Would Labour voters be upset if joining the EU meant they could no longer tax children’s education?

[Blarneyspoco]

Taxing children’s education is banned as part of EU membership. If the U.K. rejoined the EU, would Labour supporters be upset that they can no longer levy the tax or would it be seen as a necessary compromise.

There are benefits, wider education options are definitely going to bring benefits. Educating children 100% brings benefits.

It may not answer the question of whether children’s education should be vatable, but it certainly puts the ‘tax loophole scrounging’ child depriving state schools of funds argument to bed when you’re comparing £100k with £0. What are we left with as motivation?

It comes back to the basic fact of private education being a luxury service that people opt into if they can afford to and want to (and some opt in who can't). We live in a free society which allows people to pay for privilege. We also live in a social democracy which makes education provision for all children. This has evolved since 1870, when the shift from an agrarian society to an industrialised one had increased the need for workers to be numerate and literate.

Before 1870, people with money paid and got a good education. The poor may have been given a basic education by a charity or church. Lots had no education so, like one of my great-grandmothers, signed her name with a cross.

Given this backdrop, it's not easy to feel sympathy for a tiny minority of people now priced out of private education (who, if a fee increase of up to 20% prices them out, should never have opted for private in the first place), who are doing sustained mental acrobatics for six months and counting, to complain about something whose logic is really not that difficult to understand.

Typo

Why wouldn’t people ask if Labour were honest about improving state with this policy?

So it's good for the taxpayer to spread out and pay for education. But if a parent wants to do that privately and reduce the states burden we should punish them for that?

We do a good line in this kind of voting, other countries realise what the state burden is.

They are asking. And the government, foolishly, has provided a poor answer ie the revenue has gone to the Treasury and is not hypothecated to fund teachers as originally communicated.

Whatever may or may not be done with the additional revenue, the logic for private schools paying VAT remains the same.

Why? And Labour are hardly under pressure to answer re state improvement given the posts on these threads.

Why what?

Why does nothing change for you given the policy isn’t delivering what Labour claimed it would.

So you'd agree it's a luxury / purchasing an advantage?

Because lefties often just want to "punish" i.e. their politics of hate, spite and envy, rather than wanting policies that are for the general good. Re the VAT on private education, the amount raised is loose change compared with total tax revenue so won't make a jot of difference, but they've got what they wanted, i.e. to "kick" people they perceive to be rich/better off etc.

I think you mean 'Why do I support the policy of VAT on private school fees even though the revenue is not being used to fund 6,500 teachers for the state sector?'

For me, it's about basic fairness. It's right that people with the most pay for a service they choose to buy privately when they could choose the service they have already paid for through taxation.

If you live in the SE then a pretty big chunk of what you pay out goes straight to the government in stamp duty.

We paid a years worth of net income to be permitted by the government to buy our house. Not the house purchase itself - just the tax.

This is on top of already working about 4 months of every year for free in service to the government, taken in income tax.

Frankly, it feels pretty close to being a medieval serf.

I'm glad you used the word 'often'.

Right, so it doesn’t matter if state doesn’t benefit. So the Op isn’t far off. It’s more to do with taking away from others than improving state.

But they already were paying for the service they "choose to buy privately when they could choose the service they have already paid for through taxation."

That's why it's called private school.

Because the parents pay for it entirely themselves. Privately.

That's in addition to the education they're paying for everyone else's children. Paying far more than you for something they don't even use - just for you - due to progressive income tax.

The VAT is yet another extra layer on top.

How on earth can you possibly twist that round to being 'fair' ?!?

No. I have already said that I think Labour has made a mistake in not doing what they said they were owing to do: employ 6,500 teachers to help improve the state sector. As it is, the money will be spent and the state will benefit but we don't know how.

Typo

’Purchasing an advantage’.

Would that also capture private health, or giving DC the deposit for house, or opening a JISA or PP for them?

You are not alone.

We know. This latest tactic of whining about personal attacks in response to any criticism is very noticeable though. As is the 'leftist' nonsense. Have a look on site stuff, it's become a real thing.

I despise posters doing this, but….

This.

Yup, sadly I think some Lefties would indeed ban all that kind of thing or dream up new taxes to "punish" people for doing it.

No twisting involved. It is fair that all luxury goods and services should be treated equally for taxation purposes. Education has been treated differently, and that's not fair.

Yep, ‘luxury’ cars, designer handbags etc.

It’s not enough they cannot aspire to certain things - they have to deny you, too.

Very bitter and twisted.

This binary bullshit where anyone who disagrees with you is a 'leftist' is why our politics is such a shitshow.

That's in addition to the education they're paying for everyone else's children. Paying far more than you for something they don't even use - just for you - due to progressive income tax.

Those who don’t have children still contribute to childrens’ education through taxation. Should they get some kind of compensation too ?