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

Erm, you earn more than double what I do and you're lecturing people like me about having too much wealth and privilege?

“If just for the purpose of funding education, the labour should just freeze the high level income tax band, much much less contraversal and more effective than the 20% VAT”

That won’t work because teachers are one of the professions caught up in the fiscal drag. They would just drop hours or you would have to pay them so much more because they fall into the 40 per cent bracket. The thresholds have to go up due to inflation. People need to want to work more, not less and take top up benefits instead.

Teachers have children that need improving funding for education too. It is about fairness of the system.

Outside of London, how many teachers pay a substantial amount of income at 40% ?

Its the Tories that have frozen THs until 2027/28, which i think is totally wrong, 50k per year is not what it was, a single person wouldn't be able to buy a house in most parts of England on that.
Too many caught up in it now, funnily enough not under Corbyn or McDonald but under the Conservatives.

Are private schools going anywhere soon? No.
are they for the wealthy? Yes.
Are they charities? No, they are not.
should they receive the financial benefits that real charities do? No way.
Is it all about to change? Yes.
and no amount of whinging about it will make any difference.

No amount of laughing emojis and whinging about Clemmie or whomever some bitter mind has hooked on will change the fact it’s a dud policy that will bring in Jack shit.

Is the state education so dire that many parents have no option other than sending DC private? Yes
Have Labour offered any policy on education in order to raise standards other than the VAT policy? No
Will Labour's VAT policy raise enough money to fund systemic improvements to the state education system? No
Have Labour committed the VAT money tree to 3 different projects already? Yes
Is the policy rooted in the principle of making private schools suffer rather than raising substantial amounts of money? Yes
Is there one poster who is probably more privileged than anyone else on this thread yet preaches to everyone else about privilege? Yes

For someone with a household income in excess of £400k per annum you appear to be remarkably bitter about life.

Is 20k take home pay every month not enough to bring you even a modicum of happiness and good grace?

Are they charities? No, they are not.
should they receive the financial benefits that real charities do? No way.
Is it all about to change? Yes.

For the umpteenth time, Labour are not removing charitable status. How many times do you have to be told this?

@Charlie2121 point in case that money certainly doesn't buy happiness 😁

Hear, hear.

Is the state education so dire that many parents have no option other than sending DC private?
Of course you have another option! Send them to state school like most people.

What do you think you’re getting out of it?

Is it just to poke one at the Clemmies of this world like the pp

Why would I send my child to a very poor underperforming state school? With major behaviour issues, lack of teachers etc?
I am fortunate to be able to afford am alternative therfore why would I sacrifice her education?

But happy enough for the 95% of school kids to go to this crappy school? but more than that, expect a tax payer subsidy.

No I'm not happy about it at all. I'm disgusted at the state of our education system but I am intelligent enough to know that it won't be fixed by 1.5billion which won't even cover the cost of RAAC let alone the other 3 schemes that Labour say it will seemingly pay for.
What we need is a long term, cross party agreement to properly fund state education but Labour aren't pledging this are they?
I would be happy to pay a ring fenced amount of general taxation (same as a health tax) but again Labour aren't suggesting this. Instead they are creating a socially divisive policy which will only result in greater inequality as the truly uber wealthy wont feel any impact and it will only impact lower earning parents who currently pay fees.
Labour won't be honest though and admit that the policy is more about making private schools suffer than it is about raising standards. They are being disingenuous. As can be seem by some comments on this thread some supporters only care about hurting a perceived class of people rather than raising standards in the state sector.

Why have you got this completely the wrong way round? How do you think state schools are funded?

Do you not stop a think that you are berating someone for using tax payer "subsidy" for something they actually pay for themselves in it's entirety, while trying to offer the alternative which is 100% subsidised by the tax payer? What is your argument here?

I pay tax, my husband pays higher rate tax but we don't take our state funded place.

‘I pay tax, my husband pays higher rate tax but we don't take our state funded place.’

wow. Here’s your medal. Such sacrifice, such selfishness. We thank you for your contribution to society.

Your comment makes no sense. Do you mean selflessness?

Out of interest what is that you and your DP do for the wider good considering your household income is by your own admission in excess of £400k?

I’d imagine someone in your position and with your attitude must be doing something quite significant for societal good with the £20k+ take home pay you stated your household receives every month.

I also object to the assertion that I am somehow receiving a subsidy when I send my children private. A shockingly small proportion of uk taxpayers are net contributors, but I bet most private school families are. I take almost nothing from the state, but the state sure takes from me. Which is fine, but it is ridiculous to assert that I am somehow leeching from society when I send my children (one of whom has Sen) to a private school rather than taking up a state place. I quietly pay for the extra support my dc need, and while my motivation is purely about my child’s best interest, that choice does save the state a hell of a lot of money.

the reality is that we are a country with rising financial obligations (due to aging population), and anemic growth, which mean the taxpayer is increasingly burdened for decreasing quality of service. everyone (but especially salaried higher earners) is facing historically high taxed obligations, which become increasingly painful to bear, We aren’t going to be able to tax ourselves to better services in education, health, etc. Hell, we would need to rapidly increase the tax take just to maintain the current shit levels. Some combination of decreasing our obligations (decrease our pension, healthcare, etc. commitments) and/or economic growth is the only way to a fully funded educational system.

‘Is the state education so dire that many parents have no option other than sending DC private? ‘

No, but for whatever reason some feel the need to pretend it is. Which is odd given that school catchment areas generally mean that better off areas = better schools.
Unless all these folks earning enough to drop an entire salary or two on fees are living on council estates and just striving to make the financials work?
I have more respect for the parents who are just ‘we can afford it we’re doing it’ over the ones who pretend that they live in a catchment with only one choice of school
and that school is THE worst anyone’s ever heard of.

Suppose education is subject to the VAT in all cases, there will be less dispute. Anyone who receives the state education has to pay back 20% of the state funding amount. I bet in this scenario, the private school parents would gladly pay 20% of whatever the additional education cost they privately fund their children.

@Whazzabanger there’s something in the news on a daily basis relating to various crises in education. My sense is that it has declined significantly in past 5 years, so unless you have dc in school right now, you may not realise how bad it is in some very nice places. Our very highly regarded secondary that everyone jockeys for a place is currently roiling with rampant behavioural issues, have numerous unfilled vacancies in math/science, and achieves very mediocre results which on closer inspection look like a small number of high perfomers boosting otherwise unimpressive performance.

and that is for the average student - It is also an absolute shitshow if your dc has Sen. About 1/3 of students at my dc prep have some Sen that made it very very difficult to cope in mainstream state, but not severe enough to warrant specialist placement (not that those are available either). Tellingly, all of the very well regarded state schools in our area have rates of Sen about half the national average, suggesting they are some combination of really poor about supporting diagnosis and/or pushing those children out. Please don’t tell me that these schools are good schools - I mean, maybe for some of the children they are - but it was a disaster for my child, and keeping her there would have done more harm than good.

i’m sure there are good state schools, especially if you have a NT child, but I can only choose from my local options, and a school is only as good as it is for meeting my child’s needs. Most of the private parents I know did not automatically choose private from reception- we tried state and were utterly failed.