FT: Demand grows for private tutoring after VAT charge on independent schools

[nearlylovemyusername]

https://www.ft.com/content/300f07df-0126-46be-8470-544223cb7c35

Some extracts:

"Britain’s elite tutoring agencies have seen a boom in business from parents seeking alternatives to private school, a year after VAT was imposed on independent school fees. Top-end private tutors said they had witnessed demand shifting away from preparation for independent school entrance exams, as more families focus on securing places at competitive state and grammar schools."

"Lessons costing more than £60 an hour in subjects including maths, English and languages have risen by 56 per cent since 2022, and by 27 per cent since 2023, according to the data shared with the Financial Times.

Initially, parents were “aiming for independent schools and might have a grammar as a safety or backup”, but he added, for those affected by the VAT changes “it’s shifted completely the other way”."

"Nick Harrison, CEO of the Sutton Trust, a social mobility charity, raised concerns that a rise in private tutoring risks exacerbating inequalities in education. "

Surprise surprise...

Who could've thought that VAT will lead to wealthier families pushing out poorer ones out of grammars and best selective schools, whilst saving them substantial amounts to help kids with housing deposits instead spending on school fees.
And the same wealthier kids don't hold a tag of private education anymore so can't be discriminated by unis.

Win win for wealthy

Yes, only to be expected.
The wealthy will find ways round it, £60 × 3 a week is nothing compared with school fees.

Especially x two or three kids.

I had to laugh at the idea that wealthy people had grammar schools as a back up in the past. Is there any area were it is easier to get into state grammar school than into private schools?

If your kids are getting into the selective private schools, they're getting into the grammars too - especially the non super-selectives.

Plenty of parents felt they should focus on the private schools and leave the grammars for those who couldn't afford private. Now they're being priced out.

Big shift towards top comps, state grammars and using the fee money for extra curricular, tutoring and to pay uni costs upfront/house deposits.

I absolutely believe that people who would have preferred private in the past are priced out and are now targetting Grammars or move to catchment areas of good comps. I just don' t believe that many people in the past thought: I would like my child to go to St. Paul's but in case they don't get in, I also apply for Tiffin as a back up. It was more I apply for St. Paul's (and Westminster and City) and for two more less competitive private schools as a back up.

Mix - especially with the top academic private schools.

Lots of parents were prepared to push the boat out for St Pauls, Westminster etc, but not for the less academic privates schools.

They were all targeting grammars and great comps as well.

Nowadays the big shift are the parents who targeted the naice but not uber-academic privates and never looked at state who are now reckoning they can do more for cultural enrichment themselves and plenty of 'people like them' are now going for the state options.

We have friends who applied both to top private and top grammars after VAT. Some planned, some didn't but it happens of course.
Grammar first round exams are straightforward if you live in catchment, Westminster, SP, SPGS etc admissions are more complex and less predictable.

All totally predictable; in fact tons of threads on here predicted this. It was always obvious that the VAT policy would be counterproductive and stupid.

I would add that people are becoming more cautious about "less competitive" schools as the fallout of VAT is materialising. PGHS that used to be a decent back up school with over 70% of 7-9 at GCSE is one the recent examples.

A few years ago now our eldest was offered a place at both a grammar and a good independent. For various reasons we were torn, and discussing it with the private school Head at the chosen independent, once he knew that the grammar had offered a place, he offered us a 25% fee reduction because the school "wanted" our child as a pupil".

I still find it amazing that this actually became a reality. I get how it played okay in opposition to the left, but it’s beyond me how any competent Government could even seriously consider a tax on children’s education let alone go though with it.

We are in this very boat where we have a private seat already, hoping for grammar as private is now unaffordable but planning comp as backup since grammar is looking uber competitive this year! The school we are at is a highly sought after private all through school. Only if we get neither grammar nor decent comp will we consider continuing. Makes me sad as we really hoped to stay.

Tiffin is usually a back up to SPS or Kings

The top independents are woke and don’t offer significant discounts to very bright kids from middle class households. So grammar it is. They used to offer 50 per cent discounts to the best regardless of income. For now, there are still plenty of rich people to choose from but if that dwindles they will have to rethink.

My son is in a prep in a grammar school county. I don't know anybody who is even considering independent secondary.

Anyway, I just checked and Westminster School 13 plus is now over 46000 a year just for a day pupil! So I can completely understand why someone even quite wealthy would choose Tiffin or QE or Wilson’s or any number of grammars over paying that. There is also a lot of job insecurity now, especially Big 4 and Finance. That may make plenty of people nervous.
When I look at my friendship group from uni, a lot did send their DC to independent schools. Typically 2 children each, 2 full time working professionals in law/finance/accounting/medicine. All would be completely priced out now.

Totally agree that schools could have done more to attract the working professionals families. I just can’t justify subsidising someone else’s school fees via bursary in addition to paying income taxes and VAT. The fact that our kids will never be considered for financial reward / support due to these schools’ arbitrary definition of sufficient income threshold just adds insult to the injury.

I wonder what these schools will look like in 5-10 years with cohorts of like, 80-90% very wealthy, 10-20% from the other end of the economic spectrum.

Our DS's school is appealing to alumni to sign up for donations to help existing struggling pupils keep their places, and to attract new ones. I'm not sure how I feel about this, but I don't imagine it will be very successful.

If your kids are getting into the selective private schools, they're getting into the grammars too - especially the non super-selectives.

What are the selective ones? I know lots of dc who go to private who didn’t get a place at the London grammars.

Tutoring for the grammars is very normal as well plus the excellent state comprehensives tend to have high house prices.

I'm a full-time tutor (ex teacher). The boom isn't just related to private schools/VAT. It started during covid and has rocketed in demand since then. I work full-time and earn an hourly rate that boggles my mind (given how downtrodden UK teachers are).

3 years ago, pre VAT changes, I had a waiting list and still do.

Exactly this.
We live in an area where - if you have bright children- there's no point going privately because the private schools aren't remotely good academically. So parents have always spent on tuition and extra curriculars instead

During and post covid this has increased further. Firstly, as parents working from home realized that the only way to manage the home schooling plus working full-time at home and parenting and being your children's only companion was to outsource where you could- so they found private tutors. Once mine had established relationships with their tutors we just kept them going when the schools went back. The children enjoy the tuition and the benefits were clear.

I reckon at my children's comprehensive in a fairly average area of the southeast it's far more unusual not to have any private tuition.

My understanding from the headteacher of the school is that actually this has wider benefits across the whole school because they are able to focus budget and attention on pastoral care and there results so good that they don't feel the pressure an underperforming school might feel to do things like be incredibly harsh about attendance

It does strike me as incredibly unfair though from the perspective of performance reviews of teachers. It would be impossible to tell who the good teachers are from results - because parents tend to work out where teaching is weaker and focus their budget on tuition in those areas.

For instance, around here there is an incredibly good local English tutor who does small group tuition. She must tutor about a quarter to a third of the year group throughout their GCSEs. We've already used her for two of our children and their grades were too grades higher than they were predicted by school. The school's English department must look like they are hugely overperforming but in fact it's just down to this high quality tutor who is in effect teaching a large slice of the school.

I agree with this thinking - unless money is no object, why would any parent pay £50,000/year (once you factor in uniform, lunches, trips etc) for a school which gets them similar results to state.

Would love to get info on if the applications to St Pauls, Westminster etc are higher than previous years as many will be thinking if you're going to pay you only want the best or back to state.

The state grammars eg Henrietta Barnet are MUCH harder to get into than any top private school. These have 3,500+ applicants for 120 spaces whereas last year St Pauls had 700 applicants for 120 spaces for girls.

MathsAndStatisticsCampus you said:
I had to laugh at the idea that wealthy people had grammar schools as a back up in the past. Is there any area were it is easier to get into state grammar school than into private schools?‘

Yes, of course it can be easier to get into a state grammar school which normally have a catchment requirement, if you live in the catchment and your child meets the academic selection criteria.
Or at least, it’s completely impossible to get into that state grammar without paying to live in the catchment. Even if your child meets the academic selection criteria.

Whereas, a private school won’t have that catchment requirement. You can live anywhere and your child still attend a private school if you can pay (or if the school will subsidise or cover fees) and your child can meet the academic selection criteria, if there are any.

So are you laughing because you’ve already paid a ££££££K housing premium to buy into a desirable state grammar or super selective state school area? or a non-selective, but covertly economically selective school via high price tag catchment area, like many of the exceptionally high-performing state schools exist in?

We’ve often talked on here about how adding VAT to private schools is just penalising the bright kids in state schools from poorer backgrounds who don’t have access to paid tutoring or have savvy wealthy parents buying into catchments.

They miss out on state funded education that would suit their high abilities and set them up for the future because the child of a parent who could have afforded private school (without VAT) has taken their state school place. And will be providing tutoring and enrichment activities for their child on top.

That’s not progressive policy making. I vote Labour. When did Education, Education, Education stop being important?

When did Education, Education, Education stop being important?

When Rachel and others decided the parents were snobby. It’s a resentment based policy with no positive outcomes.

Yes, I agree!