Will VAT on private school fees lead to a partial collapse of the sector?

[mids2019]

Will VAT on school fees coupled with cost of living drive a lot of parents from the private sector or will the majority absorb the cost? Are the numbers that potentially end up in the public sector going to offset any gains to the treasury through VAT?

Labour are working at about 4-5% transfer rate to the public sector but is this an underestimate?

UKsounding

They are trying to push the middle class out of the private system, and back into the state system where the m/c parents will demand a more effective education for their kids.

As pp have pointed out, there are already loads of middle class parents with children at state school. Why should middle class parents who are at present sending their children to private school be more effective at improving state schools?

Not this again please. I think the percentage educated in the private sector is 7%? So the overwhelming majority, including MC kids, is in state already. Please tell me what is so magical about the extra 7.
state education doesn’t respond to its users because it doesn’t have to. They can safely be ignored.

What seem like small changes in the %s of total school age population using state provision isn’t necessarily small in cost terms - financial and ‘non monetary’

I think it's actually 6% these days. It has gradually declined due to becoming more of a luxury product.

The private sector (parents and schools) are going to have to perform some triage and have a think about what they are and are not willing to pay for.

If the "point" is to avoid disruptive kids in a dodgy local state school (for example), this could be achieved by a private school which had 30-plus well-behaved kids in a class and nice but not amazing facilities.

Do you actually think that reducing educational investment in UK children - by reducing the educational provision private schools make - is a good thing for the country's future?

I mean seriously, your subtext is "a basic education should be enough for anyone! None of these fancy opportunities like varied extracurricular activities and sports! Don't need those to pass exams!"

Do you really value education (the broader meaning of growth by learning) so little?

Might have to delay buying a new Range Rover if this comes in

Would it be fairer to improve state schools by a higher even if income tax day above the 150 000 level. You thereby spread the cost of improvements to the state system amongst a demographic that presumably benefit from living her outstanding state schools, affording tutors, and using the private sector.

I think one thing about this penalty is potentially having a large tax on wardrobe range of parents and one would immediately feel this unfair if this was compared to a similar taxation on income.

It has to be questioned whether private schooling does offer significant advantages to university entrance now as it has been shown at Oxbridge for instance that reducing the number of private school students has simply leads to more students from middle class backgrounds from excellent comps and grammars. It therefore would look like there is a lot of of similarity in educational attainment between these sets of schools.

it seems a little perverse penalizing the private school parent without due coanidsrat Ian of the families that have paid large amounts of money to move near grammar schools and invested in tutoring to get their children similar adavnatges.

in addition what if private schools cut bursaries which allow poor we students to attend? Is this necessarily a good thing?

overall I think this is a simplistic policy aimed at an easy target for a government aiming to placate its left wing. It relies on easy non factual tropes such as private school parents buying Oxbridge entry or having opaque entry into high status professions which today I don't believe is the case.

it is also the case a lot of voters won't see change for their children as any money raised (if it is raised) will be quickly swallowed up by supporting failing schools in deprived areas and though welcome it is to be seen how effective the monetary investment will be.

Especially bearing in mind that the addition of VAT is unlikely to make the government any money - 10% move from private to state is estimated to be net zero.

So the reduction in UK educational investment in UK children in the private sector won't be balanced by an increase of investment in existing state students in the state sector. It just means less education for British children.

Exactly

That will be the legacy, for votes they’d probably get anyway

Depressing and poor

Right, so you confirm that you don't value education at all. You just hate rich people.

Depends. I think private education for kids with varying levels of SEN is often serving a purpose, and is harder to do on the cheap.

But so many private schools spend an awful lot of money on stuff that's probably serving no purpose at all - gorgeous-looking souped-up facilities, and tiny classes for academically able, non-SEN kids who are capable of succeeding just fine in larger classes (big classes don't seem to do grammar school kids any harm, let's face it). I don't think these things are actually contributing anything to the nation at large.

I think focusing minds (parents' minds and school leaders' minds) a bit more on "What is our raison-d'etre, what's really important, what's worth spending money on and what isn't" is probably not such a bad thing.

@mids2019 its a ridiculous policy and as you say the money will just disappear. It’s such a small amount raised to do so much damage. It’s tribalism at its worst. But tribalism as I say can work both ways. When it comes down to the bit we will be paying over £15k per term per child. To be honest, I won’t really want to subsidise other kids through bursaries at the risk of paying more than that given the choice and that’s what schools know, hence they will protect their own.

This thing about universities is interesting. If someome in the private sector says little Dolly didn’t get to Oxford cos of discrimination, then respond that they should take little Marcus and Penelope out then. They rarely do because private school is about so much more than that. The sports facilities you can use to train in, the soft skills you learn about life and engaging. Mine won’t be coming out of that system unless they are literally banned.

OK, that's a very reasonable opinion.

I believe that the majority of private schools (except the very few super-rich ones) already do that, since for those non-super-rich schools, price and value-for-money do really matter to the parents.

@strawberrybubblegum yrs and those are the schools that will be affected by the policy

Also, some of the things you mention as not mattering actually do matter very much to private school parents. We believe that they make a genuine difference to education in the broader sense - growth from learning, not just exam results.

small classes of academically able kids: you say that large classes don't do grammar school kids any harm. They might not harm their exam results (these are bright kids) but it absolutely changes the dynamic and the ability to discuss, develop debating and critical thinking skills, and make the class work at the best speed for all the students, leaving more time for things outside the curriculum.

Facilities don't need to be gorgeous and souped up, but if you believe that lots of exercise is critical for children's physical and mental development, and that games teach important emotional and teamwork skills, then you will consider sufficient sports facilities to be pretty important.

Likewise, a full theatre isn't necessary, but children learn confidence from frequent performances (musical and drama) so you do need sufficient dedicated space that these won't impinge on the rest of the school (decent sized hall with a stage is enough). And when they get older, they learn independence and resilience as well as technical skills by taking over the whole of the production of plays including lights and sound. And for personal growth, you want there need to be small enough numbers for all the kids to participate fully, and regularly, not just once in their school career.

And of course, sufficient staff to make all these things possible. That's the main cost.

Sure - all of these things are available outside school. And many middle class parents sign their kids up to classes to do all these things (VAT free - since they are considered education).

But having that within the school day - not just once, but as a regular, intrinsic and normal part of their school day - is part of the educational provision of private schools. If you strip it away, then you are genuinely removing education.

Yes, you're probably still left with a calmer, more disciplined environment, and that's important for some kids.

But it's a huge loss. And I believe that that extra education does genuinely make kids better than they would be otherwise. And I believe that does benefit the country at large: exactly as it benefits the country at large for a state school student to study the piano, or join a netball club, or go to Stagecoach, or do a drama summer camp.

Why remove education from kids? It doesn't benefit anyone else for those kids to not have these opportunities for their own personal growth, paid for by their parents.

VAT isn't charged on the out-of-school Stagecoach lessons or Netball club. Because the government recognises these as education and hence a social good. And doesn't want parents to have to choose only one, because an extra 20% VAT means they can't afford both.

So why do you think it's different for private schools? Why impose 20% VAT (on top of the fees paid for by parents out of taxed income) and suggest that the solution is for private schools to cut back on the sports or drama education they provide since the extra 20% VAT means they can't afford both?

It is obviously punitive @strawberrybubblegum rather than revenue driven. It is a “disincentive”.

Where I live a large successful private school busses loads of kids in on school buses which are already very expensive for many of the private school parents. If they end up charging 20 per cent on school transport as well it will cause a massive problem and traffic mayhem.
I do not see how they can charge 20 per cent on school transport, school trips, lunches (free for all state primary kids in London currently) and boarding. It would be even more punitive.
We don’t pay 20 per cent VAT on package holidays/flights so how can they possibly justify it on school trips?
As you point out private schools are not just about academics. It is all the extras lacking in the state sector, better lunches, more sports, more trips, more languages on offer to choose, more drama, significantly more music, more art etc etc. That is what people pay for. If these schools strip that out, then what is the point of going to private school? (Excepting the very small SEN ones)

Personally I am looking at the local private school and its huge grounds and thinking what are they going to do with the grounds? Can the Charities Commission allow them to build housing on some of it with private developers and then rent out some of it and use some the income? I am wondering if these institutions are being pushed towards that kind of thing. Another one has a huge field that just sits there. I assume is because they are a charity and were never allowed to sell it. It must be worth millions and millions though.

Labour plans to hit those who have worked hard and want their children to better than them via private school, many wont be able to afford this. Its a myth that "rich parents" only send kids to private schools as we know of people doing overtime, cutbacks to send kids to private schools

Labours hit on private schools will close some and there will be less spaces as a result of this, fees will go up. This will then not allow many parents to send their kids to private schools as they then certainly wont be able to afford it

Exactly. That’s Labours’ MO. Bring people down don’t raise them up. They started the grammar school closures. They introduced uni tuition fees. They’re hoping to introduce VAT on education. Starting with private school fees - where will it end?

Labour are a disgrace.

Also, some of the things you mention as not mattering actually domatter very much to private school parents. We believe that they make a genuine difference to education in the broader sense - growth from learning, not just exam results.

I think it would be fairer to say that any/all of those things matter to some parents, but not to all. There is no such thing as "private school parents." We are all different and have different motivations. One of my kids goes to a private school, FWIW.

Some parents have academically able kids and want highly selective schools where they will be stretched, like a grammar school that you pay for basically. Their kids don't need sweet little classes of 18 kids, or amazing facilities.

Same goes for parents who are concerned about terrible behavior in their local state and just want a safe, peaceful school with decent behavior where their kids can learn.

Some parents have kids who struggle in the state sector and need smaller classes and a lot of individual attention. They will be prepared to pay for small, expensive classes. They may also be prepared to pay for some nice facilities, but perhaps not those that are not relevant to their kids.

Some parents are really keen on "well-rounded education" and want amazing music and sport. They will be prepared to pay for these things. They might be prepared to accept bigger class sizes, if it's clear that savings have to be made.

Some parents want everything - small boutique classes, academic stretch, amazing glossy facilities - and are happy to pour huge amounts of money into gorgeous schools that are basically money pits.

Different schools will need to think carefully about this and decide what kind of school they want to be and where they and their parents are prepared to make savings.

That's fair to say that different parents want different things, but I think there's more overlap than you suggest.

And certainly there's benefit to a wider education, even if that isn't specifically a parent's aim. In fact, I think it's often the children who aren't naturally drawn to sports / avoid the stage who benefit most from that being a normal everyday part of school life. I say this as the parent of a child who had severe stage fright since nursery (got sick during nativity plays!) but who now happily volunteers to do an instrument solo in front of an audience of parents.

The core fact remains. If education is good, then why discourage it? Why reduce education to 'good enough'?

We don't do that for other types of education. We encourage parents to pay for additional education (sports, drama lessons, music lessons) for their children by excluding it from VAT in every other situation. Purely because as a society we see education as good. Why treat private schools so uniquely?

DD will never be an actress, but thanks to her education, when she needs to give a presentation to colleagues or clients, she'll be able to.

Her friend who hates most sports, but has discovered the niche sport that she really enjoys (which is a great one to continue into adulthood) will have a healthier adult life. (Incidentally, sports wasn't remotely on her parents' school wishlist)

Having a citizenry/workforce that can live and work a bit better than they would have otherwise, is exactly why education is a public good which shouldn't be deliberately discouraged by the government.

We can afford it even with VAT but our children will come out of the independent system at the next natural point in each child’s education.

we have made a decision that the local state offering is good enough, the private fees are exorbitant and the cost doesn’t feel like value for money to us personally. our expectation is 20% (or close to) will either be passed on to parents or the schools will adapt their offering to become more akin to the state provision or something in the middle.

we still value education and will do our best to support with tutors and extra curricular outside of school if/where it is needed.

DP and I were both state educated and we don’t see enough of a difference between our local state and private offering to justify spending the current and estimated future level of fees.

it’s a personal decision at the end of the day but that’s where we have landed.

Does anyone on here think Labour will put up uni tuition fees? There is so much press speculation about unis struggling and not enough overseas students making up anymore…. So will this happen? In which case, even more of a reason to not do private but save for uni?