Vat Question????????

[Anoth]

Can I ask a silly question??
We have been given our school fees for 24/25 academic year now for the school my daughter attends.
My question is if labours policy comes in half way through an academic year will the schools be allowed to put the fees up for the remainder of that academic year? Eg if we start paying X amount on September and then labour get in and introduce the added vat in October. Will the fees go up in Jan of that academic year? Normally fees remain un changed for the whole of the academic year once fees have been published but I understand this is a strange situation!
Just wanted to know if I need to prepare to save more for 24/25 fees just in case or will these that are now published still remain until the end of July 25??.
Thanks!

I've seen it everywhere. "maybe private school kids will end up in some of the worse state schools but meh" was I think the worst comment.

I understand it's not a massive issue for many people. In that case, why are they so "invested" in supporting the education tax, however, and it soon deteriorates into "regardless of the economics, we should do it anyway" because levelling down.

Incidentally, I see the same thinking in people who say that people will only care about state education if their own kids are educated in state schools.

All that shows is how little they value education themselves, and how little they recognise the importance of education in helping people to achieve their potential. They see education only as a tick-box exercise with grades.

Anyone with the slightest common sense and understanding will care enormously about state education, since the future of the country they live in - and their own future living standards - depends on it so much!

I genuinely have never witnessed any rancour, either online or in person. But most of my professional and friendship circles have or have had DC in private schools so maybe I wouldn't come across it. I don't think people are that invested in supporting education tax. It seems more that they don't really care that much either way and that's just resulting from them having different priorities of things that matter to them personally rather than malice.

As you say, your professional and social circles don't include people with a chip on their shoulder and poor financial literacy. So unless they have kids in private school themselves, they probably don't care enough about this policy to think it through.

Unfortunately the fact that this policy is a Labour flagship - without Labour making even the slightest effort to figure out whether it will make the country richer or poorer - shows that your social circle doesn't represent the majority. It's a populist policy, whose only purpose is to make voters feel good about sticking it to the rich. Unfortunately, those voters don't realise that they will suffer some of the consequences of it themselves further down the line.

And it does have a negative impact on those people having it stuck to them. People who are incidentally no richer than their next door neighbours who have 2 kids in state school and a mum working part-time to take the kids to activities. But who do subsidise the state significantly more.

Most of my friends/colleagues still have DC in private school. They are not that bothered about the VAT but I understand that they are mostly in the group that can afford it without it impacting other things.

I think the crux is that the percentage of society really bothered about this (private sector circa 6% and a proportion of those probably not too bothered) only represents a small minority. This is the only group in which there is a quantifiable and direct impact. Any wider implications are much more an unknown quantity and we can't really quantify them. This is because everyone directly affected has different personal circumstances, values and behaviours i.e. some will not care too much and stay, some will hate it and stay, some will leave because they have to, some won't have to leave but will on principle, some will think they will leave but grandparents will help out or they themselves might release some equity, some will really feel the pinch but keep DC in as it is only a few years, some will wait until secondary and have a rethink, some will decide on a good state primary instead and keep the money for secondary. Also responses will not be all knee jerk ones, they will be phased depending on things like where a DC is in their education and this mitigates against shock waves.

No-one really knows the thought processes of Labour making the decision to implement a VAT policy but we do know that it is far from a new thing and has been talked about for the best part of 20 years. I remember it being discussed when my own DC were tiny and they are now at university.

@StarlingsForever also mentioned that he/she (I'm going to go with "she") is very much a higher earner, earning much more than me (for example). And I'm not strictly a "marginal" private school parent; we're just about able to pay up and grumble if we choose to.

Maybe her professional and social circles don't include many people who are "marginal" families. Precisely because I have some social awareness, I know there are many tens of thousands of families on (say) £75-150k (1) for whom this tax won't be manageable given marginal tax rates of >62pc plus cliff-edges (2) others who theoretically "could" manage it by making further sacrifices but will choose not to; and (3) others who will push themselves even harder and manage with great difficulty.

In all those cases I'm saying it's not "fair" given how much tax these people already pay, contributing ~£30k to the Exchequer per child in school; in cases (1) and (2) I'm saying it greatly undermines the fiscal argument; I think we're all agreed that nobody really knows how many families fall into each group, but the risks if Labour are wrong are obviously very large.

Additionally" because I have social awareness", partly through my workplace where I employ around 200 people on lower wages (and before somebody pipes up, I'm fond of them and I'm an excellent boss, they tell me), I know they don't really care about or hear about this policy, but they only quite like the idea of making state schools better. If the economics don't work, they're being sold a pup, and that's why the economics are front and centre of this debate, where Labour have put them.

We've heard her tell us she's done her school fees and has heaps of spare money. Perhaps we file this under "luxury beliefs".

‘One of the nastier aspects of this debate is the glee about the risk of some sink school for private school kids.’

oh please. How about this - how about there shouldn’t be ANY sink schools in existence?
And why should I or anyone else give a shiny shit about whether or not your privileged child goes to an underachieving school? Anymore than you should care about the school mine go to.

I’ve always found it bizarre that wealthy parents seem to think WC don’t value their child’s education or are just as invested.

Sink school, such a snobby outdated term too, no-one thinks posh kids are going to ‘sink schools’.

Of course no school should be a sink school but VAT isn't going to solve that. Only a complete overhaul of funding for all schools will resolve this, Labour aren't promising to do this.
WC send their kids to private, it is to do with money not class.

You are just stuck in your own tunnel of thought, not listening to evidence presented to you. That's fine but don't rely on Labour to solve education, Starmer doesn't give a shiny shit. He and his wife are privately educated, their kids are benefittng from partnerships with private schools. He just wants to pull the drawbridge up after his family.

This policy will only widen the inequality gap as only the truly wealthy will be able to afford private school.

Yep, exactly as I said. "why should I or anyone else give a shiny shit about whether or not your privileged child goes to an underachieving school? " really nasty.

"Anymore than you should care about the school mine go to." For me, other people's education is a matter of massive concern, and I'd love there not to be any sink schools, special measures schools, unpopular or underachieving schools or whatever else you'd graciously allow us to call them.

Sadly, they exist, and the fewer children go to them the better. But as you say, you don't understand "why you or anyone else should give a shiny shit". I understand, you don't, because I care about others in ways you don't.

@Quatty typifies the type of bigoted voter Labour is appealing to with this economically illiterate policy. It’s like catnip to them.

It’s a good job there are plenty of others who care more widely about all aspects of society and are able to take a more objective view of the issue.

@MisterChips ad hominem again? It seems to be a pattern when people disagree with your posts that your posts quickly turn rude and personal. It makes a change from you pushing your own blog and giving repetitive (and unconvincing) fundamental Economics lessons I suppose.

Never have I ever written that I have "heaps of spare money". I said VAT would not have been an issue for us to pay and that's an entirely different tone.

Do you really expect to win anyone over with this kind of posting?

Yes everything they say just reinforces the impression they are happy to be "socking it to rich people" rather than wanting comprehensive and well thought out policies.
Populist politics and a lack of critical thinking.

You can agree or disagree with them but MrChips is an economist. They are just trying to highlight the economic aspect from a factual basis.

Should I be in awe of a random economist? I have four of LSE origin in my own team! I have a post-grad qualification from a top US business school. Does that mean I can predict the performance of the FTSE100 two years down the line? No.

Not saying you should be in awe at all. Just don't dismiss them out of hand. You are incredibly dismissive of anyone else.

how about there shouldn’t be ANY sink schools in existence?

I couldn’t agree more, but there are. Taxing private school fees isn’t going to help with that though.

And why should I or anyone else give a shiny shit about whether or not your privileged child goes to an underachieving school

Having a well educated population is beneficial to us all. Some of us care that underperforming schools are teaching the next generation of political and industry leaders. Why would everyone not want those people to have access to a great education? Some of us see the bigger picture.

I’ve always found it bizarre that wealthy parents seem to think WC don’t value their child’s education or are just as invested.

No one has said that no low earners value education. Lots of families (from all income levels) don’t value education though. Too many don’t value it because they see it as “free”. Too many assume that others will step in and support them in adulthood.

Lots of low earners strive to do their best by their children - spending hours tutoring at home, moving heaven and earth to gain a place at a selective school, applying for bursaries at private school etc. Some will spend every spare penny they have in trying to give their child the best start in life; to break the cycle of deprivation. This should be encouraged. We should encourage all families to strive for their children, whatever their income level. There can never be a defence for penalising any form of education through the tax system.

@StarlingsForever - what is your view on UK pension funds only investing around 5% in British companies? Actually deflating the pound long term?
What is your view on what this policy will do to Britain’s reputation? Given no other countries tax Education in this way? You must have some views?

I am pretty sure that the pound is on a long term downward trajectory due to the narcissistic and self harm populist policies our successive Governments seem intent on inflicting on the rest of us. I have no intention to just sit back. Do you?

Difference between "predict the FTSE" and "identify the factors influencing decisions at the affordability margin for private school parents".

"Never have I ever written that I have "heaps of spare money". I said VAT would not have been an issue for us to pay". I'm sorry for saying "heaps". Let's just say "spare money" which makes your circumstances different to those of marginal families, which (since you like receiving economics lessons so much) is where economic effects take place. Ask your economist colleagues. If they tell you something different, sack them.

"I genuinely have never witnessed any rancour, either online or in person" Given @Quatty interjection above, hopefully you've now seen the rancour. Fair?

I have read what that poster has to say about the economics and I don't find it compelling mainly because there are too many unknown variables at the moment to really be able to predict anything. This is not a reflection on their aptitude as an economist at all.

I am not incredibly dismissive of most people, quite the opposite really. I like hearing other people's views. I just don't respond well to strong arm tactics to get me to share their views. I don't think it has to get personal either. My views are my own, that's all really.

[Response to MisterChips comment about evidence of rancour - post only edited to include this reference]

I have also seen specific references on this thread to "bigoted voters" and "groups of people with a chip on their shoulder and poor financial literacy".You must remember another post yesterday referencing "Tyler-Lee from the council estate." Really? Also if anyone says they they agree with the policy in principle, they are jumped on for being jealous communists and the over-used politics of envy card comes out.

How is this position ever going to get people to back a cause that doesn't directly and tangibly impact them, particularly if they feel that they are being looked down upon? Quite naturally, that is a catalyst for a negative response. I understand that there is a lot of emotion in this but mud slinging from either side will never bring people together.

Same way as people saying they are pleased that some private school kids will suffer as a result of the policy. Or categorising all private parents as uncaring Tories.
All some of us are trying to do is to explain the unforseen (to some) consequences which mean that state school kids/mental health services etc could also suffer as an indirect result and that the policy will be lucky to fetch 0.8 billion net. We are trying to highlight the inconsistencies in the policy and that Labour really haven't thought out the policy that they are clinging to so doggedly.

The people who are such supporters of VAT are so because they think it won't affect them because they have bought Labour's lie of only wealthy parents using private schools. Unfortunately it is very likely that they are misguided.

I think the tone of a lot of posts on here (not yours, just a general comment) is that people have to care about something that quite possibly won't directly affect them or they are bad people/ jealous/can't understand basic maths etc. The reality generally is more that they see a small group of people who for whatever reason decided the state education provision wasn't good enough for their DC when it has to be for 94% of DC. They also perceive the parents to be generally quite well off or they couldn't have gone that route in the first place. Obviously private school parents are not a homogeneous group and there will be quite varying degrees of wealth within that group. However, the perception of this wealth depends on the relativity of the financial position of the observer and their own group. For example, let's say someone's mother is living very frugally, squeezed and worried on just a state pension or their own bright kids can't even afford to go to Uni because they can't afford the top up maintenance part. Do you think they are going to lose sleep over whether a small group who they consider to be financially well-insulated parents are paying VAT or not? Now I know there is a lot of nuance in all of this and people in reality end up in private education for a myriad of reasons but generalisations are what generally form opinion. All I am saying is that a more gentle and persuasive approach would most likely foster a lot more sympathy.

I quite agree.