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.

Why would it be something Labour voters are fanatical about? That makes no sense. Yes, there are people who support labour who are ideologically opposed to private education, but why would they want it taxed? They want to get rid of it completely.

Personally I take the view that private schooling is a substantial expenditure by generally wealthy people on what is usually considered a luxury item, so in theory I don't really have an issue with it if it raises some much needed funds for the country. I do however, have sympathy for the families that were pushed being able to afford it to not being able to in a short timeframe and the effect on their children of having to change school. It's not something I feel strongly about one way or the other and I think that would be a fairly standard view.

Where did I say I did ?

The majority of children are in education settings that don't require fees

They are not a hive mind

You cited them as examples for taxes controlling behaviour, linking that to VAT on education.

Why would you do that?

Private schools bring a lot of soft influence, in fact they ought to be sponsored by the foreign aid our government invests in influence abroad.

Yes, it’s clear this tax wasn’t about revenue generating and was about enforcing ‘correct’ behaviour. It really should have been sold as that, lots of people were misled.

As Eden Paul said ‘He who has the school has the future’ . It’s been the socialist template ever since which is why they detest non government funded education.

Probably not a good idea to invent an argument in your head and then project it onto me.

My one single point - clearly even that was a bit too complex - was to point out that taxes are not merely used to raise revenue. They are also used for other things. Sometimes to encourager les autres, or sometimes to create an artificial limit on the sale and distribution of certain commodities (tariffs are of course taxes).

Just to mention smoking, the smoking ban has cost the exchequer a fucktonne over the past 19 years. Not just in reduced revenue from less sales and those giving up. But also the longer lives ex-smokers are now enjoying with their triple lock pension.

I often wonder how popular the smoking ban would have been if people knew it would cost extra in taxation ?

Why are people so for making educational choice more expensive?

Is the minority in private education so dangerous for the Right Thinking?

Sugar tax is also a good example here

I wasn't specifying VAT. You did that.

Now you're on my wavelength 😀

The Right Thinking? What or who is that?

Absolutely! I'm a staunch Remainer.

VAT on PS doesn't affect me anymore - I promptly moved DC from their private school to one of the best grammars in UK (denying a place to a child for whom private has never been an option). So now taxpayer funds my DC education instead of me. This also allowed me to retire at least eight years earlier than I planned, so not paying tonnes of taxes anymore (was on 62%). What's not to love?

So on this thread about VAT on education do you think it should be used in the same way as your earlier suggestions of tobacco and alcohol? Ie to control behaviour?

Well Reeves and Bridget Philipson have had to go (latter at least from education post) so surely some of you should be happy about that and you got your Schadenfreude and they paid for their sins?
It is how they implemented it that showed the nastiness, straight away and with a retrospective bite half way through a school year, impacting some families and kids in exam years who were trapped and no exceptions for kids with SEND.

True. Surely there's usually a more... uh, fetishy element though. Not sure who's typing one-handed on this one.

I am glad you put in that bit about denying a child for whom private was never an option.

Makes the envy argument look even more silly.

State education is open to all, including your children.

We all know the more private education the less strain on the state sector. And also they can trial out new innovative teaching mechanisms as well (which they use to help the state sector)

Top public schools (e.g. much hated here Eton) are registered charities. They don't make profit, they reinvest their surplus and keep substantial endowments funds.

Smaller privately owned schools which aren't registered charities can follow their examples.

So by banning profit you won't ban private schools, far from it.

As I said previously I have no real opinion on the matter.

Oh, you’re back with your ‘taxing children’ tirade. I think you fundamentally - or deliberately- misunderstand this. Anyway. There’s lots of things I’d give up, to get our EU benefits back. Biggest act of self-harm ever.

Now I have visions of some very niche perverts starting threads on the Corn Laws.