To have though of a fairer way to fund state education than VAT on private?

[wlakaaf]

State schools are in desperate need of funding.

Money needs raising.

Instead of sticking 20% onto private fees - when those people are already paying 100% of the costs for educating their child, how about this:

Parents of children currently in state schools ought to contribute to their education on a means tested basis. There would be no argument over means, it would be a simple reference to the council tax band of the house you live in. We have bands A-H. I would propose that people in band A-F pay nothing. People in band G pay a fixed charge per year and people in band H pay a higher fixed charge per year.

Keir Starmer has used money to buy a massively expensive house, worth in the region of £2m, in the very tight catchment of a lovely state primary. This is buying privilege, same as buying private education. So why does he get away without paying?

Your kids could be educated for free as weill

I sometimes wonder if these posts are started up to convince people why we should have VAT on private schools!

Yeah, sure thing. Of course it's fairer for poorer people to have an extra fee before richer people pay fair tax.

Don't be ridiculous!

Poorer people don't live in band G&H! Come on.

I think that the last time they upped the top rate of tax, it didn't actually increase tax revenue.

Perhaps they could increase it to the level that it does increase revenue. Again - what is your objection to that?

Err we pay taxes thanks. Very few people can afford million pound houses and those that do will be millionaires using private education or in London.

News flash the rest of the country is a world away from London. We don’t pay a million to get into a good or outstanding school which 86% of schools are.

I’d be happy for a tax rise but rich people want everything - low taxes and private education neither of which helps the majority.

No objection to that.

I just think that if people meet 100% of their kids' schooling costs, and other people in band G&H houses get state schooling for free, that it is absurd to charge the private people 120% and the G&H people £0.

I'm childfree by choice and I think this is a flawed idea.

I had state education paid for through my parents taxes.

I am happy to pay my fair share to see children now and in the future receive education.

Keir Starmer earned his money by working in the service of the public and has paid tax on his income. He can spend it on any house he wishes.

I said I am going to be hit by 1 year of sixth form or not at all. I don't need a limited company thanks.

What about the average private school increases their class size from 19 to 23 which means they would get 20% more income without raising your fees? A lot simpler, I think.

The thing is, KS doesn't send his kids to an "exclusive" school. Yes, it's a nice school - but 17% of the kids are on free school meals. My friend is a cleaner and her son goes there. It is not the same at all as sending your kids to private school.

How much would this charge be? I’m curious how much you’d think this would raise school budgets by. And is it just for parents with children at state schools only (i.e. you don’t pay if your children go to private school)?

But if you are child free, you won't be hit by the G&H charge that I propose. Only rich people getting state education for free would pay (for a portion of the service they are using).

Yes, KS can spend it on any house he wishes. But let's not deny he has bought his children privilege with that address near the posh primary. And he has an issue with bought privilege - unless of course he's the one buying it.

Interesting to see some posters horrified at the prospect of a fairer way of taxation.

Household A earn 100k and use a fantastic local state school.

Household B earn 100k and have a hopeless local state option so are forced to pay for private schools.

Explain to me why household B are the ones who should be paying even more tax? Surely it should be household A who are asked to pay more in an equitable system.

In my kids' private school, some classes are already up to 28. Privates have already gone mega cost cutting.

Yes, it's just for those rich people receiving education for free. Don't know how much. It's the principle.

You've managed to change my state of mind on this. I now want VAT plus another 10% added to private schools because the whinging has been unbearable. 15% if they started a thread on this site. 20% if they talk about how bad their local school is.

His kids' primary has been described as a "prep".

And I'm not asking for the rich state school parents to pay the full costs. Just a fixed contribution. Your cleaner wouldn't be charged. Just the people in band G&H.

Every person I know who has a kid in private school does not have a million pound house. One does. The others live in particularly modest housing or have downsized. All these later individuals have a child who has some additional learning need of some description (Sen or gifted).

You are talking bollocks and using stereotypes.

But not concerned about the billio aire currently in office. He's just a normal man of the people

Yes, by a newspaper with an agenda. It's a normal London school where a big chunk of the kids are on free school meals.

How about closing tax loopholes to ensure that those who should be paying tax actually do pay tax. This rule should extend to both private individuals & businesses to raise more revenue. I know it's not a popular opinion but wealthy pensioners shouldn't be eligible for state benefits or breaks.

Are vapes taxed? If not, then they should be to raise more money for the treasury. I don't know why the Tories want to tax less and then borrow to make up the short fall. It doesn't make sense, make the economy more productive and tax the avoiders.

I'm happy to pay for my kids. Just not happy to pay a 20% surcharge to fund state education when there are loads of rich G&H people getting it free due to having bought in lovely catchments.