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.

Are you assuming the poster is English?

@Certainlyreally thank you

I haven't read the full thread, but has anyone actually answered the question of 'why not tax private health and private tutoring'? They don't usually on these threads. If the argument is that private school fees should be taxed because private education is an optional luxury version of a service that is available for free from the state in a less luxury form (and which buys advantage for those with money), then I can't think of a single moral reason why exactly the same the same argument shouldn't apply to private health and private tutoring. The only difference is that they're cheaper and therefore accessible to more voters. Rather makes a mockery of Labour's argument that they're doing this on moral grounds.

When a politician says “we will raise your taxes to fund x”, the only part that’s guaranteed to happen is the former, not the latter.

Perhaps I did not say it clearly enough in my original post, a big part of my frustration is that I’m convinced the money will not go where it is intended to go.

Here’s to the extra £300 million for the NHS 🍻

And this is also the reason I brought up Singapore. A competent, corruption-free government does not need that high taxes to have a world class state education system.

You’re spot on.

this is what I don’t get. Of course this will happen if they force people out of private school.

People will just use their money to buy their way into a better area and top up with tutors. quite often those type of schools do just as well as private schools because that’s what those parents are doing.

I used to teach in Korea and most kids attend public (state) schools there but tonnes of parents send their kids to private after school academies and get private tutors in.

And most significantly if your parents were well connected you could more easily get into certain companies, once you graduated - just like this country.

Attacking private schools is not the great equaliser people think it is. And the private school kids running the country didn’t go to the local private school that will be hardest hit by these proposals, they mainly went to the extremely prestigious ones.

@jjkkll very good point!

Ours is another for profit charitable Trust that has educated many children who could not afford a private education. We even have a number of Ukrainian refugees.

Yes, they provide a service, but what school does not?

But what is the difference between a pre school attached to a private day nursery and a pre school attached to a private school?! Is VAT payable on both?! Then there’s the question of why should a small private school with a high proportion of SEN students attract VAT but not Oxford or Cambridge? Which is the most elitist?

I think it will just widen the gap further between those who can and can't access private. I also think it's a slippery slope to charge VAT on education, as others have said.

I'm in the minority on this on here, but I get the point about why people are pissed off for paying VAT on something that the state would otherwise be paying for. It's a different point to those without children saying they should get a rebate as they don't have kids accessing education at all. People who pay for their kids to go privately are paying into the pot for state education that their kids aren't accessing either. Yes they are fortunate to have that choice, just as those who can move to a good catchment area are. They are not asking for a rebate.

I find the argument that if everyone went to state school, the rich would make sure it was good really odd. Are all those who say this not bothered about their kids education, just because they can't afford / have chosen not to send their kids to private school?

We can't be bothered to chase billions lost to fraud, but can piss about on this? That so many state schools are in such a woeful state is because of political choices.

Surely when you decide to send your children to private school you factor in the possibility that at some point - for any number of reasons - the fees may no longer be affordable for you. Not saying that would be an easy pill to swallow, but a possibility you would consider surely?

This whole thread is so woe is me.

This story really really does not show what you think it shows.

Indeed. But they also have much higher taxes, and a system that prioritises education. They have an excellent education available to everyone. Are you thinking we can pull that off? They also have an excellent public transport system. Great pensions. Great health care. Great social care. We cannot do any of this. Let's not pretend we can pull rabbits out of hats!

It would be entirely possible to exclude private care for under 5s / post 18 education / SEN provision / pre and after school care with careful wording of VAT legislation.

👏👏

All children will never be given the same education. Parents will always, always soend monet to buy privilege.

i think it’s a policy designed to win votes, but one that won’t really do much good, if any at all.

The thing that really beats me is this: I can see that all children ought to be entitled to the same education in an ideal world. But why do people think state schools are all the same? It’s idiotic to think that a leafy state school that is stuffed with the kids of uni professors and sends loads to Oxbridge every year is in any way comparable with one that gets terrible results and sends virtually no one on to sixth form, let alone university. And shutting/taxing private schools will further widen this gulf - house prices will rocket around good schools and they’ll be private by stealth - you can only send your kid there if you can afford £££££££ for a house in the catchment.

ideally we shouldn’t have private schools, but we do. And we can’t just shut or severely tax them without serious negative consequences for everyone.

we’re fucked any way you look at it really. We have no chance of emulating Finland or anywhere else being touted as utopia because we’re too far gone.

Yes, private health care is a luxury and should be taxed. As far as I am aware, all care homes are private these days. If any state care homes exist, it is certainly not a large enough number to act as a basic alternative. I am, however, all for a return to state care homes, having worked in both, and seen the difference in staff conditions and training. In fact, I became a teacher using my redundancy payment at the point at which my own service became privatised. Care staff are massively undervalued in the current system, whereas under local government control they were valued as a skilled workforce.

I’m sure at the moment, the thought of taxing private health care sounds horrendous, as many prone are having to use it as the standard version of health care. The point is, standard health care and standard education should both be of a reasonable quality. I’d be very happy for there to be no private healthcare and no private education whatsoever, and I strongly believe if everyone used the same services, we would have a far fairer country with much better investment. Standard should not mean inadequate, and currently it does. This is the real outrage. I save my sympathy for those who cannot afford the alternative.

They are the same, so let's tax them! I would be all for that.

The more unobtainable these things become for the majority, the more pressure there will be on government to fix the issues in the state systems.

It just makes no sense to pursue a whack a mole policy of taxing one type of bought privilege, which will doubtless bring with it various legal challenges and endless expensive wrangling to avoid unintended consequences, when we all know perfectly well that the wealthy will continue to buy privilege in many different ways (as many who use state schools already do, through nice houses and inheritance and private health and tutoring and weekend tennis lessons and networking to get their children great summer placements etc etc).

Just tax wealth more. At source, regardless of it's spent on.

Op I don't believe in Private schools I think all children should be given the same education.

There is a huge misunderstanding with the above statement. State schools never have been, and never will be, the same. The top state schools (where people pay inflated house prices to get their place, rather than school fees) are just private schools under another name.

The VAT on schools policy won’t solve inequality in schools - I wish everyone could see that.

The wealthy will continue to attend private schools.

Those who will lose out are lower middle classes and those accessing bursaries. Some of the bursaries cover more than 100% of fees. 2 minor private schools near me support 12% of pupils with bursaries. That will end.

The top state schools are not private schools under another name. They have the same amount of funding per student as other schools and will have the same teacher to student ratio. The teachers will work under the same conditions for the same hours.

The wealthy will continue to attend private schools. The middle class will suddenly be a hell of a lot more invested in the state of state schools.

Good.

And more fundamentally, there is the question of whether it's actually the ideal to get rid of private schools. Of course, it's the ideal for somewho want a more socialist state. But actually, we live in a country which generally believes that people should be able to spend their money on buying a better lifestyle. Why else do we let people buy houses rather than making everyone live in state-provided housing? Or shop in Waitrose rather than Tesco? Banning private schools would actually be fundamentally at odds with our underlying capitalist democracy principles. By all means, tax wealth more to improve the standard of housing, health and education for those who don't have the money to buy it - make those things brilliant But why pursue a tax or a ban on one specific little area of paid-for privilege when we don't do that elsewhere -particularly of we claim to be doing it for reasons if principle rather than practicality?