Labour’s private school tax raid ‘likely illegal’

[Zizzagaaaaaww]

Thought some may like to read this article

archive.ph/i1XD3

Sir Keir Starmer’s planned VAT raid on private schools is likely to breach human rights law, The Telegraph can reveal.
The Labour leader risks falling foul of European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) law <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.ph/o/i1XD3/www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/labour-private-school-tax-moronic-policy/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">over his party’s flagship policy, one of Britain’s top constitutional and human rights lawyers has warned.
Lord Pannick, who has taken on some of the UK’s most high-profile court cases, backed legal advice warning that making private schools subject to VAT was likely to breach ECHR law.
He told The Telegraph: “It would be strongly arguable that for a new government to impose VAT on independent schools would breach the right to education.

“That is because all other educational services will remain exempt from VAT and the charging of VAT on independent schools alone is designed to impede private education, and will have that effect.”

The KC and crossbench peer said that the Labour policy risked breaching two articles in the ECHR which protect the right to education.
He referred to legal advice written in response to Labour policies as far back as the early 1980s, when the country’s most senior lawyers warned that plans to end tax exemptions for private schools or abolish the institutions altogether would likely breach international human rights law to which Britain is signed up.
Previous leaders of the party have floated the idea of taxing private schools as part of plans to integrate them into the state sector. Under former party leader Michael Foot, the Labour manifesto of 1983 pledged to “charge VAT on the fees paid to [private] schools”.
The policy to abolish the schools was eventually shot down by senior lawyers, who argued it could be at odds with the ECHR and spoke specifically about the risk of imposing VAT.
While Sir Keir has ruled out abolishing private schools, he plans to force the institutions to pay business rates and 20pc VAT on tuition fees.
In an unearthed legal opinion from 1987, seen by The Telegraph, the late Lord Lester and Lord Pannick, prominent human rights lawyers, concluded a government “could not lawfully prohibit fee-paying, independent education or remove the benefits of charitable status or impose VAT in respect of such education” while a member of the court.
A foreword to the opinion written in 1991 by Lord Scarman, who served as a Law Lord in the precursor to the Supreme Court, said it would “encourage a challenge which could be mounted by taking the argument to the [ECHR]… if ever a government should seek to abolish or discriminate against [private schools]”.
The opinion was jointly written by Lord Lester and Lord Pannick as advice for the Independent Schools Council (ISC) and later published in its journal. Lord Pannick confirmed his belief that the argument still stands today.

@twistyizzy

"These are the same things we have been saying from Day 1. Maybe if Labour had agreed to speak to the Indy sector.....They don't care how hard or how much it costs to implement. They will do it even if it brings in £0."

Completely agree. More good media analysis out there, the better, to show how this is such a ridiculous policy that most likely won't actually do much to improve state schools. It's such a sad state of affairs.

I'm clinging on to hope the new KC who has the Attorney General job will do a good thorough job of looking at the discriminatory and legal elements here, as well as the treasury and OBR scrutinising this policy in great detail before it's rushed through just for the sake of saving face.

Precisely. I am curious how @Avarcas would feel if Vat was/had been added to their Oxford tuition fees?!

There wouldn't have been any fees, depending on how old @Avarcas is. Back then we were able to have an elite education for free.

I'm really glad they've managed to find a way to stay open - but I'm sorry for the impact on the students.

I understand your anger. I'll have a look for the parents campaigning group you mentioned previously.

Very odd to give in notice when the policy hasn't even taken the shape of a draft Bill, let alone been enacted, and they don't know what steps the school might take to reduce the impact. It makes you think that the parents concerned have other reasons for taking their children out.

Not really. If people can’t afford the increase it’s better to plan accordingly and not get stuck in a term’s notice or worse state option later on.

Not odd at all. Private schools require 1 term's notice so of parents are genuinely concerned then of course they should start that withdrawal process now. To sit and wait would be irresponsible

A few weeks ago all over the press there were articles about anti-forestalling measures, and how labour planned to backdate VAT to the 4th July so no one could pay in advance and avoid it. Coupled with a lot of parents would rather move at a natural break point ie end of prep, before GCSES, before A-levels etc, and then in addition if you know you're going to have to move you'd rather be one of the first than the last if your local secondaries are over subscribed and you need to go on a waiting list I'd say it makes a lot of sense that people who know this isn't feesable for them are moving asap.

Just goes to show you can't always believe the press.

Absolutely agree, just saying for those already struggling I can see why they'd try to move fast. I know of three families in private as the state secondary they were allocated was 10-15 miles away (all live in the same village which used to be in catchment for the secondary at the edge of our nearby town, but now there has been several new estates built on the town the village isn't in catchment for any secondary so they just get any place remaining in the borough which means the village primary kids all end up at different schools) and I really feel for families like these as I do for SEND families who weren't planning on using private but haven't been left with many good options.

I have no back up option to my SEN child being at a tiny private school. The alternative is her not being in school at all. At home, doing nothing, essentially indefinitely. So we are trying to keep her in the private school despite possible 20% rise on top of the standard yearly fee rise.

The local mainstream state school she started at was too big and noisy for her. This is a very common experience.for autistic kids.
DD wasn’t given any quiet place to work at the state school. They soon gave up even letting her go in to do pretend work. She couldn’t habituate herself to the busyness and noise of school, which initially they thought she might (they seemed not to understand autism/sensory issues are lifelong) so there was no point continuing to try. Struggling to go in was very distressing and traumatic for her and for all of us around her each morning. Her school didn’t set any work for her to do at home. There’s no support from anywhere. For us there was no safety net from the state apart from parents giving up their jobs to be at home with their kids which is very scary.

If we have to leave the private school for financial reasons, I’m looking at 12-24 months with DD at home doing nothing. So me not being able to work, DD spiralling downwards, me fighting the local authority to find her an alternative place somewhere suitable. It’s completely grim. Councils ration EHCPs so it’s stacked against children with SEND.
The SEND system is broken and only the very luckiest kids like mine will ever get to have a chance to try school with a smaller class at a private school. It’s a national scandal. Sorry to derail.

Possibly an answer is a private EHCP. Is that possible?

@EHCPerhaps does your daughter have an EHCP? It sounds like you’d have tons of evidence to show what works for her.

There’s no such thing as a private EHCP. All EHCPs are via the LA.

Thank you, yes I am in process of applying for an EHCP. That takes a long time to get in place and agreed I believe 18 months or so, or longer with the national shortage of educational psychologists at the moment. There’s an official timeline for this but a lot of LAs don’t stick to them according to other parents.

If the LA breaches the statutory EHCP timescales, parents can pursue legal enforcement action, including judicial review if necessary.

I have read that it will be discriminatory to charge VAT where a pupil has an EHCP.
So it seems a reasonable assumption that parents will apply for one in greater numbers than they do now, pre VAT on school fees. And I assume that private schools provide for pupils who would qualify but parents currently have no reason to apply for one because the local authority is not involved in funding.
Reasonable assumption?

Yep, exactly right and it's already starting to happen

It’s a slippery and dangerous slope using children to get at a section of society you don’t like. Rachel Reeves as a mum should remember this.

Nobody is using children or dislikes them or their families. All that has happened is the country has decided that the service paid for is taxable. If you can’t afford the hike in fees then send your children for 20% less time or stop using the service altogether.

Ahh, brilliant.

Thanks.

You’re welcome.

The very essence of what you've said is highly disruptive and damaging on young people and children. It shows a great disregard for the kids that will be effected, specifically their mental health, SEND and educational performance. They may not dislike them, but they certain haven't shown any consideration with regard to their fates.

So given this policy will raise very little money, perhaps none at all, or, in fact, cost the tax payer to implement, there are very little reasons left to implement it - with the obvious being that Labour simply don't like independent schools.

As people withdraw their kids, or the big, famous, rich schools (although most independent schools are small and run on a very tight budget!) absorb some VAT, capital projects for the last c.10 years are also offset against VAT, clever parents learn how to be more tax effective etc., etc., the money raised will continue to fall, and the burden on the state will increase.

This policy will not fund 6000 teachers or breakfasts, or nurseries - it's bonkers to believe that!

The fact that people cant now afford it is the point, yes they will have to move - in most cases to no place at all, away from their friends, teachers, half way through exam years, etc. etc.

The ONLY people this does harm to is the kids. Whether that be:

• the independent school kids having to withdraw due to cost.

• the state school kids that now have larger class sizes and won't see one of the new teachers or breakfasts.

• the state school kids that loose the use of independent school partnerships, such as swimming pool, sport, music, art, etc., facilities for free.

• The state school kids who are pushed out of catchment of decent state schools because ex-independent parents target them with house moves

• the list goes on...

Once again - this tax has no benefits. It serves to punish and damage a certain group of people.

Taxes are imposed to either raise money effectively for the country, or to curb the use of something damaging (like smoking), whilst effectively raising money at the same time.

All this tax does is to seek to curb independent schools - no benefit will be seen, by anyone.

It's effectively an attack on a sector and thus an attack on a group of our society. If they really wanted to reform education, they need to take a leaf out of Tony Blairs book, at least he saw the benefit of reforming bottom up, aspiring to be like those who do it well, and using independent schools to help and supplement the state sector, through partnerships, etc.

I hope someone at some point sees the light on this one...

Back in 2015 Greece added 23% VAT on private schools and it didnt end well.
Many private schools closed with many children not being able to attend state schools because of the lack of spaces. The EU ordered the government to removed the VAT as this was against the EUs tax directive, it states VAT must not be added to education.
Google it.

So this huge rise in school fees (20%) is loads of money when you are being asked to pay it but insignificant when it’s collected? Be sensible. What you are buying is a luxury not a necessity and in a country where other families are tightening their belts it is not unreasonable for those with their children tucked up and cosseted in fee paying schools to do the same. If you do have to move schools you may be pleasantly surprised with the results.