Private school fees

[studentandparent]

Labour will scrap charitable status on private school fees when next in Government. Anyone got any idea how much this will increase fees?

Anyone who thinks that adding VAT to school fees (if indeed this is the plan rather than scrapping charitable status which is particularly complicated) is going to benefit the state system is going to be disappointed.

What it will do, if it happens (and I suspect there will be years of legal wrangling first) is drive many parents into the state system. Which is already underfunded and too full. House prices near good schools will increase and yet more people will be forced into weaker schools.

The 20% VAT doesn't cover the cost of the state education, the state schools wild potentially have more pupils and less money.

We privately educate, I was state educated and it was truly awful.

If they charge us another 20% we'd pay it. The weaker and smaller private schools would close.

So you'd be left with: an even more elite private school system for the very wealthy, without any charitable benefits, and an even more divided state school system.

And if you shut private schools (which would never happen) we would 'home school' with friends, paying for tutors and teachers who perhaps used to teach at private schools. And we'd pay for the sports and music lessons which you cannot get at state school. And it wouldn't be a 'private school' but it would be a private home school set up.

I went to a Public School on a scholarship. It was hell. I loathe the Public School system and will vote for anyone who does anything to remove or diminish it in any way.

I don’t understand the argument of paying tax and not using state schools, so paying twice.

Surely those without school aged children are also paying tax that will go towards state school funding that they aren’t using? Do you think they should pay less tax or get some VAT free purchases to make up for that?

Some people are struggling to put food on their table.

Do we have to have this trotted out on every single thread that possibly dares to talk about money?

My kids are state educated. If parents choose to privately educate, so be it. No skin off my nose. I suspect private education saves the taxpayer a tonne of money.

I can think of lots of privately educated with low paid jobs. I don't think it always leads to glittering careers for everyone.

There's 2 issues here:

1. Private schools being charities and
2. Private schools being exempt from charging vat on fees.

The two are actually not related.

I'm all for labour scrapping 1. But making people pay vat on fees, if not staggered, is an absolute recipe for disaster - the swathes of kids who would be forced back in to state provision would be unmanageable for some local authorities.

My kids go to a very cheap private school that does not have charitable status, but does charge vat. If VAT were charged on the fees we would have to withdraw our kids and place them in the excellent, yet seriously over subscribed, local state schools. I simply do not know how the state system will cope.

We live in an area with a high number of private schools and a high number of outstanding state schools and a rapidly rising young population, so much so, that the local primaries are bursting at seams; 35-37 kids per class (yes, in the infant's).

Unless Labour can build more state schools quickly AND staff them, I have no idea how this would work!

@PinkFrogss no. That’s not what people are saying. The opposite, in fact.

If people go with a state school then they ARE using that place, ergo, they are withdrawing from the system, if you like.

I do understand the arguments against private schools’ charitable status but I don’t think it is the answer.

No one is subsidising my DC’s education. I’m paying a huge amount of tax and then paying the fees on top. Furthermore, my DC’s school sponsors a state primary that was previously failing and is now rated Ofsted outstanding after my DC’s school helped to turn it around. They are now proposing to sponsor an another state primary but if the charitable status goes I think the parents will be pushing for the all of the sponsorship to go as well. There are loads of other things that my DC’s school does to justify its charitable status. I would like to think that they are decent enough to carry on with some of this, but I can’t see the state school sponsorship continuing.

Oh and if you really want to know at how much extra tax could be generated (or rather not generated) have a look at this report by the ISC: www.isc.co.uk/media/5926/isc-vat-full-report-1018-for-circulation.pdf

And finally, those of us that send our kids to private school know that the most affluent families already pay their fees years in advance to secure a discount. They won’t be the ones paying the VAT. It will be the ones that pay the fees monthly or termly. You basically effect the hard working professionals. I hope many of them choose to leave the country and take their skills with them if it comes in. We are seriously considering it.

Oh and wouldn’t it be wonderful if instead of bringing in this policy, Labour said that every private school must do what my DC’s school does and help to improve the state sector…

You don’t subsidise private schools 🙄 its the other way around.

I pay tax which funds state schools, and seperately I also pay fees for private school.

The private school then shares many of its facilities, eg swimming pools, theatre, and computer labs, with local state schools. Playschemes also use it all summer. If our local private school closes, our local state school will lose their computer lab access and all of their swimming lessons, and many of the summer playschemes will close.

What’s the point?

It’s just a vindictive policy designed to alienate the middle class. Very odd from
someone who apparently wants to be elected.

@HairyToity

I can think of lots of privately educated with low paid jobs. I don't think it always leads to glittering careers for everyone.

I am sure you are right - but statistically, overall, private education gives massively better life chances.

lbnblbnb

erm the private school parents are subsidising the state sector

not the other way around, duh

We used to model this as an LA based on postcodes and linked to 3/4 year old funding.
It wasnt an issue.

If Labour is angry about rich people having lotsa money, why not do a wealth tax, and have heavier tax on owning rental properties and holiday homes?

Then we can actually get more money from
Boris Johnson and his cronies.

I'm a Labour voter who sends my children to private school. I'll carry on voting Labour despite this policy.

I’m utterly baffled by the gleeful posters desperate for private schools to lose charitable status because they seem to think their taxes are subsidising other children’s private education.

So the state would storm into say Eton and Harrow and take them over with the locals kids?

Dont be so utterly stupid. Sounds like some daft Left Wing idea which won’t go anywhere.

Those people claiming to vote Labour and educating their kids privately will change to Tory even if they don’t admit it.

In Surrey, c.25% of secondary places are private, and state schools are oversubscribed. Plenty of people I know who send their kids to independent schools make big sacrifices to do so - increasing fees will send many back towards the already oversubscribed state sector. How does Labour propose to mitigate the lack of state secondary school places? I have seen further up the thread that they plan to make independent schools into state schools, but this all feels a bit communist. There are many consequences to this policy that don't appear to have been thought through

@Lairig I went to comprehensive school
and that was hell. Can we ban all comprehensive schools?!

@BananaGrana If middle class parents care that much about private education they will need to have only 1 child rather than 2 or more.

Not sure how that works unless by which you mean - I can only afford 1 set of school fees so only one child, Most people I know have the number of children they can / able to / want and can look after and then work it out. No way in the world when I had DS was I thinking on to school fees.

@manifestationofconsciousness

"We used to model this as an LA based on postcodes and linked to 3/4 year old funding.
It wasnt an issue."

What about all the kids (already of school age) who will be removed from their private schools by parents who can't afford it any more and put into state schools?

Is business class on a plane also unfair? We are not a communist country, those that can afford luxuries should be entitled to them, they probably contribute a fair whack to taxes. I couldn't afford private schooling but wouldn't begrudge those that can.

It won't be that many. Private schools aren't choc full of pupils whose parents can only just pay the fees. Yes I'm sure there are a good few, but there will be a lot more for whom this is an annoyance at best. I suspect some schools that desperately need to keep the pupils they have will find ways to absorb some of the increase themselves whether via extra bursaries, or reduced fees.

@OnABreeze

I think you might be confusing me with another poster - I haven't argued for banning private education?

Everyone pays taxes for education - whether we have children or not. Based on the (surely not controversial) idea that education is needed for the future of the country.

Some choose to pay extra for private education - ok, but don't expect private schools to be treated as a charity. Outreach, allowing other schools to use facilities - none of it evens up the vastly different life chances of those who go to private schools. Yes, that is adjusted for other factors.

I think falsely arguing against those who agree with charitable status as 'wanting to ban private schools' is a bit of a poor argument?