VAT on school fees (you have to read this!)

[EverythingAllatOnceAllTheTime]

Government’s private schools VAT raid ‘could cost taxpayer £1.8bn’

Parents who are forced out of sector are likely to work less or even quit jobs, according to think tank research.

Adam Smith Institute.

“There is another thread on here about how many people actually know someone who is moving to state as a result and hardly anyone does.“

I am assuming the data will be readily available via freedom of information in due course.

Yes I suspect that's true in a lot of schools/areas and so far we've not seen a mass exodus either (1 or 2) but the two startling differences we noticed this year were that the Year R intake was massively reduced - the smallest intake ever - and of the Yr 6 leavers only 2 continued on to private schools - all of the remainder went to grammar - usually it's about 80% who stay in private. So I think in 5 yrs time we'll have a better idea of the long term impact.

“I think cars should pay tax according to fuel consumption etc through road raz and fuel duty. I agree with higher stamp duty on more expensive homes and luxury goods should be subject to VAT.”

@pintofsnakebite - fine if you have a functioning public transport system across the whole country, like Switzerland. Or safe cycling routes for children to secondary school.
Not fine if you put poorer people into poverty because they cannot get to work. You just get ULEZ camera hampering.

Some of us are resisting your kind of thinking because you are just feeding Farage and his lot. We already got Brexit, maybe some people should actually start listening rather than imposing their privileged views on others.

As for the stamp duty, it is entirely unfair on London families and has led to an exodus of families out of the City. When actually the London Challenge gave us amazing state schools and fantastic social mobility - yet another misguided tax, not aware of consequences, trapping people and making them more inefficient.

Please remember the original post in this sub-thread. I think(?) we're in agreement that "a state school teacher [might] give poorer children less attention due to meeting the specific curriculum requests of ex private school parents." Unless you're assuming that ex private school parents will not be, on average, pushier on their children's academics than the parents of poorer children.

Edit: I think I now see our point of contention. I suspect that current pushy poorer parents at state schools will face more competition from pushy ex private school parents who join them, besides the effect on those without pushy parents.

We're not in agreement about that at all.

Also, without wishing to generalise massively or go off topic, I do agree that a lot of 1st and 2nd generation immigrant parents have a more serious attitude to education (my Dad was also 1st generation).

However, I don't agree that it is selfish or only benefits their child. I think all children benefit from that child's presence in the class. Behaviour expectations are better, peer influence is massive etc.

So no, it is not a given that private school children will take all the attention at all. They may have more of the teacher's attention after school, and they may send more emails, but that is not the same thing.

@user149799568 - no we are not in agreement that a state school teacher will prioritise ex PS children over poorer children because PS parents are pushy. Schools don't wirk like that. Also if you have a look on another thread on MN hardly any parents are making the move from private to state.

@pintofsnakebite @redwinechocolateandsnacks I was addressing the PP to my posts on the sub-thread, not making an assumption about everyone on this thread. Though I may have presumed too much even with them.

We'll have to agree to disagree about whether parents who are focused on pushing for their children's educations have a net positive or negative effect on other children's educations. I suspect it varies depending on whether or not those other children have engaged (pushy?) parents. Certainly, IME, academically ambitious parents try to cluster together. I don't know what effect that has on children with less ambitious or engaged parents.

no we are not in agreement that a state school teacher will prioritise ex PS children over poorer children because PS parents are pushy. Schools don't wirk like that.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this point as well. There's theory and there's practice. In practice, my experience, both with schools and outside, is that providers tend to give more attention to those who complain more. I accept that may not be your experience.

But a number of posters are reporting a reduction in new joiners. At my DC’s private school they have reduced the reception classes from three to two this year. This is despite massive house building in the area and lots of professional families moving in from London to the extent that the second new primary in four years is opening and the existing primaries are full. In other words, it’s not a falling birth rate issue.

A significant number of the last year’s year 6’s have moved to state rather than continuing into year 7 at the school, many more than usual and the nearest well regarded comp is now the most oversubscribed in the county. Over the next couple of years I have no doubt that private school admissions will continue to fall (they fell last year) with the result that this policy will not raise a meaninginful amount, if anything.

In the meantime, some children will be moved outside the usual exit points because their parents can no longer afford the fees. However, this amount will be dwarfed by those that never start and those that leave after year 6 or 11. From my own perspective, we plan to remove our son after year 11 and I know lots of other parents that now intend to use state sixth form.

Good state school teachers do prioritise new children into a school though. Just to make that clear. Like all teachers, private or state, most have the best interests of the children at heart. Also, most schools love engaged parents, regardless of socioeconomic background or class etc.

I did exactly that.

We left London 15 years ago because we wanted a bigger house and weren't happy with the state school options and didn't want to pay for private.

The country's economy as a whole would be better if more people did the same, especially now working from home is so standard. I spend money in my local community, employ people in my local community through my business and many of my children's school friends' parents had lived in London for some time.

London house prices are massively unfair to poorer people who grew up in those areas or need to work in those public sector jobs the OP so distains (nurses, teachers etc). There is an entirely different thread required on how to tackle inequalities in house prices but VAT on school fees isn't it.

As for the rural economy, I agree. I would love to see a better public transport infrastructure which will only come when we stop being so London centric. Fuel duty and road tax influences behaviour and spending on lots of levels though.

I live rurally, my car tax is about £30 a year, my insurance is £200 and it costs £40 to fill up the tank. That's because I choose to drive a 10 year old Fiat. SUVs on 15 miles to the gallon are not compulsory.

You seem from your posts to be vehemently anti-state in general, so I suspect we will always disagree.

The other strange thing I noticed is that whilst yr R admissions and the number moving to private secondary dropped, we had a few joiners in year 3 and 4 - I wonder if people might be more inclined to pay the much smaller fees at a prep to increase the chances of their child passing the 11 plus in order to avoid private secondary fees.

This poster has all kids in state

She's just seeing wider implications of this stupid policy

This is despite massive house building in the area and lots of professional families moving in from London to the extent that the second new primary in four years is opening and the existing primaries are full. In other words, it’s not a falling birth rate issue.

A significant number of the last year’s year 6’s have moved to state rather than continuing into year 7 at the school, many more than usual and the nearest well regarded comp is now the most oversubscribed in the county.

I do find this interesting. There will always be a cohort of parents who want private because they want private, but there is a large section of parents who would opt for state if it was good enough.

So the reduction here could well be due to good new primary schools opening and a 'well regarded comp' rather than anything to do with the VAT.

And yes, here, lots of parents pay for private prep hoping it will help get into a state grammar, that's nothing new. I know of very few parents who would pay for private if their children passed.

DS is at a grammar school and every year about 1 child per year leaves in year 9 to go to private after common entrance.

Where we differ is that I can only see this as a good thing. The more wealthy, articulate, motivated parents in the state sector the better it is for everyone.

I think that’s also a possibility. Also, I personally know a number of parents who tried state school and then moved their DCs when they were not happy with their progress etc. A couple of those moved their DC for private for years 9-11 only with the intention of them moving them back to state for sixth form.

I think we will see more of this, parents dipping in and out of the private system.

I would also add that most of my friends who chose private because their children didn't get into grammar, moved back to the grammar for sixth form.

Again, nothing to do with VAT.

The sixth form were happy to have them.

Also, it has a postive effect on sixth forms because many can't offer a wide range of subjects because not enough uptake. Many don't offer physics for example, so those state children who would have done physics A level miss out.

More privare school children means more choice.

Except that I know many of the parents that have moved their DC to state and they have cited fees as their reason. And the area has always had some great state schools.Two of the highest performing in the country!

I am quite aware that parents pay for private in the hope that their kids get into grammar. My oldest moved to grammar at 11. However, the private I am talking about doesn’t prepare for grammar school entrance because it’s an all through school. I had no intention of sending my oldest DC to grammar when I chose the school but my mind changed during the 2019 election when I could see what would eventually happen re VAT on fees. Also, many more pupils left year 6 than is usual this year, to the extent that there is one year 7 class less than in the years above.

Over the last year or so, people have started to be vocal about the cost of the fees, mortgage increases etc. I have had at least one child at the school for over 10 years and this has not happened previously. There is a definite change in behaviour. Labour may have got away with this if it hasn’t been for the cost of living crisis but that combined with the VAT increase is going to mean that this policy doesn’t generate much (if any) revenue.

It’s very, very hard to get into the grammars here at sixth form. You need a string of nines for GCSE. Most of the new joiners at my DC’s boys grammar are girls from the girls grammar over the road who decide they want co-ed for sixth form. The parents that I am referring to are not talking about grammar for sixth form as they know it’s very unlikely that their DC will get in.

I think private schools will also have to rethink their offerings.

Most private schools i know have had massive cap ex recently because they are constantly competing with each other to provide the best facilties. Pools, pitches, concert halls etc.

That is what has fuelled the above-inflation fee increases. But in doing so many of them are pricing themselves out of the market and are now having to compete with free state options.

Maybe we will see a resurgence of the more modest 'no frills' private school that focusses and small classes and good teaching.

“You seem from your posts to be vehemently anti-state in general, so I suspect we will always disagree.“

@pintofsnakebite - I am not at all anti state. What I am against is too much trying to exert control from Central Government with no understanding of implications in different regions. I am absolutely pro much more local authority control and funding and voices and power locally, to local people. I believe in choice for all.

I also cannot see how anyone can be anti private but send their DCs to grammar. It makes zero sense to me. If you move to a grammar area, you already made a certain choice. I find that hypocritical.

Car insurance and insurance in general is an interesting one - has gone up massively due to bottlenecks in reinsurance and regulation and private sector and regulators not talking to each other properly. At the cost of the consumer. It is not like anyone has a choice over having to insure their car either.

I'm not anti-private at all. As I've said many times, I think everyone makes the best decision for their own child and that is exactly as it should be.

I just think school fees should be taxable.

Yes I made choices. I left my well paying job, moved out of London, worked part-time self-employed. All because I wanted a certain lifestyle for my children and yes, that includes educational choices.

I don't judge anyone for making different choices.

Government policy hasn't always gone my way or favoured me. I'm not bitter about it, that's just the way it is.

“Yes I made choices. I left my well paying job, moved out of London, worked part-time self-employed. All because I wanted a certain lifestyle for my children and yes, that includes educational choices.

I don't judge anyone for making different choices.

Government policy hasn't always gone my way or favoured me. I'm not bitter about it, that's just the way it is.”

@pintofsnakebite - well if everyone makes the same choice as you, we are entirely economically screwed. If anything, you should be made to pay more for the privilege of exerting your choices, not the other way round! And I say this as someone who made very similar choices to you.

But not everyone would make the same choice as me. That's why they are called choices.

There will always be people who want more money than I do, a bigger house, more expensive clothes etc.

There are people who choose to have more children than others.

By your reckoning, we'd be screwed if everyone chose to become nurses or teachers because there wouldn't be enough tax revenue.

It's an illogical argument.

if EVERYONE decided to become teachers or nurses we'd be screwed big time indeed.

If A LOT OF people made your choice we'd be screwed as well - working part-time you're likely to be a net tax recipient unless super highly skilled in niche area and this mean that you expect other people to work and pay for your kids state education

@dontjudgemeagain and the fact she'll be educated alongside a mixture of people rather than just people from the same background as her... this made me chuckle. You have no idea what you're talking about. Our local schools are busting at the seams with generational white locals, definitely not a mixture. Big cliques of parents who all went to the same school together too. Talk about same background. Don’t believe me? Pop on over to Black Mumsnetters and have a read of the threads asking if they should move to a particular area, worried because of the lack of black people. And they have reason to be concerned. “mixture of people” my arse.

In very sharp contrast the independent prep and senior schools we moved our DC to (after bullying and SA in state that the school did not want to deal with, I might add), for the last decade my DC have mixed with DC from just about everywhere and from all kinds of backgrounds. My white northern British DC speak half decent German and Spanish despite never having lessons in school and have a basic grasp of Swahili, they know a bit of Chinese (know all the swears) and who knows what else. My DS friends go home in the holidays to Mongolia, the Caribbean, Brazil and are of all religions. And there’s the DC of our military families whose parents move frequently to postings all around the world, do you sneer at those families who serve their country? DS best friends are a Hindu from London and a Kenyan boy, you will not find a more different background to my DC. There are many reasons to send DC to state school but the suggestion for them to be educated amongst a mixture of people rather than "just people from the same background" is fucking ridiculous.

Posters who hate the independent sector, are you aware that this policy has already put a lot of jobs under threat? While you are gleefully rubbing your hands at your ultimate goal of closing those schools it risks putting a large workforce of British teachers, cooks, admin workers, grounds staff, drivers etc out of work? And the (often local) businesses who supply them will be impacted too. Many have worked in the state sector and will not go back to it, the one’s I’ve chatted to say they’ll move to schools overseas if it comes to it (so the loss of their income tax to the treasury seems assured). I gather some indy schools are already reducing staff in order to cut costs and thus lessen the impact to parents. If you are salivating at the thought of British taxpayers losing their jobs then shame on you. Before reading reports by assorted institutes of whatever political flavour, first stop to think that those fees go back into the economy via salaries and running costs, and falling pupil numbers will mean job losses, or else where on earth do you think the fee money goes?

Lastly the dirty little secret the anti-indy crowd either wilfully ignore because it chafes at their politics or are unaware of is the number of people who work in the state sector who send their DC to independent schools. I’ve met loads of them in my years as an independent school parent, it’s eye opening. Healthcare professionals who need the longer school day or even boarding provision just so they can do the demanding jobs and hours they work and qualify for promotion, state school workers who schlepp off to jobs they hate (either due to abuse from DC/parents or shite management, often both) in order that their salary funds indy school “so I can afford not to send my kid to a dump like this”. These are the people who’ll be forced to move their DC and cut their working hours/refuse promotion/quit. It will probably make foreign parents think twice too, so a big chunk of money coming into the economy wiped off there. It won't hurt the wealthy higher tax payers you hate so much, but you can't have everything.

As the OP and others on this thread will attest, if someone hates their job but does it solely to give their DC a better chance in education why wouldn’t they quit the minute they’re priced out of spending their disposable income in the way they wish?

My years of a schoolie parent are almost done and the VAT hike won’t affect us (we’re just one at state boarding now so no VAT - indy parents should definitely look into this its been a fantastic choice for my youngest), but its not as clearcut as VAT will earn the treasury X billion and only affect a small % of DC.

Exactjy this.