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…

People see what they want to see and disregard the rest..

Am I the only one who read that to the tune of The Boxer?

'Breaches Human Rights law'?? Bwahahaha. Good luck with that is all I can say. Tbh I'd MUCH rather see elite schools taxed than see benefits cut to poor pensioners. And yes, those just over the Pension Credit level-thus missing out on the WFP- are bloody poor). Not ALL pensioners by a long chalk are swanning off on long holidays as the tv ads would like to make us believe🤬.

No, true, but then neither are all private school parents as some would like to make us believe.

Or maybe you could stop telling folk what they should do/see just because that's what you think is there. 🫣

Serious question, do people think private schools should have charitable status - do they do enough to deserve that status?

We all see things from our own perspective though. Nobody should be telling others that they 'should' see something.

No.

I did think that, yes! Of all the things to consistently comment on (and how are they all singing from the same hymn sheet - is there a judicial WhatsApp?!).

JL did DD's and it was like a personality X ray, which at times was incredibly hard to read because she was so blunt on the vulnerabilities and challenges - but also so warm and clear on the strengths, too. I'm so grateful she does the PIN rate assessments and doesn't seek top-ups. Puts reports on that level within reach for families who would never be able to access them otherwise.

EHCP funded placements are exempt. LAs can claim the VAT as an exemption. My own child has an EHCP and the LA won't have to pay it for her at all.

The problem isn't EHCP kids. It's parents who pay in desperation, because the EHCP system is broken. They're not choosing privilege - they're trying to save their kids from severe harm. It's not fair when it's not "a luxury product" but a bare necessity that the state should, in actuality, be funding (and it's less than specialist schools, at that) that they are taxed on top.

You’re a trifle slow on the uptake old girl.

May I recommend that you get up to speed with the entire thread?

Meanwhile you continue to be 'a trifle' rude.

Agree. But very low income pensioners don't have options-those choosing to send their kids to private schools do.

I see I touched a nerve. I hope it wasn't too painful

I don't agree with what they are doing with the WFA either but if you read this thread you'll see it is not as simple as you are stating. Many people use PS because they feel they don't have a choice.

But that's not actually the main reason why I find the VAT issue objectionable. Make it an income or wealth tax and I'd be fine with that (and we'd probably be included with that).

Whatever the rights and wrongs I saw this commentary on Twitter suggesting the case was wrong-headed from a legal point of view with very poor prospects of success: x.com/danneidle/status/1832702400253112374?s=46&t=Aa4KQdzTTGmVEueO_urarA

@Thistlewoman - I am against scrapping WFA, but low income does not always equal low wealth. So it is possible that there are pensioners living in fully paid up mortgage free houses (that they could theoretically sell), but on very low incomes, just as it is possible, that there are PS families in overcrowded overpriced rentals paying for a DC with SEN. Income and asset wealth are not the same, We do not have a taxation system that assesses both reliably and it is very difficult to moralise too much about people’s choices. My personal opinion would be that both those cases deserve sympathy, but others may disagree. As is evident on these threads. Plenty will say the pensioner should sell up and support themselves and the PS family should lump it in state because others have to as well.

People have prejudices either way and there is a distinct push for those “just richer or better off than me” should pay up.

But Starmer got into office on a promise of NO increase in Income Tax, NI or VAT rates. What on earth did people think they were going to get?? Or have huge swathes of the electorate got no brain cells? The majority voted Labour, and now the pain begins-mostly for that same electorate.

@gardenflowergirl that's not "the scenario this legal challenge is about."

You may want to check out the Guardian comments section - it has gone into meltdown on the WFA.

A poster calling Labour the new ‘nasty party’ is at 176 upticks and counting…

Well, not to be pedantic, but the majority did not vote Labour. They held just over 30% of the vote share, but they won in a majority of constituencies.

Old - already discussed.

What on earth makes you think that? 🫣

The 'asset rich' pensioner is a mythology created in the south of England. Many thousands of pensioners in the North of England, Scotland, NI, North Wales are living in properties which are a fraction of the value of those in the SE and South of England. Those pensioners in the North are also exposed to the coldest winter weather. But a load of London Metropolitan based MPs are blithely cuttting benefits for a massively vulnerable section of our society based on their ignorant and limited understanding.. cheered on by an equally prejudiced, ignorant and self-centred electorate-who will happily turn a blind eye until the cuts start to affect them (tax relief on private education anyone? Oh boo feckin hoo).

@Thistlewoman - if you cannnot see “nunance” and your own hypocrisy, we are not going to take you seriously.