If labour win the election can they introduce VAT immediately?

[londonparent321]

(For school fees) Or do they need to go through the courts which could take years /never happen?

I think there are different economic mindsets:

1.That the best way to improve everyone's lives is to redistribute money fairly

2.That there isn't a fixed amount of 'value' created each year, and that the best way to improve everyone's lives is to structure things so that more value is created. That if everyone gets a bit more, but some people get lots more then that's preferable to everyone having less.

The different mindsets cause huge frustration on both sides for lots of topics, including this one.

Group 1 think that private school parents are selfish for resisting redistribution.

Group 2 think that it's stupid to make everyone poorer just so that everyone is more equal.

@Newbutoldfather - you asked How do you campaign for a better state sector when those with power and influence opt out? Why would you care if it doesn’t affect your child?

Of course I care about state education, because most of the UK's citizens are educated in state! And it's not just that my doctor and my kid's teacher were educated in state schools, it's much more than that. It's that how pleasant my city centre is in 20 years time, how much theatre and arts are available, how quickly I'll be treated at hospital, how well-stocked the shops are will depend on how productive the next generation are. Oh and the guy I meet on the street will be more or less inclined to crime depending on whether he has a job, which in turn depends on whether private companies are thriving. And it's a cycle where better education now means more money available in 20 years, which means better education in 20 years, which means... you see where it's going. We're an interdependent society: of course it affects me, regardless of where my DC is educated.

The strength of our economy isn't fixed. How much value is created depends on the ability, skill and hard work of all workers collectively. And that to quite a big degree depends on their education. Opportunity isn't zero sum: my DD being a better engineer doesn't make your DC a worse entrepreneur.

Why don't you care that some kids end up with a worse education from this policy without any real benefit?

(Oh and the reason it feels like an attack is that it's such an obviously ineffective tax in terms of UK economic benefit that when you think the group 2 way, you can't see any reason to introduce it except to cause deliberate harm)

Our school gave 100% bursaries to ‘looked after children’.
The lower bursaries were given to teachers kids but mainly because the school day, for day pupils, ended at 5pm, there was school on Saturdays and teachers were required to be involved in activities at all other random times. Not least those as Boarding House tutors.

10% - 40% exhibitions and bursaries were offered to
lower earners who were means tested
lower earners whose kids were particularly gifted ie for choristers, musicians, in the arts and sports.

These children benefited from the fees of those who paid in full and benefited the school as a whole.

Our school also provided for free the following to the community (for example)
playing fields, swimming pool and sports equipment
the theatre
music teachers and music equipment
Wednesday afternoon help at local primaries
Revision sessions in the Easter break
Weekly Evening lectures for both adults and local students
Food to the local food bank and homeless shelters
Access to exhibitions and all plays at the theatre

The local areas hotels, Airbnb etc and restaurants also benefitted by visiting parents throughout the year. Adding millions to the local economy.
You only have to look at the Charities Commission Website to see how much and whether individual schools are a value added to the local community.

@strawberrybubblegum thanks for your reply. I guess I'm nervous like alot of people will be that my children's school will close as too many won't be able to afford the increase. And on the other worse case with 3 children in private the VAT would be like paying for 4 children. All because we've made huge sacrifices for earning ability and we want the best schooling for our children.
Time will tell

https://www.edsk.org/publications/obstacles-to-adding-vat-to-independent-school-fees/?fbclid=IwAR3nDO7SGEy3PkdQ4PaBsd-kyln1cCmmnmH_ojLBE01qDW5L6Y4wrdmQHhc

New think tank report on the challenges of the policy.

Thanks for this

The spokesperson was in the radio this morning and made good points, I put summary in pp

We absolutely need more eyes on this as education can’t rest on one IFS economist point of view. The impact is too big

Seeing as Labour are doggedly clinging onto the IFS report as their ONLY basis for the policy I am sending this to my Labour candidate. He bases all lf his answers on the IFS report so will be interesting what he responds to this.

Thanks for sharing. I still feel like they ought to read this thread to find out more about potential behavioural impacts!!

Perhaps we should all write to our Labour MPs and tell them to sign up.

Maybe they're already on here....I mean, some of them had privileged upbringings and yet are very against it...🤔

Sadly it’s electoral catnip for obvious reasons

But yes we need better policy than one that will have negative impact in many ways

I picked up the IFS report hadn’t considered differences between England, Scotland, Wales and NI in some aspects. I hadn’t picked up on SEN. That they are suggesting using EHCPs as a means to decide who gets VAT exemption and neither Labour nor IFS acknowledged that these only apply to England is actually pretty shocking. And nor is it just a case of another but very similar system existing in different parts of the UK - the legislation is very different. It could mean an English child with an EHCP placed in a Scottish school gets exemption from VAT but a Scottish child with the same, or even more severe SEN/ASN at the same school isn’t. VAT is not devolved to regions.

This. Our catchment school is in special measures with Safeguarding being a key concern. We will have to move to get access to a better/non-failing state school but currently highly unlikely to be able to afford the house prices in the nice catchment areas.
Imagine if Labour had proposed scrapping the catchment areas system to actually make state schools more accessible to all - oh my, the outcry…

I was a tax accountant in the 1980s when we were still doing returns for back years with 83% rates on some income . They must have earned pretty well to be paying that especially as it was only on the very top slice. The thing is that VAT is a notoriously regressive tax whereas income tax is progressive in terms of who it hits most.

@mrssunshinexxx that sounds like a big worry, I'm so sorry.

An Autumn election looks likely and Labour are very likely to get in, and seem to want to bring this in quite quickly, probably with anti-forestalling legislation going in straight away. It isn't entirely clear whether any of the legal complexities will delay it (like the ones outlined in the EDSK report above).

So the timescale could theoretically be from Sep '24 (if there's an early snap election and no problems defining the new rules) BUT it's more likely to be from Easter '25 or even 'Sep 25.

I think it's a case of hope for the best but plan for the worst.

-Is there any particular reason you think your school is likely to close, like small numbers already?

-Are there already rumblings from parents about pulling out and about the school finances? You need to make a judgement call about how likely and when!
-What other schools are there close by?
-How old are your DC? Might the eldest be almost through, or the youngest not yet started?
-Can your finances stretch, at least until a DC leaves or you reach a natural break point for one of them?

-What options do you have eg extending your mortgage (not saying you should do that - just weigh up the options)

Things I'd be thinking about:
1.Your school may offer a prepayment plan, which could shelter you from the first few years of VAT if you do it before the election BUT you need to be sure the school won't close down and that you definitely want to keep them in for that period, since the money will go into the school's general funds with no way to get it back.
2.If the school does close, then all the pupils will be looking for a new school at the same time, which will be hard. If you think this is a real risk then moving them to another school earlier (either state or a more resilient private) is worth considering, especially if you're at a natural break point like 11 or 16. It might seem a shame to move them before it's necessary but a planned move gives you more options than a forced one.
3.They don't all need to be at the same school. You can move them at the right time for each DC, even if it makes logistics trickier.

4.If your school is short of pupils, then getting in at a later point should be possible, so don't be afraid to have a few years at another school and see how it goes
5.Alternatively, if you have a good state 6th form close by and your eldest DC has chosen standard subjects then that might be worth considering. GCSE years (9-11) really seems like the critical time.

Wishing you all the best.

@pootleq5 ,

I don’t really know as was only a teenager, but heard them moaning about it.

I think it was a tax on investment income as we were comfortable but certainly not rich. My parents ran a small business with alarmingly volatile income, so we went from 5 star holidays to no holidays at all.

I had a full scholarship for my 6th form years and did 4th term Cambridge (which was a thing then) as the school didn’t want to stump up for my 7th term. Luckily I got in anyway.

My parents used to use the threat of putting me in state school as if it was purgatory. Knowing more now, I think I would have done fine anyway as I basically prepared myself for 4th term. I do think it was easier in those days to work hard, pre internet. It was do some maths, or read, or watch one of 5 TV channels.

Do you mean the 90s @Newbutoldfather as we didn’t have 5 channels till 1998 when ch5 was brought in.
In the 70s we had 3 channels, then late 80s 4 when ch4 was introduced.

Do you not think state school have clever top set kids. My daughters primary cohort who went to state did better than the ones who went to private. Top sets in state are not less intelligent than top sets in private.

Out of all the ridiculous things on this thread written about state schools this is one of the most condescending.

One thing I wonder, is if they will bring it in part way through a school year. That would seem unnecessarily cruel.

Firstly because it means parents may be forced to move kids part way through an exam year.

Secondly because it could mean parents being forced to pay VAT on a service they can no longer afford, but are already commited to. For example some schools require 1 or 2 terms notice to withdraw, or even in some circumstances a full year. If you withdraw before then you still have to pay the fees for the full period. So if labour were to slap fees on straight away, what would happen in those circumstances?

I agree, hilarious really, my DS who was Top group Maths at GCSE was helping via video calls, my close family member in the same year, he was in top set himself but work DS found easy and didn't have to revise for, close family member found very challenging.

When I had to leave private school at 12 and was sent to a London comprehensive, the differences were more like I was the only person that played the Cello in the whole school but I wasn't in top maths set as I am awful at maths. At private school I had to work at it in break time and some of lunch at 7 years old!

Close family member was at a pretty well known private school.

Do you not think state school have clever top set kids.

A lot of state secondaries do not set pupils. DC school doesn’t (apart from a support class).

I agree, hilarious really, my DS who was Top group Maths at GCSE was helping via video calls, my close family member in the same year, he was in top set himself but work DS found easy

Anecdotes like this are rather pointless. I was in the top set at maths in my state school, my cousin’s private top set was well ahead. It is not that there are no bright maths students in comprehensive state schools, but that there are proportionally more in selective state schools. And where there is a lack of setting children at both the top and bottom of the class can struggle to achieve their best.

Well if you look at the most senior U.K. maths Olympiad’s then there are typically a lot of top private schools represented as well as some state schools, including Kings London Maths and I saw Hills Road too. One would assume that at that level state school kids who would want to go private would get full bursaries, if they can’t afford the fees. The point being the most clever kids get a choice. There is no point going on about what school the truly gifted kids go to - it is about the kids. Not many of the names sound very British either.

Parents who pay for private fees would manage VAT up until the point they are contracted to pay (notice period) because if they then move to state they would no longer have to the pay fees they would otherwise pay. If they couldn’t, it wouldn’t be down to VAT. It would be more of an issue if you don’t want to disrupt exams and therefore are committed for nearly two years.

However, imposing any cost on anyone who does not at that point have the choice to avoid the cost seems very unreasonable for any government to do. Article 7 of the European convention on human rights prevents you from being found guilty of crime that was not an offence when the crime was committed. This seems to go against this principle.

That is why I specified “selective” private school kids who would automatically be top set anywhere.

The PP noted those from selective private schools.
So those that test kids and offer places who pass that entrance test. Selective private schools will be therefore be taking the brightest of applicants.

PP did not comment on non selective private schools which of course will take the same academically broad range of students as state.