To think you can’t have your cake and eat it too? University fees

[NoSoapJustUseShowerGel]

Anyone on the What I wish I knew about university page may have noticed a post about “home status” for uni fees today.

Short version - there are several posters who are Brits living abroad complaining that their children will not qualify for home status (and therefore lower fees) at British universities because - guess what - they don’t live here.

Some people are calling it unfair but surely if you make the choice to go and live in another country, this is one of the consequences and you can’t expect to enjoy a benefit meant for residents of a country you don’t live in.

Aibu? I’m not interested in replies with details such as if you can prove you come back regularly you may still qualify, etc etc. Just the overarching principle that if you choose to leave a country, you can’t still expect the same benefits as people who actually live there.

Well yes, just like you cannot have low taxation and superb free healthcare, schools and public spaces. But people tend to see things very much from their own point of view.

This.

Any more thoughts?

DD grew up abroad, and I always thought we would pay foreign student fees for her. I understood that completely, as we had not been in the UK paying tax etc. In fact, we always thought she would go to uni in Canada. As it happened, we moved home unexpectedly (nothing to do with uni) a few years before she went to uni, and she wanted to go in the UK, not Canada, and qualified as a home student. Having seen this from both sides, I think it's a perfectly fair and reasonable system.

In your case it makes sense as you were living and working in the UK at the point your daughter started uni. It’s the people who emigrated and are still abroad but expect their children to be treated as having home status that I think are unreasonable.

I agree completely. My cousin - born here but brought up overseas and a citizen in that country - was surprised that his children (British by descent) didn't qualify for home fees in the UK. He hasn't ever lived here, let alone his children.

I agree OP, I’m always a little flabbergasted at the people who haven’t lived in the U.K. for 10 years (but have visited for 2 weeks a year!) but think they should get home fees.

Then there’s the astonishing realisation that the students don’t get a loan either.

We lived overseas for 25 years and most people I knew were aware of the rules and either moved back when their child was 18 or looked at university in other countries in terms of fees and value for money eg Netherlands and Australia were popularly choices.
Its a fair system now, but less fair pre brexit when European students paid home fees and perhaps never contributed to the UK economy but the child of an expat in Asia would pay international fees and perhaps start their career in the UK.
edited - should be 15, not 18.

It’s a pretty muddled system that we are currently working through and some universities have decided on home fees and some on overseas fees. Apparently this is quite common because it is a complicated system. I had assumed we would pay overseas fees as we were not residents but we do pay some tax in the UK and are citizens. So given the complexity of the assessI’m not surprised some people are confused.

See also access to the NHS. You leave the U.K., you don’t get the privileges such as they are!

Surely the test should be whether you pay tax in the Uk?

I don't think you should be eligible for home fees if you don't live here full time and pay taxes. But willing to have my mind changed if there is a compelling reason why they should.

Home vs international fees are essentially decided by the Uni. If they need bums on seats they may therefore offer international students home fees as 9k is better than nothing.

This is separate to access to student finance ( tuition and maintenance loans) which has stricter and more consistent residence criteria. I saw that post and was pretty “wtf” about that poster throwing a strop at not being entitled to UK student loans when the family is not uk resident.

9k isn't really better than nothing. 9k for home students doesn't reflect the cost of the education. It is subsidized by overseas students/fees which are four times as much. So, yes, home fees should be reserved for those whose home is the UK, and whose parents have been paying taxes here.

Our uni loses £3-4k on every home student. An overseas student who doesn't turn up but loses their deposit is better than a home student.

It makes a contribution to fixed costs and university teaching is largely a fixed cost model - ie the costs incurred are not hugely different if a course has 100 students or 125 students enrolled but it may only break even if there are 120 enrolled. The higher education sector has a lot of spare capacity and some unis will take anyone with a pulse to fill places. So yes I agree with you that home fees should be reserved for uk students but that’s not currently the case as Unis will take international students on home fees to reduce losses on undersubscribed courses- and sometimes also to attract better than benchmark students who might otherwise go elsewhere

Many people went to the EU prior to Brexit, when one of the things promised was that it would make no difference to their children's entitlement to home fees. And under the Brexit agreement, this continues to be true until 2028.

We always assumed our dc would benefit from this, but having taken a look at university education in the UK vs in other countries in Europe, they are much more inclined to stay abroad for their uni. Not only are the fees much lower even than home fees, the funding for further study (PhDs) is much, much more generous in Europe.

They lose it on total costs ( fixed plus variable) for home students but home fees are still higher than variable cost per student and economics dictate that if revenue per student is more than variable cost per student then it makes sense to take that student.

Its a fair system now, but less fair pre brexit when European students paid home fees and perhaps never contributed to the UK economy but the child of an expat in Asia would pay international fees and perhaps start their career in the UK.

But that was reciprocal for UK students in EU countries. So it was fair in that way.

I live abroad but I am British, have always paid tax in UK and still pay additional rate taxes in England. So I fail to see why my British children should be charged higher fees than the children of people who have never contributed a penny to the Exchequer. Ditto for access to the NHS.

Tbh, it'd depend on how much tax they'd paid into the country for me. If a lot, I'd rather they get subsidised than somebody who hasn't lived here long and hasn't contributed much.

I don't think it's massively unfair though. My opinion may change but that's my kneejerk reaction.

What about the ones who lived all their lives in the uk but went aboard for the last 3 years for their parents work and upon the whole family returning fund they don’t qualify for home fee status?

But it’s not the last 10 years is it. You have to have lived for the past 3 years. So you could be born in the Uk and live here until 15 and move abroad for 3 years because of your parents work. The same parents who have paid higher rate tax for 25 years in the UK but because you were not here for the past 3 years you do not qualify.

The students are British though and it's not their fault that their parents have chosen to live elsewhere. They may choose to return as adults, but are not considered for full home educational status until they have been resident for 3(?) years.
There is also the tangent that students are of adult age and should be treated as such, why for the purposes of education alone are they still considered dependant children. Especially regarding the loans situation.

So don’t choose to move away then. It’s a choice to go and live in a different country. When you make that choice you’re giving up the rights and benefits you have as a resident. Every decision has consequences.