VAT on private school fees

[user1486984759]

So I’m going to get crucified for this, BUT, let me get this straight:

• We pay 45% tax, thereby funding state schools
• We do not get any benefits, and those that do get priority when it comes to state school admissions
• We scrimp and save from what’s left after paying 45% tax to pay for our kids’ education
• And now the state is going to add 20% to our school fees to fund state schools
• So we pay the most to fund state schools, but when it comes to state school admissions, we are last in line

How is this fair?

It seems that in this country, the best places to be are (1) a non-dom billionaire, or (2) someone who doesn’t pay taxes, gets all the benefits, and gets priority in state school admissions. The hard working PAYE earners are screwed by parties from left, right and center.

In my view, significant educational reform is required in this country before one can start treating private schools as a luxury as a lot of people on this thread seem to be thinking.

Reforms should include -

• Get rid of the "nearest to the school" policy for state schools, and make it a randomly selected ("lottery") process for everyone within X miles radius from the schools. That will take away the incentive for people to buy closest to the school, thereby depriving people who can't afford to buy at ridiculous prices in order to secure school admissions. The only ones that should get priority are SEND or LAC categories, where it makes sense to be close to the school. This also takes away the privilege element where people can buy their way into a state school admission by buying or renting closest to the school.
• Get rid of religious criteria for admissions to any school that has any form of tax-payer funding. Discrimination by schools on the basis of religion results in people being deprived of school admissions based on their religion. Why should tax-payer money be used to subsidise schools that promote certain religions? If such schools need funding, they can declare themselves private and raise money from people who follow that religion who can choose to subsidise the schools.

Till the above two are considered and implemented , people should realise that private schools are not a privilege, but a necessity for most parents who send their kids to such schools. But I am 100% certain both Labour and the Tories will push back on any such proposal like the ones I have noted above as they are not keen on ensuring social and educational equality. All they care about is winning the next election.

If the government needs funding to improve the education in the country, they should think of cutting unwanted expenses elsewhere including cutting down on projects like the HS2 and certain defence spending.

Taxing private schools is not the solution. Also, if private schools are taxed, then why not tax private universities, day care, nurseries, and any form of private education or care? Does the Labour Party have the guts to do that? They will never consider that as it affects their vote bank.

I agree.

Let’s get rid of all state school selection, whether that’s based on faith, 11+ or legacy school policies.

Agree 100% with your entire post.

I agree with this. I honestly think that this just is a cheap shot to play to the policies of envy.

and it is not consistent.

if private education should have VAT, add it to all private education, including tutors. I personally think this would be wrong - but labour would never do this as they use tutors for their own children.

if more academic schools are wrong, get rid of selective state schools (religious, grammar). Again, Labour would never do that because that is where they educate their own children. Tony Blair’s children went to an extraordinarily difficult to get into state school (oratory). https://www.thetablet.co.uk/news/979/london-oratory-school-criticised-for-favouring-white-middle-classes

Keir Starmer sends his children to a similarly selective school https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2022/dec/06/tuesday-briefing-what-a-row-over-starmers-school-choice-tells-us-about-the-state-of-education

they would never do anything to prevent the nice selective education their own children are getting, entirely funded by our tax money. However, they want people to believe that they care - so add VAT on others who pays privately. And make a big song and dance about how this is helpful.

I really hate politicians.

I’ve got a better idea, let’s get rid of comprehensive schools. They are not comprehensive at all because they can’t deal with a very wide spectrum of pupils ranging from those with severe disabilities to those who are in the top 1% academically. They fail so many pupils of all abilities.

I meant the other way - allow schools to select 10% of intake via aptitude. It seems to be a good way of getting buy in from the middle classes... which many seem to think is how to improve schools.

Faith is an impossible one due to historic ownership of the buildings by the churches. We had a nightmare with primary - slightly odd location on a borough boundary and 5 of the nearest primary schools were faith schools all of which were over-subscribed and required bums on pews for years. We're atheist and DH of a completely different faith even if we weren't so pretty annoying to not even have the option of 5/6 closest schools.

Grammar schools are massively popular with parents so that won't happen either.

The communists are out in force again

You mean the people who are vouching for VAT on private schools in the name of equality?

Why yes, let’s go back to secondary moderns and grammars. What could possibly go wrong.

Nothing worse than the mess created by successive governments of all hues ever since.

Those terrible secondary moderns… They’d be ones that any bright child would do well in, wouldn’t they, because bright kids will do well anywhere? So what’s the problem?

Or is that schools with more academic children, often with parents who care about education, actually do better, academically? (As with middle class enclave comprehensive schools.). Because those pupils’ education isn’t generally disrupted by children who have no interest in learning.

I didn’t suggest that but super-selective grammars spread evenly across the country would be a great start. I don’t support a full grammar system but super-selectives are very useful for the most academically able pupils.

Another great start would be a lot more specialist schools that can support pupils with severe learning disabilites, or other special educational needs / mental or physical disabilities.

I could go on and on…one size definitely doesn’t fit all when it comes to education and that’s where lots of comprehensives fail miserably.

Nothing worse than the mess created by successive governments of all hues ever since.

Because the comprehensive policy was never properly implemented, was it?

Dunno. What’s “properly”? Does it include combatting shadow selection by house price? Does it include some other compulsions on parents?

Look at the history of the development and implementation of comprehensive education in the UK and you might understand exactly what that means.

Okey-dokey.

The best way to get rid of Private schools us to invest in state schools - hardly anybody bothers with private if state schools are more than just adequate for average to high average children.
As shown by many extremely hard to get in (and incredibly privileged) state schools with a tiny catchment of million pounds houses….

I live in an affluent area where the state schools outperform the mediocre private schools, however, the house prices are eye-wateringly expensive so there are still significant barriers to get in the most popular secondary schools (not so much primary schools).

I do wish state education would get properly funded and not be used as a political football.
Education & the NHS/social care should just have long-term bipartisan strategies that are adopted.

“Those terrible secondary moderns… They’d be ones that any bright child would do well in, wouldn’t they, because bright kids will do well anywhere? So what’s the problem?” You do realise children in secondary moderns were taught different subjects, took different exams and were expected to leave school by the age of 16, don’t you? However bright, if you aren’t given an academic education, you are not being given the tools to prove you have the capacity - you have been labelled at age 11 as needing to acquire practical skills, because you are not thought intellectually capable of something more academic, and are so rigorously streamed you have to go to an entirely different school from the grammar school kids, so that you might never cross paths with those children again.

When will this actually start? My guess is not before 2026.

@Georgiepud well they have to win first and even if they do win they are going to find that it isn't as easy as they first thought. They will have to re-write VAT legislation, get it passed in parliament and then overcome any legal challenges from private schools etc. So earliest would be for September 2026 but I think if lawyers get involved it could drag on for a while and I would bet that many schools are looking to challenge if Labour try to bring it in.

On what basis do you think schools would challenge?

Also, not persuaded this would require a change in the law - I think it can be done by issuing a new VAT regulation.

@meditrina on the basis of it being against the ECHR as has been quoted in one of these threads. The only reason they can do this is because we are now out of Europe and members of the EU aren't allowed to tax education however there is also a possibility that it would also be illegal to do so under ECHR, of which we are currently a member. Nothing certain either way but a potential there for a legal challenge.
Also if they just re-write legislation then there will be so many loopholes ie for SEN etc then there will be ways around it.

“On what basis do you think schools would challenge?”

Well for those with SEN, mild or not, who have developed mental health issues, how about Art 28 of the Human Rights Act “says that children and young people have the right to education no matter who they are: regardless of race, gender or disability”.

Those that have chosen private education due to race, of which there are many too. Especially black children in places like London.

Given Labour are pro human rights, it is not a good look.

It is a massively discriminatory policy singling out certain children and their parents so of course there will be legal challenges. Is that not obvious? At the tax payer’s expense I would imagine and great further embarrassment to the country, “laughing stock England” springs to mind.

Did you know that the ONS miscalculating our economic growth in stats recently probably cost the country millions and millions of direct investment by foreign investors?

These politicians and public bodies we have need to wake up and smell the music. All the farce politics is going to cost us dearly, especially the most vulnerable.

I’m not in favour of this Labour proposal. But I very much doubt it can be stopped legally.

I’m no expert on the ECHR but my understanding is that opposition to state taxation measures under rights to property ownership inevitably fails because taxation is not arbitrary confiscation and in any case the change will have been introduced for a rational purpose using proper procedure.

As for the right to an education, the government would presumably just say that every child is provided with that by the state.

I suspect the legislative change is more difficult than people might suppose. But it’s still not that difficult. They’ve probably scoped that already.