When will the outcome of the VAT legal challenge be known?

[kitz90]

Does anyone know the answer to this? (VAT on private school fees).

So, as far as I understand any VAT refund will be repaid to the school not the parents who then decide what to do with it.

My understanding (IANAL) is that if the court case is won, it will mean the VAT policy is deemed inconsistent with human rights law and then it will be on parliament to debate if and how to fix that. If it does reach that stage, the fix might be rescinding the policy or it might be something else (not sure what, a grant to children affected by SEN to cover the VAT cost, say)

But I don’t think there would be a refund even if it was rescinded, it would just be a change in VAT treatment from that point onwards.

Wouldn't know, I wasn't only grammar educated

The time limit for applications is in the Civil Procedure Rules, specifically rule 54.5. It is the time limit for filing the claim form.

Even when a case comes to court, there may be a wait of several months after the hearing before a judgement is issued. From initially instructing solicitors to getting a judgement can take up to a year.

Thanks!

Of course they don't. They'll only be interested in billing doomed clients.

Despite the Government attempts to delay, it’s been fast tracked through the high court. Likely to be heard before May, possibly as early as April.
Its a positive sign and implies that the case has merit.

It implies that the case should be heard sooner rather than later (which makes sense as it will impact how the school year 25/26 goes).

It acknowledges that there are arguments to be heard. Is that what you mean by merit?

Well the judge yesterday obviously thought the case has merit, they expedited it because of the impact on children

Sinclair Law is a leading firm for education law and in particular on bringing judicial reviews and other legal challenges for SEN children in relation to EHCPs. So they are well placed to argue about the impact of VAT on SEN kids.

I worked with David Pannick QC a long time ago (IAAL) and it’s not an exaggeration to say he is a genius and an enormously impressive advocate. I don’t know about tax specifically but he has an vast amount of experience on human rights law and government policy. He’s who I would want fighting my corner.

That’s not to say the challenge will succeed of course and FWIW (and it’s not my area of expertise) I’m not hugely optimistic it will lead to any substantial change. Even if it succeeds in court then as per PP it just means that in relation to SEN kids only Parliament would have to consider if and how to amend the law to make it compatible with HR law.

I don’t know much about the separate ISC or Scottish challenges.

Plus he was also the lawyer who previously was hired by Labour and advised them not to do this (not this incarnation of Labour). He is immensely knowledgeable about this topic.

The problem the Government has always had is 1) best case scenario of amount of tax raised is very small in comparison to the overall education budget and 2) the SEND exemption is deliberately too narrow precisely to try and make some sort of financial case out of this tax in the first place.
Which means there is a lack of proportionality.
It will be interesting to see the outcome.

Does the harm to those SEND kids displaced by this tax outweigh the benefit to the state education budget? There is no doubt in my mind about that.

Normally, taxation is a matter courts do not get involved in.

Normally, taxation is a matter courts do not get involved in.

There have certainly been legal challenges raised before on taxation. Famously, for one, regarding jaffa cakes:

www.astonshaw.co.uk/jaffa-cake-tax/

I donated to the campaign and got an update from them yesterday saying a judge had had an initial look, concluded the case was of public importance and should be expedited and they are hoping for a court date in April.

The best way to get updates would be to donate a fiver I guess.

www.crowdjustice.com/case/education-not-discrimination-1/?utm_source=sendinblue&utm_campaign=Update_2078,%203334]%20on%20Education%20Not%20Discrimination%20(January%2011,%202025)&utm_medium=email

I just posted the link to them on CrowdJustice.

This has been reported in the Telegraph, independent, accountancy age, probably other places too by now.

That's not terribly helpful to people without subscriptions 🙄

I wouldn't read anything about the merits of the case into this judgement. It was expedited because the judge accepted that parents need certainty and did not accept the government's argument that they needed more time to review the evidence. As far as I can see he wasn't asked to rule on the merits of the case. That would only be needed if the government argued that it should be struck out. Even if they did, the only requirement at this stage is that the ISC and others have an arguable case. That is a low bar and tells us nothing about the chances of success.

I note that the government's response talks about "ending tax breaks for private schools", which is disingenuous to say the least. As they well know, there was never a tax break for private schools. All education was exempt from VAT. There was no special exemption for independent schools. They also claim this will raise £1.8 billion a year by 2029/30, which is almost certainly too high. Talking of 6,500 additional teachers sounds impressive until you realise this is less than 0.5 of a teacher per school.

Of course it doesn't but it shows that at least the court understands the pressure on parents and kids, which is what Labour keep denying. I'm reading nothing into it more than that

It is interesting to note the shift in Labours language in response to this, it has shifted from ‘paying for 6500 teachers’ and ‘breakfasts for every child’ to ‘ will raise £1.8bn a year by 2029/30 to help deliver 6,500 new teachers’.
The extremely thin veil of justification for spite aimed at children continues to become thinner by the day.

Because it isn't a hypothecated tax and BP has already said it will go into general taxation pot, it isn't ring fenced. Secondly, they can't even hit the basic recruitment target, let alone an extra 6500.

Will be interesting to see if any of her divisive language eg tweets, are brought up ie discrimination

Personally, I think they need to change the job description for the Secretary of State for Education to include all children, including those homeschooled and in independent education.

The DfE already covers independent schools and has some responsibilities around home education - mainly publishing information to help parents understand what is required.

@prh47bridge - yes of course there is the DFE. However, as this is a political attack on the private sector primarily and no proper analysis or engagement with the entire sector appears to have occurred (at least according to MN threads), then the solution is to demand that there is political representation of those children. So SOS for STATE education only - not very representative for all children now is it. And the tweets from the SOS for Education back that up. It is simply not one of her responsibilities.