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

"I would, however, highlight how bizarre the situation is when parents who can afford the equivalent of many people's salaries in order to buy their children an education can unironically consider themselves the victims of discrimination and unfairness."

@Hobbi Have you ever seen the movie Crazy Rich Asians? The first scene? An exaggeration, poetic license, to be sure, but it is true that being rich doesn't automatically insulate you from discrimination and unfairness. As you like to put it, a category error.

Perhaps because her methods are inherently exclusionary. Not all parents are either able to, or willing to, enforce that kind of discipline on their children. She deters those parents from applying and works to manage out those who do get places initially but can't or won't toe her line. Are children not worthy of the best educational opportunities because their parents don't do this?

I hope we all agree that money can confer educational advantages. I believe we all agree that more invested parents can confer educational advantages. Those who rail against the one inequity are consistent in railing against the other.

and when you have the top private schools now hitting the £50k per YEAR per CHILD mark for boarders, it’s really not Any politician making private schooling inaccessible to ‘strivers’ and the middle classes, is it?

This is not representative of private education as a whole. There is a small percentage of children who go to boarding school (less than 1% out of the 6/7% of children at private school generally). A lot of the boarding schools are not £50k anyway. As I’ve pointed out before, the average cost of private education is much less than the figures you keep quoting. The average secondary figure is less than £18k, the average primary less than that.

It’s also worth noting that the more elite and wealthy schools are likely to be able to claim a lot of VAT back if they become VAT registered, because they often have large capital expenditure. It’s the smaller, cheaper schools with much less expenditure who will be affected by the VAT more as they will be able to reclaim proportionally less. In reality, the elite wealthy schools will be affected less than the poorer ones. It will make private education even more elite.

“Telegraph has been doing lots of pieces in the last couple Years about whether or not private schools are worth it anymore given the rising costs and the likelihood that an ‘elite’ education may actually go against kids when it comes to university places and opportunities.”

Here we go again… the Etonians don’t give a damn about Oxbridge anymore. The truly talented and rich there decided years ago that Cambridge is no longer for them. They are Harvard and Yale bound on rowing scholarships and will be leaving their cash in their wills there and doing private equity in the US. They are also deliberately leaving the name of their school off their job applications. They are way ahead of the intentions of some politicians.
The big irony being that if you go to the top private school in the US neither Cambridge or Oxford cares.
The elite are never going to lose out, you can’t get to them.

And this is how it is clear that you have no experience of private schools yourself. Many of us don't judge education through outcomes but how happy our DC are and the breadth of learning available. I am not paying for Xx amount of GCSE grades 7-9.

“Perhaps because her methods are inherently exclusionary. Not all parents are either able to, or willing to, enforce that kind of discipline on their children. She deters those parents from applying and works to manage out those who do get places initially but can't or won't toe her line. Are children not worthy of the best educational opportunities because their parents don't do this?

I hope we all agree that money can confer educational advantages. I believe we all agree that more invested parents can confer educational advantages. Those who rail against the one inequity are consistent in railing against the other.”

I think realistically if you are truly raising standards and kids out of actual poverty then it requires a certain type of narrow vision and leadership and this woman delivers what she promises on the tin. Anyone looking round the school will see that. Parents who think they will send their DC and that they can magically get those outcomes without pure sweat and slog and sacrifice are deluded. As they live in London there is free transport and they can move their kids elsewhere. There are lots of different states schools in London with a different ethos. We have had parents order our outstanding state school because they don’t like the high expectations and homework/interventions.

That was meant to say we have had parents leave our outstanding state school because it is too pushy for them. It happens.

@user149799568

I haven't seen that movie, nor I ever intend on doing so. I am aware that to folk accustomed to privilege, any move towards equity seems like persecution. Poor lambs.

@user149799568

Out of due diligence I've just watched the scene you mentioned. I'm afraid I don't see a parallel, in fact the woman in the scene was being discriminated against because of her race, her wealth solved the problem.

It's more the case here that those accustomed to receiving something for free, over time, come to view it as an entitlement.

I don't object to the VAT in theory...but in practice it just won't work.

I went to a very deprived state school, worked hard and now send my two children to a prep school. I'm also a governor at that school - we suspect it will work out to be around a 16% increase on fees.

Out of all my mum friends, only two of us work full time...coincidentally we're also the only two who send our children to private school. If they do add VAT onto fees we will take our two children out of the school (not sure where they will go as we couldn't get them into any of the village schools round here). But one thing I do know is that I will reduce my working hours because what is the point in slogging my guts out - so actually I'll just pay an awful lot less tax. So for my family they'll have to find two more state school places and receive a lot less tax to fund it!

It just creates an even bigger divide between the super wealthy and those of us who have worked really hard.

When my brother first mooted the idea of PS for his boys, i asked "why? we decent schools around here"
His response was "Contacts/Networking, they will meet a far more influential cohort of pupils and parents then in our local comp plus there is the prestige of going to X school"
For him it wasn't about "education" though to be fair to the school and his children, they both did very well.

In regard to "Happiness" they were boarders and it took about 2 years for the youngest one to settle, imho i wondered why they even bothered had children if you give them up for someone else to bring them up.
Obviously this is anecdotal and not typical of day students.

Perhaps this is why i'm not really a huge fan of private schools?

@Absolutely45"When my brother first mooted the idea of PS for his boys, i asked "why? we decent schools around here"

And what would your response have been if you didn't have decent schools around your way?

edit: Also, that's the first actual PS parent I've heard mention networking or making influential friends as a reason for going.

Honestly, i would have totally understood it (but not the boarding aspect)

At a personal level, most parents do whats best for their kids, you cannot blame them in anyway.

But at societal level, we need to make sure all children, regardless of the luck of parentage, have access and opportunity to a excellent education and if that means taxing the wealthiest by this or other taxes eg unearned income taxes, then that has to happen.

This country is screwed unless it improves educational opportunity.

Well he said, still believes it, its not that rare given the number who strive to go to the most expensive schools, i doubt many would admit it other than to family- never heard of the "old boys network"?
Maybe its an outdated concept.

Some of us don't have good state options though as I think I've made clear.
Not all private schools are boarding and even those which are, only a small % actually board.
There may be prestige of a tiny number of famous schools but the majority serve local communities/seevice families/SEN. Those families don't send DC private for the prestige.

Too many people just aren't prepared to look past the Eton stereotypes and judge every one of the approx 2000 private schools with the same attitude. Lots of those people are on this thread, they don't don't accept that every school is different and will cater for a different set of DC.

My income is already taxed at rates up to 62%. How much more do you think I should pay?

Would you be happy to undertake work when you have to give 2/3rds of your income away while at the same time being told you should really be paying more?

The idea that people will just stomach ever increasing tax rates is nonsense and has been disproven many times over.

Its quite unbelievable you don't get what "taxes on unearned income" means, did i mention PAYE or earned income?
As i repeat, reading what is posted seems to be increasingly impossible for some.

Did you see what Sunak was taxed at on his recent income tax return?

Approx a 1/3rd of what you say you pay.

So are you suggesting that people like me who use PAYE income to pay the fees should not be impacted?

If so then they need to abandon the VAT plans and start looking at some form of wealth tax. Perhaps link it in part to property value as that’s what I’ve sacrificed to help pay for the fees. That would create a more equitable outcome for all.

‘Out of due diligence I've just watched the scene you mentioned. I'm afraid I don't see a parallel, in fact the woman in the scene was being discriminated against because of her race, her wealth solved the problem.’

Exactly But like my Mamaw used to say, you can’t argue with stupid

@Absolutely45

"But at societal level, we need to make sure all children, regardless of the luck of parentage, have access and opportunity to a excellent education "

+++

I completely agree with you on this and I would certainly advocate greater state spending on education because it is an investment in the future of the country and the economy.

I would reject the view that this is funded through the popular call of "tax the rich" when the top 1% currently pay 30% of all income tax revenue. Also when asked to define who are the rich the common answer tends to be anyone earning 25% more than my salary but most definitely not me".

Instead I would rather it be paid by say taxing or means testing the winter fuel allowance, increasing the pension age earlier which would raise significant money.

But the central question on VAT on school fees is what is its purpose? Is it to raise money for state school spending or is it to simply punish the rich because it's "not fair"? If it is the former then it's not going to raise much (if anything) and therefore won't make much difference to state education. Or if it is to punish the rich in which case why just private education- why not private healthcare or dentists.

Which concludes with surely we should be addressing the inequality by making state schools better and not through making private schools worse or less accessible.

I have many, many colleagues who privately educate their children who do it because it’s expected of them, background and income.
They feel this immense pressure. I even had one who said he does because his CLIENTS would expect him to, and how would it look to them if he didn’t. Like he couldn’t afford it. Like he wasn’t ‘successful’ if he didn’t send them and then they wouldn’t trust him.

Utterly bizarre to me. Not only am I WC, but also grew up somewhere where private schools didn’t exist.

Thank you for the demonstration.

@bogoffeternal 😅😅😅

Re Northern European countries not banning Private Education- you really can't compare at all. State Education in thos countries are really well funded, with great facilities, excellent staff and small class sizes- so only a ver few opt out to go private. And State schools have students from all backgrounds, with very many from high ranking professional and business parents, who ensure they use their influence and support in so many ways, to benefit all children. It is indeed not at all a 'left'wing' principle to believe that ALL children deserve an excellent education, and that long-term is leads to a better, more harmonious and also productive society- where all benefit.

You made the blanket assertion that the wealthy cannot "unironically consider themselves the victims of discrimination and unfairness". I assert that they can, certainly in ways which are not related to their wealth. And it is not always the case that their wealth can solve the problem.