VAT on school fees - High Court Challenge.

[EverythingAllatOnceAllTheTime]

Labour’s plan to impose VAT on private school fees in January faces a High Court legal challenge over claims it breaches human rights law.

Lawyers have written to HM Treasury arguing the policy discriminates against special needs children and has threatened court action if it is not dropped.

Showtime…

This was always inevitable. As was posted on other threads, previous Labour administrations were advised that such policies breached ECHR laws (particularly Articles 2 & 14) as "pluralism" is integral to the human right to education & other life choices that sadly many take for granted.

Whilst Labour knew that performative cruelty, blaming "rich" kids or just outright misopedia was popular with many voters, they would never back down before the election & a legal challenge could only be made once the policy was announced but now they will likely be similarly advised to row back on this policy.

A high court case will expose the cruellest aspects of this policy, that in reality will be revenue negative for the Treasury & show up the woeful provision of SEN in the state sector - & i would exiect the Tory press to have a field day - sadly

And if Labour want to go all Tory & take us out of the ECHR, label judges as "enemies of the people" etc, they still have UK law covering age & disability discrimination to contend with

www.counselmagazine.co.uk/articles/abolishing-private-schools-and-redistributing-their-assets-social-justice-at-the-expense-of-human-rights

Peak entitlement here 😂

I meant that those with an ECHP would be exempt from paying VAT on the fees, not that they would be exempt from paying the fees.

I agree that there are human rights issues that need to be examined here as well as financial and practical questions that need to be asked. I think those that think this VAT increase just sticks it to the rich fundamentally misunderstand how private schools are often used.

Read about the woman undertaking the legal action and then see whether you still think she is acting under a sense of entitlement. She just wants an adequate education for her child!

There was very obvious prejudice from my LA because my DC was at a private school (she now attends a state secondary for the SEN support). We saved them much much more money through the private primary than the EHCP will cost them for secondary. Because when needs are met, children flourish and need less expensive support. The borough had run out of primary places completely at that time too.

Successive governments have planned really poorly.

Another parent of a SEN child here who has saved the state an absolute fortune by paying for his private education since the age of 3.

NHS Autism diagnosis, moderate deafness, various congenital medical issues that need careful monitoring (all often linked) . The council reported on his needs - he could have gone to a specialist autism unit or all could be met by a small private school with multiple TAs supporting the class and a school nurse on site. So we foolishly went for the private school because of the sport and music provision (which it turned out he was gifted in) and didn’t go down the EHCP path 10 years ago as we were happy to pay for his schooling.

We’re now NOT happy to pay 20% on top which could be avoided if we had got the damn EHCP. There are a lot of parents like us now applying for EHCPs as a point of principle which is yet another impact on the remaining “93%” as the council EHCP system will come to a grinding halt.

How do we donate to this?

You don't have a 'human right' to VAT exemption on luxury products 😳

I've heard it all now.

Read the posts on this thread and the story of the woman taking the legal action and then tell me that having to pay for an adequate education for your SEN child is a 'luxury'.

I will be shocked if this ever reaches a court.

How can the fees themselves not be discriminatory but VAT on them can be? It is vexatious litigation because there is plenty of money to fund it.

The fundamental rationale behind this is that if you have mild SEN, but sufficient money to pay around 83-90% of private school fees after VAT, you are being discriminated against.

But those without the means to pay most of the fees should just STFU.

It is pretty outrageous really.

Education aside. In our area the local private schools employ between 400 and 2000 people each. They are some of if not the biggest employers in the towns. Will absolutely destroy the area if even one closes, jobs are already at risk with VAT. And I'm not talking about teaching staff, it's the cleaners and catering staff that will be the first to go. Boarding already in decline and VAT will be applicable to board and lodging (apparently school food is a luxury) so that's all the boarding staff: matrons, houseparents, nurses etc.

Or (sensibly), the state could have reinvented the old Assisted Places scheme with an SEN focus? Would have saved a packet!

i think SEN children are different cases to bog standard kids in private school so should get VAT free, not NT children though.

the government needs to sort the county out after the tories fucked it up, this is one route towards that.

"SEN" isn't "fixed" either - it's contextual to some extent.

Ignore it and you can have EBSA and maybe even self harm alarmingly quickly.

The truth is that approximately 170k out of 650k kids at private school receive some kind of bursary or scholarship - 40k entirely free, funded by some with wealth buy others eho are just cobbling it together & going without other things.
110k kids at private school have some kind of SEN & trying to label all this as 'mild' is frankly disingenuous. This case being brought & others cited on this thread clearly shows that the parent regarded the need as severe despite what the local authority classified it as (most likely to save money)
If the upshot if this policy is that SEN provision in state schools massively improves, most would cheer but withdraw thus cruel proposal & tax wealth, CGT, income, divs etc by all means but leave the kids out if it

It’s basically mild dyslexia and ASD. Profound learning needs get an EHCP and private schools generally aren’t interested in pupils who will put off other pupils (I.e anyone disruptive). I don’t blame them, but they aren’t the solution for SEN that this case implies.

Yes, of course there are pupils who cope better in small private than state provision, but that was just as true pre VAT as post VAT.

The government have exempted those with an EHCP from VAT, which is the officially acknowledged threshold of making extra provision available.

I am really struggling to see a court taking this case on. Maybe paying a top barrister and top PR agency will get it over the threshold, but I am still sceptical.

Entitlement to choose private education for my DC, yes.

The VAT exemption, at the moment, is on Education. No education here or anywhere else in Europe, has VAT liabilities.
Nothing to do with ‘luxury’.
If Labour succeed in putting VAT on private school education, what other education will they put VAT on?
Whatever happens the overpaid train drivers will be able to afford it! Sooner the trains are fully automated the better, but I digress.

Who said anything about boarding..
My beef is about how they are going about this . We committed to sending our only child to private school because the state school is a disaster.. county lines drug routes etc .. we are not loaded and we made some serious choices to make it happen at 21k per year .. what we didn't budget for is a 10 or 20% rise in year one! Where was the public consultation? Don't we live in a democracy? What about phasing it in for those who just can't find another 10-20% almost straight away.. Didn't Mr Keir Starmer go to private school? .. we are not asking fora state rebate.. we are just asking that a unorganised snatch on funds is rethought, not even mentioning the pressure this would put on the state system which is already broken. Don't do it labour, it's a mistake which will only make the system worse.

I see the French government has waded into this too, complaining that it's an 'unfriendly' act to subject parents at French schools in the UK to paying VAT when children attending equivalent British schools in France don't have to. The legal situation allows this now we've left the EU, but Starmer could presumably do without French frostiness when he's making a big thing of restoring closer ties with Europe.

With you Teal.

This is a purely populist move without any fiscal benefit. Judging by a number of posts, pure envy is the real rationale.

It also looks like Labour will face a challenge on the proposed WFA cuts too.

Excellent, had not seen that.

Then why did Labour back down when such policies were proposed before?
What has changed in case law (going back to 1976) in the attached article that would bring about different advice than that given by Lord Pannick & Lord Lester?
The high court would almost certainly hear the case, but the most likely thing is that Labour will be advised to withdraw the policy before it reaches court
https://www.counselmagazine.co.uk/articles/abolishing-private-schools-and-redistributing-their-assets-social-justice-at-the-expense-of-human-rights

This. The education is still there fir the mother in question, it's just not at the price she wants. Can't see it winning.