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.

I think moving schools at least once is the norm but in many areas middle school is common and in many many sixth form is in a new school or college. Since this is the accepted way many children have been educated I fail to see how it will be seen as (or should be seen as) significant. Perhaps what is really needed is a bit a little resilience and genuine effort to try and make it work?

This has lost me. What is it people are supposed to be making a genuine effort to try to make work?

To either find the VAT or find a positive way forward for their children (and themselves). Yes they may successfully manage to get the VAT reversed but surely it’s far more likely that it’s happening and they will need to live and find a way to thrive in the new environment.

Interesting point of view, but I really wouldn’t expect any parent worth their salt to simply accept such an unfair attack on their children’s education life and quite frankly would be amazed if they did. It’s not law yet and it’s going to be legal challenge after legal challenge, followed by ECHR appeal if necessary and even if it is ever eventually implemented it will be quickly reversed as soon as Labour are out or the U.K. moves closer to EU rules.

Labour are here to stay for a decade, I think.
Legal challenges take years. School decisions cannot be postponed for that long.
Gove damaged thousands of state pupils' lives a few years ago when they twisted exam grade bands and applied it retrospectively - parents challenged the decision, but it came to nothing. No one cares.

And yet again, those who will be most affected will be those who have been hit hardest by Covid.

This autumn's Y11's had no final year of primary, no proper transition to secondary, have then been the year group with least focus as not an exam year.

Now private school parents of these kids risk having to find 20% extra or a new school months before GCSEs, and those in state schools risk disruption to classes with councils suddenly having to find spaces for children who have studied different boards, different texts etc.

There’s lots of steps before it goes ahead and It won’t be implemented whilst being challenged in the ECHR. Yes I agree it will take years. I certainly couldn’t predict the next general election result but I’d say it’s highly likely we move closer to EU rules and/or Labour is out within 5 years than the alternative. At the end of the day this will be decided in the courts and, as it is a discriminatory policy, will be stopped. It’s only a matter of when it’s dropped, rather than if.

That came later historically. Grammar schools might be 400 years old - many girls schools will be more like 150 years old. That when the feminist movement started to really work.
interestingly at that time girls schools might more frequently were called High Schools since Grammar Schools were boys schools.
Secondary mods came much much later - post war probably.

Labour won by a landslide, they won't be ousted at the next election as people won't get as sick and tired with them in 4 years time as they were with Conservatives. And the majority clearly wants them anyway and gleefully cheers their raid on middle class.

EU is disintegrating rapidly before our eyes so I wouldn't bet on moving closer to them (I'd love to - education is so much better and cheaper on the continent, but I don't think it's happening).

Why do you think the gov will wait for the legal challenges to conclude? They did rapid implementations before, even applying new laws retrospectively which is illegal.

I think you may have misunderstood. I have never called anyone elitist. I think people should have free choice with what they choose regarding education. Of course, usually it is because they believe it is a better provision for their individual child. That's not me saying that private is always better. It is more about the fit for the child. No judgement there. I would always do what is best for my children and if that had been to pay for private school, I would have done that. I realise we are lucky that we didn't need to but we could have done comfortably had it been required so no envy either.

If you do understand how widening participation works then your comments are quite baffling and particularly your use of the term 'positive discrimination'. That is insulting to clever state school kids who are not getting university places on the basis of tokenism but merit. It is absolutely not the same as widening participation and taking grades in context.

Of course my children would never have qualified for any widening participation. However, for a number of years I have helped underprivileged kids with Medical School and Oxbridge applications so I have some direct experience of this. So sorry to ruin your lols.

You won’t get anywhere with this.

Labour received 34% of the votes so not a majority supports them, their policies are anti education and anti growth and can only make them less popular given time for the effects to be felt. Starmer has set closer relations with the EU as one of his priorities, which is why I see us moving closer to their rules and education tax is illegal in the EU.
They don’t have to wait for the legal challenges to conclude, but they could be hit with fines afterwards and it would simply make them look more amateurish than this policy already does. They do have to comply with the ECHR and Starmer has already given a speech on how amazing the ECHR is.

I’ll be astounded if Labour win the next general election. Their only hope is if Conservatives and Reform are still separate entities. If they aren’t then Labour will have little chance. 80% of eligible voters didn’t vote for them this time round. It’s hard to see how they even retain the 20%.

They got fewer than 1 in 5 of the eligible votes. It is a quirk of the FPTP system that they ended up with a huge majority of the seats on the back of a vote share that would have led to a loss in every other general election in the last century.

They were unpopular on voting day and are even more unpopular now. They just benefited from a split opposition. Without that they’d have lost.

"Positive discrimination" is not my term, please feel free to challenge its authors if you feel offended by it. I personally find it hypocritical to pretend it doesn't exist if it is well known that white boys, for example, is the most disadvantaged group as they don't tick any boxes, especially if they're not from poor families. I know of cases when a child with much higher grades and achievements didn't get an Oxbridge offer while another child from the same school and economic background (not poor, not disabled) was chosen for the same course despite lower grades and achievements - so no, in reality it's not 100% on merit. I have a boy and a girl - and I can see how being a girl helps these days, for example. DS is much more gifted but never had opportunities offered to his less gifted sister. There is no point to deny that positive discrimination exists.

I'm not saying universities will choose on protected characteristics alone, but between two children with the same grades and roughly the same achievements the state one will be favoured (and state comp, not state grammar). It's common knowledge, ppl have been seeing this for ages and that's exactly why people move from private to state sector for 6th form and even earlier these days - as universities are now looking deeper than 6th form. Ppl just work the system and I don't blame them. But it's an entirely different topic, not related to VAT.

I personally find it hypocritical to pretend it doesn't exist if it is well known that white boys, for example, is the most disadvantaged group @Ubertomusic you cannot honestly believe this??😱

Sorry it's not a matter of personal beliefs www.tcsnetwork.co.uk/white-working-class

I’m not sure about a decade. It’s been a month and already public disorder is growing

How can you consider those who are the most privileged through sex and race are “disadvantaged” because they don’t receive the help offered to level the playing field?

We'll wait and see.

Have you read the article? It's not my consideration.

I'm probably more cynical than you :) and stopped listening to politicians a long time ago. I just look at what's going on around us. Bringing the change in mid-year is a massive slap in the face of middle class, the elites are just putting the bourgeoisie in its place and it's perfectly clear.

EU is in serious trouble anyway.

Why would it be illegal? Private schools are providing a service. And services are subject to VAT.
You have no case here at all. 😂😂
Ps that response came from my DH who is a barrister and lawyer.

People have been starving and freezing under Conservatives, this is hard truth. Labour will have to mess up really badly to do worse than that (I'm not saying they can't mess things up even further, unfortunately). It won't be a mess with VAT on private though - it's a tiny minority of the population. The majority have much more difficult problems.
But we'll see.

He’s incorrect, not all services have VAT added. Specific to this discussion, educational services are VAT exempt and Labour’s policy is for these services to remain exempt with the exception of private schools. This is discriminatory, it is an attempt to deprive a sector of society an education in line with their philosophical convictions and is the reason the policy contravenes the ECHR.

This isn’t labour’s first rodeo with this policy and it’s always dropped at the first challenge. In short, it’s 20% on nursery fees, university, after school classes, clubs, tutors and music lessons or nothing at all.

Article 2.1 of ECHR:

“No person shall be denied the right to education. In the exercise of any functions which it assumes in relation to education and to teaching, the State shall respect the right of parents to ensure such education and teaching in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions.”