increase if by some miracle I could earn more than £100,000 i would work less so I earnt less than £100,000