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?

@OhCrumbsWhereNow "You just have lots of smaller companies that are contracted to provide St Custard's Rugby, St Custard's Drama, St Custard's Catering."

This is called disaggregation and, unsurprisingly, HMRC are wise to it. It won't work.

Tory HQ again.

It has nothing to do with charitable status .

education is currently an exempt supply , that means that it sits outside of the system.entirely regardless of who supplies it. The proposal is to make it a chargeable supply , we don’t know yet whether it will be at the standard rate or as I have heard rumoured at a reduced rate.

Actually, an argument can be made that people without children should pay more in taxes. My children, who are a considerable expense to me now, will eventually pay taxes which will fund my state pension. The childless don't have this expense but will also eventually receive a state pension.

Never have voted tory and never will actually.

I don't even disagree with this idea in principle. Unfortunately I just do not think it will have the consequences that Labour think it will. It will widen the wealth divide even more and I just don't think it will generate extra revenue for state schools.

It's not much of an assumption that any children displaced from the private sector will compete for places in the best available state schools. And children formerly in the private sector are likely to have more resources so will have an advantage in this competition, regardless of their level of intelligence. Purchasing homes close to good comprehensives, for example. Or paying for tutoring for grammar schools.

At present, this does not appear to be relevant. Because they appear to be targeting education provided in schools for pupils of CSA and sixth form (irrespective of whether the provider is a business or a charity)

But devil is in the detail, and the Government will have to define exactly what types of education it proposes to tax, because yes there is a risk that if a charity charges a fee for a service, and that new service meets the definition of VAT-able education, then yes VAT will have to be charged. Careful drafting by the new administration avoids this completely.

And of course departing from the principle of no VAT on education could mean a thin end of a wedge for taxing other educational activities or age groups.

But I expect what will be next is the (philosophically aligned) exemption for knowledge (books, magazines, newspapers etc)

Honestly, this is such a non issue. If schools don’t want to raise prices, they will make cuts. It’s simple, and it’s what state schools have been doing for YEARS.

I just can’t see who this benefits.

It’s eye catching, appeals to the section of people who are voting “yay, can’t wait”.

It’ll increase inequality, because it won’t make a shred of difference to the genuinely wealthy. The ones pulling their kids out are the ones for whom 20% is make or break. It’ll be terrible for the many kids whose parents scrimp and save to send them to a school suitable for their SEN, for whom an extra 20% makes it impossible.

Theres room in the state system for the kids who’ll join it, but not in the good schools. So increased pushing and shoving and house moves to get kids in to decent schools. Decent school catchments shrink more.

I’ve not seen a single “yay” poster mention those SEN kids by the way. Do you not believe they exist, or are they just collateral damage that you don’t care about?

What I’ve not seen from labour is a proper plan of how they’ll invest the funds raised. They’ve mentioned more teachers, a register of kids not in school… but as far as I’ve seen nothing that gets to the bottom of the problems with our education system.

The elite tend to donate to their favoured causes, which can just follow trends and leave many important needs unmet.

Newbutoldfather. How do you know this? Can you give some examples? Who do you mean in this case by “the elite”?

I’ve not seen a single “yay” poster mention those SEN kids by the way. Do you not believe they exist, or are they just collateral damage that you don’t care about?

So long as posh people are inconvenienced then presumably the ‘yays’ regard the SEN children as collateral damage.

@Gruhgahkle

If your local school is not a good one then how about putting the effort into making it better.

Why? Most people care much more about their children than about everyone else's children, and it's easier and more certain to improve your children's education if you move near an existing good school and/or supplement their education with tutoring, than it is to try to make a poor school better.

This, its a pretty grim mindset! A clear 'ha ha I don't care who's negatively affected as long as 'poshos' are affected'.

Exactly!

I have xero skin in the game as my child is at a state comprehensive and will be out of the system by the time this comes in.

But she has severe SEN and I have seen exactly how much there isn't available for SEN kids in even outstanding state provision. We are very fortunate that we can provide and fund help for her ourselves.

But I have plenty of family and friends who are desperately worried about what happens to their SEN kid who is happy in a private school they will be unable to afford should this come in.

And the parents who can afford it will be contributing an additional £2bn+ into the exchequer.

Where’s that figure from? Even Labour themselves have estimated £1.7bn, and a lot of commentators have argued it would be lower.

@puncheur I said that class sizes would increase in some areas, where state senior schools do not have spare capacity.

Not everyone thinks like that. There are millions of people working in the public and non profit sectors who want to improve life for people not related to them.

Look. The economy is dire, there are some really tough choices to make and you can start by taking money from those with less or from those with more. If people want to focus on SEN provision, then focus on ALL SEN kids - not just those whose parents can afford to go private because most can't.

I think the people who think this a good thing are delusional about what really is going to happen.
The parents who, instead of paying private school fees, will have a lot more free income to buy the more expensive houses in the better free school areas to get their kids places. Children on the outskirts of catchments to good free schools will be pushed out to the lower performing schools. The whole system will get a sudden influx of more students and the poor teachers will be put under even more pressure. More children with SEN needs will come into the state system - children who will need more support that these schools can give them.
It’s going to be a car crash.

This is it

They definitely won't be contributing that much. Labour's estimate is £1.7bn, but that assumes that no-one will change their behaviour, i.e. that there will be no change in the number of children attending independent schools. The reality is likely to be lower.

For context, the government spent £116bn on education in 2022/23. So, even if Labour are right and they put all the additional money into schools, it will increase the education budget by 1.5%.

Except numbers of children are falling and there is capacity within the State system.

If this comes in it will likely be from Sept 2025. If people want to move homes to get into catchment they'll have to move fast. Oh and they'll be paying a lot more than £4k in fees to move house so they might just be better off paying the VAT.

A lot more than £4k in fees! Ha ha, do you have any idea his much it costs to send a child to private school!

If they can't afford the increase then they will have a lot to play with. It'll be interesting to see if/how soon estate agents start seeing movement.

If you have two or three dc it could easily prompt a move to top state schools

The idea this won’t happen over time is madness

It’s already happening now and will get more pronounced

Um that's the VAT not the fee...