20% vat on fees

[namechangedforthisone35]

IF Labour get in and IF the 20% does get added to fees, how many private school pupils will be moved to state? I have three kids (one not school aged yet) and in private school. One of many reasons because I didn't want them in a class of 30. I couldn't afford the vat increase so would have to move them but then that class of 30 becomes, what, 40?! In an already strained and unresourced system?!

Wwyd?

Y - I'd have to move kids to state
N - I'll pay the vat

If they stay…

But yes that funding has been promised as spend a fair few times already

Why would non dom people stay? Most come for exactly 6 months a year to not pay tax. If they have to pay tax they go to Monaco or some canton in Switzerland. That is what these people do. Isn’t that obvious?

Apparently not to labour
They have it spent 6 times over already.

Ha yes

Ha ha, let's all laugh at and patronise people who would like public services properly funded.

@SheilaFentiman And lots don't bother because councils have so little money. Most will do it legally anyway. You rent your house to your cousin then you rent out the nearest place to the school. Move in furniture, stay there for a bit and it's all fine. It costs A LOT less than fees. Most won't be mid year transfers. Very few if any will crash out like that and will plan years in advance for the next stage.

Do you genuinely think VAT on school fees will cause Non-Dons to leave? They won’t even notice, I doubt they even see the invoices.

I thought they were having to switch schools in a hurry due to VAT?

@kitsuneghost is talking about another Labour policy

No. It was a bit of a veer to the side.
Average person now can afford private do changes to state
State therefore needs more places
More schools will need built
Labour's funding to EVERYTHING is non dom taxation
This is where they decide to leave.

Can afford should have been can't afford obviously

Average people can't afford private now (unless funded by grandparents etc. but that also would make them decidedly unaverage)

More schools won’t need to be built. There is capacity.

The insistence that thousands of indie children will overwhelm the state sector is misguided.

The two policies have promised spend a fair few times but as in pp it’s easy just to go and this policy won’t bring in much

So that’s low extra funding up against spending promises

I think the only thing likely to stop 20% vat on fees is EU harmonisation - will Labour want to rejoin the EU?

For myself - I would probably suck up whatever increase emerges and then move kids at the natural breakpoints - 11/16 etc

There is a decade long road fo
rejoining the EU and Labour’s current policy is not focussed on this.

The impact will be seen mainly among younger kids, the more so the younger the kids are (a lot of parents will be choosing to start their kids at state primary instead to see if they can save enough for private secondary, or switching their kids while young enough that it isn't too disruptive), and parents will be far less keen to move older kids, esp those coming up to exams.

Among younger kids, rolls are falling due to declining birthrates since the 2008-2009 financial crisis, so huge pressure on places is unlikely.

I think there are sensible arguments that can be made against VAT, absolutely, but "OMG, there'll be 40 kids in a class!!!" isn't one of them.

This is laughable. Do you think a couple of educated, wealthy parents or parents who have grandparents with cash to burn will just accept the offer of the failing school in the area as the only one with a place and leave it at that? Of course they won't. They'll social engineer - buy a property in a better catchement, tutor for grammars and specialist schools without a catchement, pay off a vicar with donations to the church roof fund, take the LA to court and hire expensive lawyers. There's a reason why these people put their kids in private schools to start with and thats because they particularly value education, primarily care about their own kids first, are highly motivated, have salary or wealth behind them or all of the above. The idea that these people who can't or won't stay in private with VAT for ideological reasons will just send their kids straight from prep school to the inner city academy where you get checked for knives on the way in is truly laughable.

All this policy will do is widen the gap between the elites and everyone else, they will stay at Eton etc (I mean do you think Kate and Wills will be switching to local comp 🤣) but also create another massive wedge between the educated middle earners who can't or won't absorb a 20% rise and the ones who never had a choice in the first place. It's literally creating a 3 tier system instead of a 2 tier system. Or actually just reinforcing it, as of course, it's already there (church schools, grammars, outstanding school catchements).

@AIstolemylunch those things, such as tutoring for grammar, are possible at normal entry points eg start of secondary.

The post you quoted is explicitly about “Children needing in year places or to join outside a normal entry point will be offered a place at a school with vacancies. “

Church schools in the state system don’t work like that. And a new church roof will be a damn site more expensive than a few years of VAT on fees anyway.

It's entirely reasonable to laugh at people who have no common sense and don't understand human behaviour. It's all very well being ideological and thinking what "should" happen, but back in the real World, people WILL make choices and alter their behaviour to reduce the amount of tax they pay, especially if they're wealthy enough to have the choice to relocate! Politicians need to forget what they think "should" happen and be more realistic about their policies and what WILL happen due to human behaviour.

@LittleBearPad clearly does not personally know enough private school tiger parents, like many of us do. The ones I know (and I know many) will move, change jobs, move abroad etc before the Labour Party get to them. Let’s start being honest here. Sure, most will suck up the rise in the short term, but if you want to become a country of whipping the rich young talented high earning very educated (as opposed to the those with inherited wealth and assets of which there are not many left) then good luck with supporting your poor people and elderly in the future.
We need to be honest here and talk about maximising tax take long term. Of course, an equal high quality education system for all is something to aspire too. However, you do not have that in any shape or form in the current state sector. So sort that bit out first at it affects the 93%. Attacking the 7% who are paying your 30% tax is a really bad idea.

And even if that were the case and they had to move in year - which they won't, as motivated people think ahead - but let's say a couple of private school parents had a sudden financial crisis, both made redundant at the same time or whatever. You think they wouldn't mount appeals, legal challenges, go to the papers etc etc. Are the LEAs prepared for all that?

Yes they do, you have to attend church for a period of time and suck up to the vicar for awhile to get a letter from them. I know people who start doing that in preparation when the kids hit year 1. And I didn't say pay for the roof I said contribute to the fund. I know a family who did exactly this as they were well off but couldn't manage school fees for both kids.

As a PP has said, I really do wonder how many of the education idealogues on this thread actually have children in the education system.in this country at the moment. It's all a massive game/farce amongst the middle classes and many go private just to opt out of the con. I also wonder if they think that all private school parents are aristocrats and kids are all at Eton. Woefully out of touch it seems to me.

I think we'll be able to afford to have them complete their GCSE's at the very good independent school they're at. We'll then have to consider the state sixth forms for A-levels.

The state sixth forms are academically selective in Cambridge, and I would expect both children to get into Hills Road, which is, whilst different to an independent school, still a very good school and already attracts a fair number across from the independent sector. If they do though, that will sadly mean two fewer places for children who may in all probability have otherwise come from state secondary.

I don't know how it's going to work in other parts of the country, but in Cambridge, every child displaced from an independent school can potentially (not necessarily) be displacing a child destined to go through the state system from their first choice of good secondary or sixth form.

Anyone that knows Cambridge knows that if you don't get into e.g. Chesterton for secondary or Hills for sixth form, the alternatives can be a considerably different experience.