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!

I said it won’t generate revenue medium term, you said it will and there’s no point discussing it as your children aren’t affected. You then said we are discussing it but there is no point discussing it??

I disagree that it won't generate revenue medium term.

I sincerely think you would prefer it if only private school parents were allowed on these threads. They're the only ones who have 'relevant' opinions after all.

I sincerely believe that your support for the policy is solely based on ideology and spite with children being necessary cannon fodder in your odd crusade against the ‘telegraph, Tories, rich, uncaring, selfish’ enemies you mentioned who undoubtedly are responsible for your life not being as you’d like. I sincerely believe no amount of negatives and lack of any positives to this policy would persuade you otherwise, as long as you got to see a few private schools close down.

The policy will not be implemented, so I fear we will not meet again as you will be back to the guardian and muttering things about equality of outcome under your breath as you walk past the local prep school children within two months.

There is no denying that an urgent impact assessment has to be carried out on the 100000 DC with SEND in the private sector right now. There are 20k plus with EBSA who may actually self harm or worse commit suicide of the back of this type of policy.
Equally urgent is an impact assessment on the up to 10000 pensioners that could die because of the withdrawal of the WFA.
This party may literally have blood on their hands so they need to carry out the full impact assessment to protect themselves legally. Ever heard of gross manslaughter by negligence?

As for general taxation, we are at the bottom end of the OECD, so it is hard to argue that taxation is sufficient, given our public services.

Link please?
We are indeed not too high on the list for lower and mid earners though.
We're very high on the list for higher earners.
Any appetite for changing this?

The legal claim can go away, just make all kids with SEND excluded from the VAT, all military families, all kids in specialist schools like music/ballet, and every kid on a bursary of at leats 50 per cent. It really is not that difficult to introduce the exclusions.
In addition, remove the ridiculous statutory drafting on charging for after school club exercise in prep schools. Ridiculous notion full stop.
And stop bolstering the tutoring industry at the same time - it is anticompetitive.

You want to tax the top elite private schools and families? Just tax them. We all know this was always intended as a tax on the sausage factory of next Tory PMs coming out of Eton & Winchester College and similar. The Government needs to stop throwing the other hundreds of thousands of school children under the bus! It is despicable. Not acceptable and morally reprehensible.

As much as I hate it, I do believe this policy will be implemented. There is no saving face for Labour if it's not and they will be prepared to die on this hill, reasoning is irrelevant, it's ideological.

I also do believe that in 5 years time UK will lose it's place on the world stage, will become less relevant and less attractive. There still will be a very tiny group of ultra wealthy, hidden from public view, but middle and upper middle classes will disappear or become significantly poorer. Overall prosperity won't improve, but because everyone will be levelled down there will be a sense of equality amongst certain groups of society so they will feel happier (whilst having the same crap quality of life).

I also predict significant rise of Reform in next election which is the scariest part of this all.

sorry for typos, mobile

I think if we’re not careful we are going to end up in tit for tat punative policies against groups that didn’t vote for the governing party, with new baddies every 5 years. With Labour it’s pensioners and PS school children, with reform it will most likely be public sector workers. It’s just a silly way to run things.

I can see why private parents think that going on about SEND will get them some traction in this issue, but the overwhelming majority of children with SEN are in state schools Not private schools.

You know nothing about my life, my children's education or my voting record.

But I'm really tired of this schoolgirl "everyone who disagrees with me is just jealous' attitude that pervades these threads.

“I can see why private parents think that going on about SEND will get them some traction in this issue, but the overwhelming majority of children with SEN are in state schools Not private schools.”

So just make all kids with SEND exempt from VAT? Really not that complicated and easily implemented.

Given state boarding schools costing 17k per year on the boarding element are excluded from VAT, there is really zero excuse not to exclude all DCs with SEND!

No. If state provision is not suitable and the person with the ECHP can prove that, then the council will pay the bill, VAT and all, and claim it back.

This court case is just a wedge issue.

I’ve seen state boarding schools advertising on social media platforms, telling parents that they can avoid VAT by using their school. It’s utterly ludicrous. Parents paying £17k for state boarding (whilst costing the taxpayer thousands for the education element) will pay zero VAT. Parents paying £12k for a private day school will have to pay over £2k tax. It’s non sensical.

Who are these people who would rather choose to not live with their children than pay some tax?

Can we get back to the 'causing minimum disruption to children' argument?

Actually you can still live with your children and take advantage of state “boarding”. There’s one 10 miles away from me that does “flexi boarding” which basically just means that they have a longer day with wrap around provision and can stay over occasionally. The fees are less than half of an equivalent day private school and NO VAT.

I’m not in charge of the advertising. I’m merely stating what is happening. It’s interesting that these “struggling” state schools in desperate need of funding have an advertising budget. Perhaps “these people” are those who want to access a decent education but can’t afford a 20% hike in fees.

The desparate grasping at edge cases is really quite unedifying. There are 32 state boarding schools in the UK. Making them an exception would be costly, pointless, and would not actually satistfying the whining of the parents who don't want to pay 20% on their kids' private school education.

If you think this is genuinely unfair, by all means lobby for them to be included, but don't attempt to use it as an excuse for no VAT on private schools.

The point is that the policy is not logical in any way. It’s a policy of spite.

Family 1 - pays private education fees, saving the taxpayer money. Pays £17k boarding element, on which £3,400 VAT is payable.

Family 2 - uses state education at a cost to the taxpayer of £8k a year. Pays £17k for state boarding and yet has no VAT to pay.

It’s not logical to tax boarding in one school and not the other. This point is about VAT on boarding fees, not VAT on fees in general. It just proves the point that this policy is nothing but an attack on private education. It’s blatant.

Exactly how many pupils are in UK state boarding schools?

I mean if the at least 100k pupils with SEND in the private sector are an “insignificant” number?
How many pupils are we talking about exactly?

https://www.internationalschoolsearch.com/news/state-boarding-schools-the-uks-best-kept-secret

Best kept secret, HA!

Vs
Traumatised children with SEND in private schools.
What a fantastic look! But then we all know they are utter hypocrites by now.

@DadJoke - what is unedifying is the utter hypocrisy! And fuelling the private tuition sector to boom further. And fuelling private equity vultures to buy up small preps full of kids with SEND.

Remind me, what's the VAT status of private tuition?

So just make all kids with SEND exempt from VAT? Really not that complicated and easily implemented.

I’m not sure it is as simple as that. Who decides if the child meets the legal definition of SEN set out in section 20 of the Children and Families Act 2014? If you leave it to schools, some DC won’t be recognised as having SEN when they actually do and there is the potential for some schools to play the system.

On thread one, someone suggested using DLA as the exemption criteria. That may work, but would bring a set of different problems. Not all DC meeting the definition of SEN will be eligible for DLA. And then there is the wait time for DLA applications/tribunals. And what about 16+, would you then use PIP which has different criteria to DLA? And what about those who are not eligible to apply for DLA/PIP, but not because their disability doesn’t meet the criteria?

I don't really have an issue with adding VAT to state boarding schools, except that it would be expensive to implement just for 32 schools, because of the mixed VAT regime it would require. It's not a reason not to charge VAT on private schools.

If it does reduce the number of people in private school (and it won't by much) that's another societal benefit of tax.

On the other hand, as almost every single private school child has a parent in the top 5% of earners, they will simply stump up, and it will be a nice earner for the Treasury. It's a beautifully targetted tax, and the potential downside if it doesn't raise tax is not anything to worry about.

I am not going to weep for a bunch of wealthy people paying a bit more tax, or sending their kids to state school if they chose to do so instead, like the other 93% of the population.