Allow a play date where mum unapologetically supports children’s education tax

[GigglyOrange]

Just this really, our local independent prep school closed due to the education tax earlier this year and has caused absolute chaos for lots of families, including my own. My dd (6) has been invited for a play date with a girl she seems very friendly with and who seems very sweet, but I’ve since found out from another parent that the mum is an ‘unapologetic education taxer’. My instinct is to cancel the play date, AIBU?

The class of 24 at a state school won't stay at 24. Very few schools can sustain that apart from the occasional anomaly.

The class of 24 is likely to end of up being split up into composite classes or the school close if it's in deficit for too long and there's no prospect of rescue.

If it's a problem across the school, TAs will be long gone and any support for kids with SEND but no EHCP will evaporate. EHCP provision will be hard to top up from school funds to bridge the gap between need and funding. At primary, specialist teachers get made redundant. So music, sport, all the nice to haves. At secondary, the school has to radically reduce the number of GCSEs on offer to only high-demand options.

School operate on wafer-thin margins based on full class sizes. So yes, the overall educational experience for a child in a state school is likely to be much better with a full class than one with every class significantly under PAN.

No it’s not an income or capital gains tax, The fee payer for child’s education is being taxed on the education service, usually the parents but yes it can be the children. Charity has absolutely nothing to do the education tax, the tax is not paid by the schools. This seems to be a very difficult concept for supporters of this policy to understand, it’s almost like they’re shocked a country would do something so stupid and spiteful.

Well of course they aren’t in terms of being a net contributor
The cost of public spending per person exceeds £12k

Nope, I definitely don't think that, my children attend state education. It's some of the advocates for abolishing private schools who think that, with the concept that if children of higher earners didn't have option of going to private school and had to attend state school, these schools would magically improve just by the mere presence of these 'sharp elbowed' parents. Which ignores the multitude of reasons why schools are struggling to meet need, and is patronising towards lower income engaged parents, that they need these higher income parents to come in and 'rescue' them.

And high earning parents already pay more into our public education system than others, and anyone can chose to pay extra to hmrc.

And the hyperbole about 'tainting' - of course that's not true. But if a few children are consistently disruptive, then it will negatively impact on other children's education. My oldest (10) said her teacher was called out of class 6 times on the last day of last half term to deal with disruptive children in other classes - he is a strapping 6'6" man with a booming voice who commands attention and very few children will ignore/act up for him. Their class has missed whole chunks of curriculum due to disruption, so we are paying for tutoring to fill the gaps. Of course, not every parent can afford this, and no parents should have to just because their class is disrupted. My daughter was repeatedly hit through last year by another child to the point she stopped eating, struggled to sleep and became too anxious to go to school, so she missed some time due to this as I told the school she wouldn't be back until they could assure her safety. And they did, and now another unfortunate child is the victim.

Her need to feel safe was not met. Her learning needs were not met due to disruption. I don't want to go private, I feel a high quality state education is much better. But when you have a child who is struggling as their needs are not met, I think parents who can do so are not wrong to pursue a private education.

I really wish there wasn't a need for private education, I agree with those who state its two tier and divisive. That state education fully meets the needs of every child, that every child feels safe, has a calm environment, high quality provision. But that isn't the case sadly, and things seem to be getting worse rather than better.

I’m not following, are you saying bigger classes are better for education now? I was ajways led to believe smaller classes are preferred.

I will remind you again that for state school numbers to increase due to the private sector contracting, more than two thirds of the private sector would need to close between now and 2030.

Anything is better than nothing…someone has to work in the lower paid roles.

No that's not what people are thinking. It's more than you are paying a business for a service. Being taxed as you would spending money in any other business right? As it should be.

Can you explain again what you meant by ALL children because that was hilarious

It is VAT. VAT on private school fees.

The exemption for paying VAT on school fee services (but not on goods - so still no VAT on books/ other classroom supplies bought by the schools) was removed.

This is VAT in the same way that you would pay 20% VAT on a wide range of services, if the business has a turnover above the VAT threshold (c £90,000 a year).

When the UK was in the EU, the exemption could not be removed as EU countries cannot apply VAT to educational services. The VAT exemption still applies to educational goods because of agreements made as part of the Windsor Framework to ensure Northern Ireland does not significantly differ on the treatment of goods for tax purposes with the Republic of Ireland.

I'm telling you what is optimal for state schools in terms of optimal education based on the current funding model.

That tiny class size isn't going to be a sustainable quality experience. It's going to end up being a quite shit experience in a variety of ways. And no way will it stay tiny for long. Whether it'll be either "bigger again but much more crap experience" or "oops my school closed/merged with another school" is the choice.

Even popular schools are staring down the barrel of being in deficit in the next few years because the funding settlement doesn't match the pay settlement.

Not making a value judgment on the VAT policy either way. But I think the thread is a lot clearer if people understand exactly what is being discussed.

You keep saying again like youalready told me something, but I’m not seeing you write these things. Can you be a little less cryptic and just write what you mean please.

Someone also mentioned private healthcare earlier in the thread.

It's considered a Benefit in Kind, which means it counts towards you taxable allowance. This changes how much income tax you are liable for.

There are widespread VAT exemptions for more healthcare services - but not all. If provided on the NHS, they are VAT exempt. As are many private procedures where they have a clear medical element. Some elective procedures do attract VAT though (especially cosmetic procedures).

That isn’t cryptic. It’s clear as day.

I’m not getting it. Independent school closes because of taxation, some pupils and teachers shift to state. Tax payers fund the education cost now and this is better for all the kids because of a funding model?

What happens where I live is that the wealthy and privileged opt out of local schools and take their money and connections and privileges to those who need them least. The local schools are filled with those who have no other choice or those whose parents refuse to buy into the elitism. So yes, I 100% wouldn’t mind if all those schools disappeared tomorrow and the people in my community had to spend some time and energy improving the schools in my neighbourhood. We really struggle to raise money for the PTA and to get local councillors to listen and all sorts of things that would hugely improve if all the children in this catchment were in the same school instead of 20% of them opting out.

I don’t see the concept of everyone having the same access to education as some soviet dystopia. Any decent teacher will be able to individualise their teaching and loads of classes are split up into different abilities and schools have forest school and cello lessons and art club. Theres a lot of space for choice in a standardised (and yes, equitable) system. Of course there are many, many other forms of privilege and I would be ridiculous to think that my kids aren’t privileged in many other ways, but at least they aren’t living in an artificial perfect world behind a locked gate.

None of this is really the point though. I am sure you agree and disagree about many things with any number of parents at private and state school. It should have absolutely nothing to do with your daughter though.

Again, the badger population in Oxfordshire will have a massive impact.

More a ranty soapbox

If my post at 19.32 wasn't specific and detailed enough, I'm not sure how to help.

But just for fun:

The state pupil population is in rapid decline.

There will be half a million fewer children in the state sector in 2030 than there were in 2020. The vast bulk of that decline hits in 2025-30.

The primary population is already shrinking rapidly. The peak population year has already passed to secondary, where the population will plateau for a few years as the peak moves through, before seeing a similar decline.

There are no indications that the private school population has different birth rate or population dynamics, so you'd expect to see a similar contraction in student numbers even without VAT or cost of living crisis.

Two key impacts:

• The state school population will decline by a very significant percentage of the entire private school population over a short period.
• The private sector is likely to see similar population impacts even before cost impacts have an effect.

There is an element of class sizes being viable. I think this is around 24+ children. A class has to have a qualified teacher whether they are a class of 10 or 30. But of low the school will struggle to fund the teacher, so will have to merge classes. In a single form entry school this could look like merging 2 or even 3 year groups. It's much easier and better for the children to teach/be in a class of 30 year 1's, than a class of 10 year 1's, 10 year 2's and 10 year 3's, where the teacher will struggle to cover the curriculum for 3 different age groups at the same time, so all children will miss out to an extent

It would be lovely if children could be taught in classes of 20 ish in state, but it's just not financially viable across multiple year groups. My youngest class has never gone over 22, but all other year groups are full which balances funding to a point. But if all year groups were 20 ish, it wouldn't be sustainable and the should would go into deficit and potentbe at risk of being taken over by a MAT, or the council, or shut

What is this in relation to? We need to tax education because pupil numbers are reducing or the education tax isn’t having a negative affect and schools are closing due to demographic changes?

And there we have it. You are sorely disappointed that your kids may have to mix with the children of net tax recipients. Shock horror.

I can’t understand this attitude at all. I can afford private school but I actively wanted my children to be educated with a cross section of people from a normal society. They have been to play dates at council houses and at country piles. I would only veto my child going on a play date if I believed that they would come to harm.

I was privately educated myself and my ex school had closed after this change. I did not particularly shed any tears. When alls said and done it was a business that was not profitable. I’ll have a wander round the grounds when they turn it into a hotel or luxury flats. The world keeps turning.

If your 6 year old having to change schools and attend a state school saving you loads of money in the process is the worst drama in your life and gets then you are fortunate indeed. Spend the money on a holiday somewhere exclusive where you can spend a summer away from the hoi polloi.

This is surely a goady thread for a hot Saturday afternoon and an opportunity to resurrect a niche debate about a policy that affects very few and is old news as I don’t believe anyone actually would do this IRL.

Exactly this, but I think since the pay settlement it's closer to 27/28 per class for the average primary to be viable.

The research shows that the gain in outcomes dropping from 30 to 25 kids is pretty small, you need to drop below 20 to see real benefits. And the financial difference between 25 and 30 kids probably buys you a TA for the classroom which is a huge benefit.

FFS wait until shes older and mixing with whoever she likes - you may need to unclench a little then!

I feel sorry for DD if you cannot accept people are different and will have differing views. Because thats what this is a difference…. have you tried to get to know the Mum at all?

I am presuming parents who have a different political view to you are off the table too…..

I grew up in a rural area in the days when Grammar and Secondary Modern schools were the standard set up.

Many local farmers whose kids were none too bright did not want them to go to the sec mods along with the farm hands’ children, hence they patronised the local tin-pot private schools which would happily accommodate them.

My Grammar school brothers and I called these ‘Farmers’ Duds’ Schools’, because that’s what they were.

I still follow the local news and are not surprised that though they lingered on, one by one these have closed or are closing.