PS VAT - international reaction

[AlbionLass]

France and Germany attack UK plan to levy VAT on international school fees
Proposal to impose value added tax in the Budget risks damaging diplomatic ties, ambassadors say.

France and Germany have hit out at Sir Keir Starmer’s plan to levy value added tax on private school fees, saying the policy risks forcing hundreds of children out of international schools and damaging diplomatic relations with the UK.

I wonder how this will square with wanting to be closer to the EU?

Well I sent mine private because our local school is shit. That's all there is to it from my perspective. I wanted my kids to have good grades so they could get good jobs. That's all.

And how are you determining the people who can bare it? Do parents with SEN kids who have pulled their children out of the free government sector and moved them to private fit your criteria? We have twins - both kids where in brilliant free government schools but we had to pull one out as she could not cope in the large class sizes and was school refusing. We would have much more money and be able to afford much more tax if we had not of just forked out 5 years of private high school. Having a child in private school is not an indication of whether someone can afford more tax. A person’s overall income is an indication of how much tax they should pay. That’s how your tax system works - not picking a group of people and increasing their tax depending on how they have choosen to educate their children.
If you have enough money to have chosen to educate your children privately because you considered it a luxury - good on you but it’s pretty entitled to think all private school parents are in the same boat as you.

Same reason here but I wanted more than good GCSE's for them and it seems thats what we got

Well I didn’t send my daughter privately to get good grades. I don’t give a shit what grades she gets - I just want her to survive school and get some sort of education.
People are so narrow minded to think all private schools are the same - my daughter’s private school has the worst buildings locally with many classrooms old and cold or demountables - especially compared to our local comp. But it caters for children with Sen needs and their mental health is more important than nice buildings and grounds.

@SheilaFentiman - https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-rights-child

I was not talking about the Human Rights Act/European Convention of Human Rights under which I believe there is an expectation there will be several legal challenges.

I was talking about the UN Charter. You just need to read it. The Government signed up in 1991. Children have their own rights. The Government has a responsibility to act in the best interest of each child and not discriminate based on their parents (and that includes rich parents, it is there in black and white). So yes, blatant breach their too for pretty much all children in private schools. It is obviously more offensive for children with SEND, children from military families and children who have a need to be educated in the French or German etc system temporarily (no different to the needs of military children).

The Labour Party have not thought this through one bit. It is a big uncertain mess, in my opinion. Not sure how private schools are going to deal with this before there is legal certainty. Not sure all parents will pay up if there is a legal challenge. That is the whole point.

The Government has a responsibility to act in the best interest of each child and not discriminate based on their parents (and that includes rich parents, it is there in black and white).

Do you mean Article 2, which is the only one referencing discrimination?

1. States Parties shall respect and ensure the rights set forth in the present Convention to each child within their jurisdiction without discrimination of any kind, irrespective of the child's or his or her parent's or legal guardian's race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, property, disability, birth or other status.
2. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that the child is protected against all forms of discrimination or punishment on the basis of the status, activities, expressed opinions, or beliefs of the child's parents, legal guardians, or family members.

I really don't see how VAT on a paid service aimed at children is discrimination. NB I searched for 'tax' in the charter and couldn't find a reference.

The (UK) State arranges for provision of an education to all children living in the country, regardless of social origin, status etc of the child or their parents. That would seem to cover the obligations in Article 2.

@SheilaFentiman - there is more than one article that the Labour Government will be breaching. They have forgotten that children have their own rights.

Could you cite the Article(s) in question, then, since you think it is “there in black and white”?

Thanks, much appreciated.

Ok so diplomats don’t pay VAT on British cars but they have to potentially pay VAT on French style school fees to give continuity to those children? It’s utterly absurd and nonsensical. And they the Labour Party should have foreseen this. The drafting of the VAT legislation on private school fees is a dog’s breakfast and an embarrassment to the country. It literally is shameful and last minute type drafting, any half lawyer or tax expert has spotted this. Are we really this incompetent fly by night, seems so!

My understanding is that diplomats pay VAT on most things and can reclaim it on some things. Cars are one of the exceptions that has an upfront exemption, I believe.

'Shall we move to the UK for a few years with the kids?' isn't a simple question with only one answer.

People think about it in the round, do the calculations around how much they'll earn, extra costs, and stack that against the experience they hope to have.

Some will still come, some won't.

I cannot see a single article in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child that is breached by this policy. Even if the policy did breach the Convention, the Convention has not been taken into UK law so cannot be enforced through the courts.

Your idea earlier in the thread that diplomats will refuse to pay the VAT is equally deluded. The school has to pay the VAT regardless of whether it has been able to collect it from the parents. They cannot refuse to pay HMRC just because parents are withholding payment. The law does not require them to pursue the parents for payment through the courts, but that is the most likely outcome.

Your latest effort saying that diplomats don't pay VAT on British cars is based on a very specific exemption that applies only to vehicles manufactured in the EEA/EFTA. They have to pay VAT on all other goods and services, which would include fees for independent schools.

Personally I am against this policy, but advancing ridiculous and factually incorrect arguments like these is not the way to oppose it.

@prh47bridge the UN Charter goes further than the Human Rights Act. Would you agree or not?

How is HMRC going to take enforcement action against private schools whilst the legal challenges are ongoing in court in the UK? Exactly, how is this going to work in practice.

There is a huge amount of uncertainty here.
It is Brexit and Rwanda all over again. And I bet they absolutely all know it.

What exactly is the problem with giving diplomats an exemption? It is not a normal VAT, it is abnormal entirely by international standards. What are we going to do when they retaliate and demand the UK government pays VAT on international schools where their diplomats send their kids?

What are we going to do when they retaliate and demand the UK government pays VAT on international schools where their diplomats send their kids?

Why on earth would they “retaliate”?? This isn’t a specific tax on them as diplomats/expats, it’s a taxation decision that applies to all schooling in the UK. You might as well suggest there would be some retaliation on Uk ambassadors if McVities finally loses the war and VAT is added to jaffa cakes.

Please try to make sensible arguments!

@SheilaFentiman - in case you hadn’t noticed, it is not me making statements about the VAT. It came from leaders in other countries! So clearly they don’t like it one bit. It is a breach of international laws that they respect and have signed up to. Of course they are going to be vocal about it.

Art 23 and Art 24 in the UN Charter - they go further than the Human Rights Act to protect kids with SEND in private education and with health needs. I have a friend who sends her DC with Type 1 diabetes to private school because of the help with the diabetes and the specialist nursing support. The Government will be breaching the rights of her child under international law by imposing this VAT because she cannot afford the extra 20 per cent. That is just one of very many examples.

How is HMRC going to take enforcement action against private schools whilst the legal challenges are ongoing in court in the UK? Exactly, how is this going to work in practice.

All kinds of laws are enforced whilst legal challenges are ongoing. If they weren’t, we would never get anything done as a country.

HMRC will say “hello, thanks for completing your quarterly VAT return, we see you charged £1m in fees and you therefore owe us £200k. Oh, some people didn’t pay their VAT? Well, you supplied and charged for £1m of VATable services so… £200k please.”

“ECHR was incorporated into UK law by the HRA. Under the HRA, it is unlawful for a body carrying out a public function to act in a way that is incompatible with any of the convention rights included in the HRA. HMRC carries out a public function and so must comply with HRA provisions.”

It came from leaders in other countries! So clearly they don’t like it one bit. It is a breach of international laws that they respect and have signed up to.

Could you link to an international leader stating that the UK’s VAT policy is in breach of international law?

If I’m an MP in Kent, I might not “like it one bit” if France lowers fuel duty and hauliers fill up there before crossing the channel rather than in my county. But that doesn’t mean France is in breach of international law by doing so.

@SheilaFentiman - if the Guardian and Politco running the story and both the French and German ambassadors to the UK, the highest diplomatic ranks, speaking up about this is not enough for you, then I do not know what will be.

Clearly you have no concept of the impact of this policy beyond your own blinkered views.

And yes our Government will be interfering with the international legal rights of those French children following the French curriculum.

A civilised society would prioritise providing excellent free state education that parents participated in and were proud to use.

Are you still talking about the UN Convention on the rights of the child when you say UN charter?

Article 24 of that is about healthcare and natal care so I am not sure I see the relevance.

Article 23 is:

Article 23

1. States Parties recognize that a mentally or physically disabled child should enjoy a full and decent life, in conditions which ensure dignity, promote self-reliance and facilitate the child's active participation in the community.
2. States Parties recognize the right of the disabled child to special care and shall encourage and ensure the extension, subject to available resources, to the eligible child and those responsible for his or her care, of assistance for which application is made and which is appropriate to the child's condition and to the circumstances of the parents or others caring for the child.
3. Recognizing the special needs of a disabled child, assistance extended in accordance with paragraph 2 of the present article shall be provided free of charge, whenever possible, taking into account the financial resources of the parents or others caring for the child, and shall be designed to ensure that the disabled child has effective access to and receives education, training, health care services, rehabilitation services, preparation for employment and recreation opportunities in a manner conducive to the child's achieving the fullest possible social integration and individual development, including his or her cultural and spiritual development
4. States Parties shall promote, in the spirit of international cooperation, the exchange of appropriate information in the field of preventive health care and of medical, psychological and functional treatment of disabled children, including dissemination of and access to information concerning methods of rehabilitation, education and vocational services, with the aim of enabling States Parties to improve their capabilities and skills and to widen their experience in these areas. In this regard, particular account shall be taken of the needs of developing countries.

I assume it is paragraph 3 you are referring to?

Again, I do not see how adding VAT to private school fees across the board, including children with disabilities and SEN, breaches this. It makes the access less affordable, sure. But it is already unaffordable for the vast majority (SEN or no) and state schools do provide for all children. You might have a better case to argue that state provision is so poor it breaches this clause for all affected children - but the mental gymnastics to make VAT the issue is,… something,

I see private schools going into administration as a positive in the long run! I would love them all to close.

How rude.

I am vaguely pro the policy, but I am also - as you know from other threads - the mother of two boys in private school so I will be paying more.

I asked you for links, which is pretty conventional in discussion threads. Not sure why that makes me blinkered, sweetie.

I have a friend who sends her DC with Type 1 diabetes to private school because of the help with the diabetes and the specialist nursing support. The Government will be breaching the rights of her child under international law by imposing this VAT because she cannot afford the extra 20 per cent.

But there will be people who have children with the same health needs as your friend's DC who already couldn't afford to send to private school - why wouldn't that have been a breach of international law already?