So, Keir Starmer is intending to remove charitable status

[BadgerB]

He intends to use the money raised to "shake-up" the State schools.

Has he thought this through - the number of children whose parents just about manage fees, who will then transfer their kids to state schools.

How many? How much will this cost? And how soon can the necessary expansion be effected?

Of course, the really rich will be able to dig deeper into their pockets

So it would be costly, legally messy and detract wealthy overseas migrants ... what a silly idea that would be ... certainly no something any serious government would consider 😉

Many schools have been charitable trusts for centuries because they were set up by philanthropists. And they have a LOT of political support where it counts

But those schools don’t act very charitably now? And may struggle to argue how they maintain the principles of the original founders. It should be tested

It’s a tiny tiny percentage of pupils we are talking about - from the 7% that go to private school, say 4% move to state schools they would easily be accounted for. Birth rate is way down from 2008 onwards, Bojo seems intent on reducing immigration, so there will be plenty of room.
I still think the most efficient way of doing it is actually how Bojo and chums are - change University entrance, change recruitment policy - people won’t want to pay for their children to be disadvantaged at interviews their whole life.

He hasn't said how.

Right now there is no way to take charitable assets and convert them into private ownership. This is a strength of English charity law - I'm assuming it's similar in Scotland.

The provision of education is currently a valid charitable aim in itself, this would have to be removed or modified, and that might have an impact on educational programmes of other charities (who would than have to fund such work non-charitably, or stop it). I have never seen a proposal on how this point would be managed.

He's used an eye catching headline figure, but when you look at the number of pupils involved (around 615,000 children, some 7 per cent of all British children and 18 per cent of pupils over the age of 16), using that figure it's £500 per pupil per term (less than the variation of fees between schools in the first place)

I expect it'll be absorbed (it's nothing like as dramatic as the price hikes of the early 00s which followed the big NI increases)

He has mentioned only charitable status and the business/VAT handling that flows from that.

If he means the entirely separate issue of VAT on fees (something we could not impose whilst in EU, but could now do as we can set our own consumption tax) then he needs to say so Lou's and clear.

Because that would lead to a considerably larger exodus, and I would like to know how he proposed to fund the increase in provision of state places, especially sixth form places

It’s not that parents will withdraw their pupils, it’s that schools will close! But it won’t be the big ‘posh’ schools, it’ll be the small, local ones. I really don’t see how that benefits anyone, apart from some envious people. Lots of pre-schools are charities too.

It would be a 20% hike in fees not the £400 cited up thread. I’ve just moved mine from state to private. They were being left behind in state because they were well behaved and there were a lot of kids in the class who genuinely needed more support than them, not educational support, but support in their behaviour, which meant my children were t being taught. My taxes continue to fund the state schools but I can chose to spend my savings on making sure my kids get an education. If the charitable status goes is have to move them back to state and my taxes would just pay for my own kids. It’s a silly policy, the taxes earned will not be ringfenced for education and will get wasted elsewhere and people like me will return to the state system so class sizes will get even bigger!

I think it would be better if for schools to keep charitable status that their bursaries have to be far more generous in terms of quantity and value.

Tbf these schools were set up to provide an education for free to children that otherwise wouldn't get one at that purpose no longer exists. Now most are pure business and serve the elite it's hard to justify them have charitable status.

I think only about 7% of pupils are privatley educated. They wont all suddenly not be able to afford fees so I dont think that the state system will crumble under the tax burden.
Its very area dependent but schools in my area expanded very quickly for a rising birth rate and then more recently have reduced in size for a falling one. For those schools filling those now empty seats would improve their finances.
I also dont think loss of charitable status would change the fees very much anyway. Some private schools already operate as businesses.
The main issue I have that the SEN sector has a lot of charities providing education where there simply isnt a state alernative at all and I think having charitable aims written into the constitution should help protect the vulnerable children over a different business structure.

Would bursaries stop? That’s quite sad

No some of the bursary pots are centuries old (literally) and cannot be used for other purposes - might not even be under the full ownership of the school, so I expect they will,continue. Unless the way the law is changed means that they can no longer exist either - because their aim is also the provision of education in a few-paying school

That's why I want to see the exact proposal. There's a lot of potential for unintended consequences in this area, and as we know nothing of whether an administration led by him will be competent I would want to see caution and attention to detail

@Pitapotamus

It would be a 20% hike in fees not the £400 cited up thread. I’ve just moved mine from state to private. They were being left behind in state because they were well behaved and there were a lot of kids in the class who genuinely needed more support than them, not educational support, but support in their behaviour, which meant my children were t being taught. My taxes continue to fund the state schools but I can chose to spend my savings on making sure my kids get an education. If the charitable status goes is have to move them back to state and my taxes would just pay for my own kids. It’s a silly policy, the taxes earned will not be ringfenced for education and will get wasted elsewhere and people like me will return to the state system so class sizes will get even bigger!

Not from the removal of charitable status it wouldn't.

Estimates are usually in the £200 per pupil per term range. But they're using figures today that indicate they expect £500 per pupil per term.

Thus is not at 20% hike.

He has not mentioned anything about VAT on fees, and that's a totally different exemption and completely unconnected to charitable status.

@SW1amp

It has been talked about for at least 20 years so maybe Starmer should just get on and do it so we can all move on

And they should also remove charity status from churches and religious organisations at the same time, as most of them are only ‘charitable’ to the very small amount of people who fit exactly with their belief system and follow their often brainwashed way of thinking, so them maintaining charity status is of no wider benefit to society than private school pupils

Exactly. And obviously ensure tax is collected from big business.

About time.

Hello....legislation to no longer give independent schools in Scotland charitable relief on their business rates has already been passed in the parliament in Holyrood and was due to start last year but has been postponed due to the pandemic. When it was first proposed by the SNP there was more or less a cross party consensus that this is something that is long overdue. Of course there was some grumbling... and a few SNP bashing articles in the papers, but come on, it's hard to justify isn't it?! Of course there will be some parents in the 'struggling to pay fees' category, but the vast majority are from very wealthy families or send their kids here from abroad - Gordonstoun, Glenalmond, Fettes etc...

There is no VAT on training and education anyway, so that's not going to happen whoever said that!

Business pay tax on their profits, so I dont see the problem here 🤷‍♀️ if a school is making a fat profit each year, as a parent I'd want to know why!!

Removing charitable status would probably make public school finances more transparent so I really dont see a problem.

Good. It's about time. 'Charities' my arse. It's ironic when you think about it.

I think the sooner children are all entitled to the same standard of education the better. There is no moral justification whatsoever to allow some children to be better taught than others on the basis of cash.

I think it the right thing to do. They are NOT charities and it isn’t right that they have that status. They are businesses and should be treated as such. I went to public school and have children in public schools and it’s a very attractive policy for me.

I'd remove charitable status from more than just public schools. Many charities are just like big business now, running for the benefit of those who run them and nothing like the original intention

Which would hit parents pockets more - Boris’s second term plan to put VAT on fees or Starmer’s first term plan to remove charitable status?

This is one way to put all private school parents, teachers and support staff off voting Labour and hand the conservatives another victory. As others have pointed out it would not benefit state schools either as more people would be priced out of private and state schools would need more places.

Boris plan would imoact parents more and would imoact on a wider variety of things if education and learning started to have to pay VAT

Typical Labour. Another policy that they think will be a vote winner but won't actually achieve any benefit. The costs will far outweigh any increase in tax revenue. They really must think voters are stupid.

About bloody time!

@Badbadbunny to be fair Boris’ landslide has already proved that voters are stupid.

@Monkeytennis97

Good.

I say that as a secondary state teacher who sent DS1 to private school and had to remortgage to afford it. It was the making of him and even though I'll be paying it back forever it was, for him, a great decision.

So why do you think it's 'good'?