What if Keir Starmer had been forced to move school part way through?

[Kitsot]

I find it interesting that Keir Starmer attended a state grammar school and was allowed to stay on for free after it moved to private whilst he was there. He doesn’t seem to consider it an issue that children will need to be moved from private to state school part way through their time at a school due to the VAT imposition. I wonder how different his life would have turned out if he had instead been forced to leave his school and move to the local comprehensive or wherever had space.

Further to this, to me it would make more sense if VAT was only added to fees for children joining at the usual entry points from next September and then going forward for those years from that point. It would still be an unpopular policy but it would at least give parents time to apply for state schools within the normal entry rounds and children wouldn’t need to move school part way through, which can be hard even if it is between two similar types of schools. The downside is that it wouldn’t initially raise as much money as planned.

Just for transparency to add that I am in a fairly neutral position regarding this and have experience of both sectors. I myself am from a working-class background and went to a bog-standard comprehensive in the 1980s.

I absolutely don't want to see kids negatively impacted, but ultimately, parents are responsible for their kids and have to make the best choices for them.

I don't think it's unreasonable to say that they should have planned ahead. Private school fees are usually a multi year commitment and a significant investment - I would absolutely expect parents to consider various scenarios that might occur and how they might manage these if their own family circumstances and/or external circumstances should change. Of course, some parents don't do this and perhaps take a more relaxed approach to planning...fair enough if they are then pretty chilled about the idea of kids moving schools if and when the need arises. That's also a valid position.

Ultimately, if parents haven't planned properly, their kids may end up having to move. I understand that that's difficult but at the end of the day, lots of kids have to move schools for all manner of different reasons. It isn't ideal but they are generally fine...it isn't the world-shattering disaster that so many people are making it out to be. DD had a few friends at her state secondary who moved from the private sector... some for financial reasons and others because they didn't feel that they were getting good value for money. All of them were fine. It really isn't the end of the world.

He would have become a heroin addict, obviously, just like your kids will thanks to LIE-BORE and their sinister social engineering project.

No a 20% tax hike is much higher than the usual rise.

It will impact dc and hopefully Labour is closer to their funding promises than net cost or damage as it will be a total mistake with actual dc bearing the cost of it

I absolutely mind about this. I would love to see an end to state grammar schools, state funded faith schools and some way of ending the postcode lottery. We need much better investment in the state system, but we also need policy change.

Personally, while I support the VAT on private schools policy, I'd have prioritised addressing inequalities within the state sector first. But I doubt that Starmer & co have the courage to do that, so I'll take what I can get.

I never said it wasn't higher than the usual rise. But sensible people do some horizon scanning before making significant investments. Labour didn't keep this idea a secret, so they should have considered it as a possibility.

I actually don't think many dc will move as a result of the policy - we will have to wait and see. We know plenty of private school families that are whingeing about the increase but none of them are planning to move their kids.

Those that do move will be fine, I'm sure. It isn't ideal but it isn't a tragedy either. Some of them may well have had to move anyway if their parents weren't inclined to look too far ahead when enrolling them.

Oh come on. Horizon scanning.,

Many sensible people will be hit by this despite forum posts expressing superiority over predicting 20% hit in 2025 from years back

Untrue, Labour didn't have a plan, so its quite impossible that anyone could know they would do this.
Also when was the last time a government actually did what it said it would in its manifesto?

In fact were there many of these threads years back on this

Any posts discussing VAT in 2025 so watch out

"Also when was the last time a government actually did what it said it would in its manifesto?"

!

I think this might be the first thread on the subject.

Apparently people were scanning many years ago

Maybe they posted warnings re VAT in 2025 from when?

Pre Covid maybe.

Nobody think it's your job to sort out state schools, but using the charitable status of an institution to pay less tax for the privileges that institution brings, and in most cases it's the privileges you pay for - (nobody is paying a fortune for a half a grade boost at A level that's wiped out by the time they graduate) might help out a bit.

As for thinking about it critically, the only reason most private schools exist is to maintain the privilege of the already privileged. There's no pedagogical justification for their existence in a society crippled by inequality & poor social mobility.

@Hatfullofwillow charitable status has nothing whatsoever to do with VAT.

Because you are bitter and want everyone else’s children to be dragged down to the woefully low educational standards of your own children. You are baying for parents to have zero educational choices or options for their own children? That is astonishing.

But it does to how private schools acquire and maintain their wealth and how they avoid 3 billion in taxes every year.

You are incorrect.

What about the children that pass their 11+ but can’t go to grammar school because their parents can’t afford the uniform.

Oh well, that's convinced me
https://theconversation.com/the-public-cost-of-private-schools-rising-fees-and-luxury-facilities-raise-questions-about-charitable-status-182060

They will need to plan this properly. Yes the numbers of schoolchildren being educated privately is small but most parents have budgeted and should be able to (just) cover the cost.

But it will mean reductions in VAT / Capital Gains / income tax elsewhere because the rich don’t become rich by wasting money. I’ve already seen it with DS schoolfriends’ families - cars are being downgraded, parents aren’t upsizing homes or going on as many UK holidays (it’s now a ‘waste’ of money and the preference is to go overseas). NHS professionals such as doctors and dentists are cutting back their hours so they don’t need to use wraparound care or boarding and so save themselves a bit of money.

I would be shocked if this policy generates any money if it’s implemented.

Fortunately it’s not my job to convince or educate you. But good job posting a hastily googled article, that doesn’t quite support your argument the way you think it does.

Charitable status is nothing to do with VAT on school fees. Removing charitable status from private schools has been mooted before, and it is far too difficult and won't happen. Not least because you can't pretend or require that all charities have to benefit everyone. The charitable acts that private schools carry out are exactly the same as Macmillan nurses or the Alzheimer's Society or Oxfam or whatever. They benefit a specific and limited group of people in a specific way. If you wanted to exclude all kinds of educational benefit from charity status, that sounds to me pretty troubling. There are plenty of small charities funding things like course fees, equipment, childcare, travel and/or other expenses, for those who cannot afford to pay the full cost.

People using the words 'baying' and 'bitter' are honestly laughable.

Some people don't agree with private education (SEND aside) and believe strongly in state education. I know better than most that it's far from perfect. Couldn't care less if I'm called bitter, I feel this is a good first step in making the playing field flat for everyone.

@Hatfullofwillow as others have said, charitable status and VAT are separate. But also your comment on the fact private schools pay 'less tax' shows how misunderstood you are. Education is exempt from VAT. Everywhere. It's illegal. This isn't tax avoidance, a tax loophole or a tax break. Schools have never paid VAT and can't claim back VAT either. Actually I stand corrected private schools do pay VAT on buildings, construction etc.
This policy isn't 'righting a wrong', it's introducing tax on education in the UK - just for private schools mind - which will make us outliers in Europe.
But convince me that people who support this policy have critical thinking skills.

Please could you explain how the playing field can possibly be flat if the rich buy their way into the catchment of lovely state schools?

How does the London Oratory School that Blair’s kids attended compare with the worst comps - or even an average comp? Just as an example.

Of course it won't be flat. Did you read my post properly? I said it's a first step. Any steps are good steps.