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.

Precisely. I can never understand the logic of posters who say that private schools should be taxed because they are a luxury which give unfair advantage, but also say that private school teachers are worse than state equivalents, and that children receive a better education in the state sector. Where is the advantage?

It seems both apply on all these threads. I haven’t seen a private school thread yet without both claims made

Again based on your experience of 1 private school.
If you are so against private schools why do you work in one?

My comment was in response to the suggestion that private schools only perform better because of selection. I gave an example where a school massively outperforms state equivalents without selection. Places are allocated on a first come first served basis. As I said, performance and achievement is about more than selection.

Totally agree OP.

We pay more than £200k income tax a year, and don’t use state healthcare or state schools, but apparently that’s not enough. 🙄 We inherited nothing just worked very hard from day 1 of school.

It’s a hate campaign against successful people, so of course it’ll get Starmer votes from anyone who’s bitter about how their life turned out. It’ll raise fuck all. Go have a look at the defence and aid budgets in comparison…

If Starmer was serious about tackling equality he’d do a proper wealth tax but he doesn’t have the guts.

Oh, I completely agree - just don’t expect to get tax breaks for outsourcing your children’s education to what are essentially businesses.

And, before anyone asks, I think that private healthcare should also be subject to VAT.

Such a warped view. Germany give you tax relief on both.

But your approach will push more into the state sector

It’s why as pp says other countries do actual tax rebates not this gimmick around VAT which is not a ‘tax break’

People have to pay for all sorts of services that they don’t use.

Would you like to refund childless tax payers for not using the state education system?

No?

It’s not a tax break. Parents who privately educate their children are saving the state money. If Labours VAT policy is introduced we will be the only country in the World that charges sales tax on education. The UK, leading the World in jealousy and bitterness…

Exactly this

It’s idiocy

So far research suggests that those that don’t want / are unable to pay VAT for private education will be a relatively small number that will make up the shortfall on the forecast falling state school rolls.

Wow, you don't think much of the teaching profession if you think parents of people who went to Oxridge should be disappointed that their children became teachers. What a depressing view.

They won’t know the detail. I’m sure private schools are surveying now though. You won’t get any extra funding it’s a gimmick to scratch the envy itch

As for falling rolls what a great opportunity to keep budget the same and increase funding per pupil. Why have 30 plus per class when we could capitalise on it falling

There hasn’t been any comprehensive research on this. It’s all conjecture.

Exactly…I would have far more respect for Labour if they introduced a policy taking advantage of falling birth rates. For example, by implementing a cap of 24 on class sizes in the next decade.

Yep that would be far better

bubblingblack, you do realise that academies and free schools are allowed to have unqualified teachers, right? So actually a large number of state school teachers may be unqualified...

I am surprised that, as a teacher, you seem to think that teaching would be beneath the likes of Oxbridge-educated people. Whereas I think the exact opposite: teaching is an extremely important job that is highly undervalued in the UK, and is a job that many Oxbridge graduates would be proud to have.

In fact, my DS go to an independent secondary school. The HM is a Cambridge graduate, as are 2 of the SLT. Over a dozen teachers have Oxbridge degrees, with the vast majority coming from Russell Group universities.

There are a number of studies that show that a good teacher is one that is knowledgeable and enthusiastic about their subject. So I know which I would prefer out of an unqualified teacher that is an expert in their subject, or a qualified teacher that isn't.

But anyway. Back to VAT on school fees. Starmer has said that he doesn't want to diverge from the EU. But the EU does not allow VAT to be charged on education, so I'm not sure how this policy fits in with that

@SabrinaThwaite - hmmm. Fees have been increasingly in private schools year on year for the past decade or so - far above wage growth. Many parents who went in thinking it would be affordable are struggling more, with inflation and mortgage rises in the mix as well. However, a jump of a one or two percent per year isn’t such a shock as the 12plus percent a year the schools will pass on once VAT comes in. Lots of parents at that point are likely to think ‘enough is enough’ and reconsider their options.

That misses a key point.

There is a huge difference between paying for general social structure vs opting not to use a facility at point of need.

Refunding childless couples for not using state education doesn’t save the state any money.

Encouraging people to use private schools or private healthcare most definitely does.

No, I don’t think that childless tax payers should be refunded, in the same way that people who don’t use the NHS shouldn’t be refunded. However, nor do I think that parents who choose not to use state schools should be penalised through the tax system. Where is the logic of penalising people for not using state funding?

Not adding VAT to school fees is not a “tax break”, in the same way that people who buy a VAT free loaf of bread aren’t receiving a “tax break”

Not adding VAT to school fees is not a “tax break”, in the same way that people who buy a VAT free loaf of bread aren’t receiving a “tax break”

That makes no sense. Everyone who wants bread has to buy it - there is no state provided free bread alternative.

It does make sense

The bread is the standard price. There’s no ‘tax break’

State provision is irrelevant here. My point is that no VAT on school fees is very similar to no VAT on food. You wouldn’t say that someone buying food is receiving a “tax break”.

Edited to add :

Using an example where there is a state alternative (the NHS), would you say that an elderly person paying privately for a long awaited hip replacement is receiving a “tax break”? They’re not receiving a “tax break”, or saving any tax, they’re just not being asked to pay a tax charge on it.

In your example the elderly person isn’t receiving a tax break, it is the commercial health provider receiving the tax break.

In the same way that the 50% of independent schools that are commercial enterprises and not charities are receiving a tax break not available to other commercial service providers.

(BTW, a bit of an ageist example - plenty of people in their 40s have joint replacements).