Thread 2: VAT on school Fees- High court challenge

[EHCPerhaps]

Following on from thread 1
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/education/5160565-vat-on-school-fees-high-court-challenge

Background to legal challenge (not yet a case):
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13824931/amp/Single-mother-autistic-child-launches-High-Court-challenge-Labours-private-schools-VAT-raid-claiming-violates-daughters-right-education.html

Sorry to begin a new thread, OP, but your thread filled up very quickly!

Could everyone who posted on the previous thread please consider responding to the government consultation on this?

Here is the link to the technical explainer on VAT so far, from the government. This is the most detailed document I can find. More information will be given to us in October apparently. Which is awful for something due to be paid in January:

Hidden at the back of this it notes that the government consultation on these arrangements are open until 15th Sept, details are given of how to respond to it at p21. They are seeking emailed comments to an email address so you can just submit something brief. (Mine isn’t going to be brief!)

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/66a7a1bdce1fd0da7b592eb6/Technical_Note_-_DIGITAL.pdf

Coverage of the case continues today
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwy7rgyljz4o.amp

I'll make sure to show my full support for this manifesto commitment.

The legal basis for the case is paper-thin. She has as much right to an education for her child as anyone else, but no right not to pay VAT on private education.

She'll absolutely get the funding for the case from establishment interests. It's a real shame that's she's suing the government on the VAT issue rather than on the principle of providing a suitable education.

It's a real shame that's she's suing the government on the VAT issue rather than on the principle of providing a suitable education.

Agreed - provision is appalling in state schools, they need input and IMO if that needs to
Come from this route then so be it, but state education needs huge injections of funding in multiple areas, definitely in SEN areas

OK. I agree with you. SEND provision in state schools is awful. Perhaps youd like to get those legal cases started. I assume you’re also not also to bring up kids with SEND yourselves?

It all got v heated at the end and yet nobody ever did answer my question.

Think there's a mis type in your statement as I don't understand what you're saying

I will respond comprehensively this evening.

The case doesn't stand a realistic chance of success.

But it highlights just how critical it is that we have a healthy independent education sector, independent of government management (and ineptitude), independent of government resourcing (or lack of it), and most importantly independent of government control over curriculum (and ideology).

The VAT policy is a direct attack on our freedom to educate ourselves independently of the government by spiteful authoritarians.

Wealthy people should not have their luxuries subsidised by the state. Everyone is entitled to a state education, and that's it.

I predict the number of private school places won't decline, that Alexis Quinn will somehow find a way to pay for her child's education regardless of losing the case, and that the wealthiest people in the country will keep whining about it.

Sorry I was mistyping in a hurry.
my point was: Yes I agree with you. SEND provision in state schools is awful. Perhaps youd like to get those legal cases to challenge that, started. I assume you’re not also trying to bring up kids with SEND yourselves at the same time? Because that’s a drain on parental energy, time, money, future earning power; wider family pressures I could go on. It really limits the possibilities for advocating for yourself

In a small way available to me yes I campaign on SEND education in general, and I have a kid with SEND in mainstream private school. It’s possible to care about two things at the same time. My DC school place requires my wider family to contribute to the fees because otherwise that would be impossible . so it’s a precarious place already. This new VAT application on top of the regular annual fee rises is very worrying.

I’m interested in this high court challenge because my autistic DC at private school is in a similar situation to the complainant’s.

Parents like us don’t have the time to take the government to court to get SEND education funded properly. Or to get existing SEND legislation enforced properly where local authorities are flouting it which many do routinely to save money. Or even to challenge where schools are discriminating against our kids. We just have to try to get them to a more suitable environment as soon as possible by whatever means we have available to us.

Our kids like anyone else’s, need to have an education that they can access, TODAY. Not after many years of fighting multiple giant legal cases that nobody can afford to fund. I find that suggestion pretty clueless.

@EHCPerhaps I'm going to make a wild guess that you will manage to continue funding your child's education regardless of the result of this case.

Are you against the rise in VAT only for SEN kids, or is this just a wedge issue because you disagree with it in principle?

Wealthy people should not have their luxuries subsidised by the state

Private school is in no way subsidised by the state.

If 10-15% of children move from private to state, this policy will cost the government rather than raise money: despite all the extra money being taken from the remaining private school parents.

If the state was subsidising private school, then each child moving to state would save the government money, not cost it money.

Dadjoke you know this is meant to be a supportive site for parents, yes?
This isn’t a ‘wedge issue’ for me. this isn’t a debate point. I’m a real parent, already in a shit financial situation directly attributable to my child’s SEND, a disability and the lack of a suitable affordable school place. The private school that we’re paying for doesn’t have SEND expertise, just offers a quieter school environment with smaller classes. That means it’s slightly less triggering for the sensory issues to crowds and noise and the overwhelming anxiety that goes with female autism and unmet SEMH need. My DC isn’t having a wonderful time there. Just is more likely to be able to leave their bedroom and go in to school than before.

Thanks for your ‘wild guess’ - yes of course; I will try to continue to keep my DC at her current school if my wider family can contribute more towards fees as they increase. But If they can’t, that’s it. What parent wouldn’t do that?

I’m in contact through SEND groups with a lot of parents with kids with needs like mine has. Of these most of them can’t afford to try private and they have kids completely out of school for months or years, just as mine was. Or their kids are really really struggling at school and being excluded or bullied. Our kids will all suffer because of this policy, It will just push extra strain on state schools SEND budgets. I don’t think that’s OK. So I would scrap the whole thing, yes.

@strawberrybubblegum the existence of private sector education directly and negatively affects the quality of state education. You are putting forward the same argument people use for private health care.

if private education was banned, there’d be a lot more wealthy people with spare cash which could be taxed and put into state education, and the more entitled people advocating for state education, the better it will be.

But it is directly subsidy, because I am pretty certain that there will be almost no decline in private school places.

Responding to one of your posts on the previous thread, @EHCPerhaps, not all wholly independent special schools (the rules around section 41 independents are the same as maintained SS and DC don’t need to sit on waiting lists and you don’t need the school to agree to being named) cost £80k+ and some do advertise their fees online. For example, More House.

EOTAS doesn’t have to be tutoring at home, or any tutoring at all, for that matter. And it would be a very poor package that only including tuition.

@EHCPerhaps

My DD has many SEN. We fought for her care in the state sector and got it - private schools simply aren’t set up for that.

it’s one thing to say that this is a supportive site, but then you post a link to someone who wants to undermine the funding of state education. I don’t think that’s inherently supportive - it’s contentious.

You don’t just want a carve out for SEN kids - it’s a wedge because disagree with the policy.

Could you please share your research which makes you so certain?

Given you lack of basic understanding that PS parents actually SAVE taxpayer money, not using subsidy, I'm doubtful about quality of this research

Just on a general note, I have no time for posters who come in right at the end of a thread, with a new username, trying to have the last word. It is like Ebay sniping and it is far from persuasive.
Those in favour of this policy, keep your usernames if you want to actually join the debate properly.

Why would having independent schools affect state school education quality? They are two separate things, I agree state schools needs to be improved but like the previous poster said, at present anyone taking up an independent school places DOES NOT cost the government any money. If these students (and actually there are many that will move or not start) go to state then they will cost the govt £7-8k per child. So this is in no way making money for the government and will cost the government money. And loads of parents are not taking up their independent spots or moving

I just read about how the government will give £2.5bn to steel making. They could have diverted some funds to the education if they really wanted to from other sectors, not try and take money from the same sector. Retention is a real problem in the school sector, not hiring and training.

“if private education was banned, there’d be a lot more wealthy people with spare cash which could be taxed and put into state education,” really?? These people will be jetting off on their holidays in Spain or buying second homes overseas and spending their money there! You do realise the independent education system brings in a lot of money from overseas students which benefits all as these students spend money, if you get rid of independent schools the whole industry collapses.

in addition, if a local council cannot provide a child a place (and every child is entitled to a state school place regardless of wealthy or not) - did you know that they are now offering people return taxi trips (at taxpayers cost of course) and even more ridiculous is that local councils will be paying independent schools so they can place a child there?

In fact, everyone SHOULD contribute to their children’s education, if state cannot cover it anymore. Every state education users pay a small amount per child in school would generate a lot more for the state system, than trying to rob extra money from others who already subsidise state education without using it!

“if private education was banned, there’d be a lot more wealthy people with spare cash which could be taxed and put into state education, and the more entitled people advocating for state education, the better it will be.”

@DadJoke - the Tories beat you to it, I am afraid. They have taxed these people as a group throw the roof already and abolished the Non Dom.

So you need to rethink and come up with a better plan.

People are mobile, rich people in particular. A lot of people using PS in UK are dual nationals and 40% are ethnic minorities (although I dislike that term).

Horseshit. Private schooling damages the rest of us, the least you can do is cough up your taxes.

Wealthy people should not have their luxuries subsidised by the state.

It’s not a subsidy. There’s merely no tax penalty at the moment. Every private school child is saving the taxpayer thousands of pounds a year.

Private care homes, healthcare, and nurseries should be taxed based on your argument. There is only around £200 tax on a first class flight to Australia, far less than the equivalent VAT would be. Caviar and cake is VAT free. No sensible person can possibly argue that education should be taxed, whilst leaving luxury food and travel free from VAT.

Dadjoke I’m really happy for you that you secured the education your DC need. I’m not saying you had an easy time, I can imagine very much not, but not everyone can or will get good outcomes out of their local schools and local authority like you had. And we still do have to respond to the immediate needs of our kids in the now.

I really don’t think you can say that arguing again VAT imposition is undermining the funding of state education. As strawberrtbublegum’ says, If the state was subsidising private school, then each child moving to state because of VAT imposition would save the government money, not cost* it money.

My DC returning to state will cost the state a lot more. Also at the personal expense of a massive amount of stress and energy and financial cost to me trying to get individual funding secured, which is not certain or quick.

It will also cost upheaval to my child who physically can’t just go in to the local mainstream school every day while I take on the local authority to try to get the extra help she needs.