Private schools - should they scrap their bursaries?

[SomeGuy]

I was interested to read this report from the Charity Commission.

Basically they tested five schools to decide whether they were charitable or not. Fees ranged from £6k to £15k per year.

The definition of charitable is a new one, since 2008. It is here.

The key criterion is

"F3 Principle 2b Where benefit is to a section of the public, the opportunity to benefit must not be unreasonably restricted"

in particular

"F10. Restrictions based on ability to pay any fees charged

Charities can charge for the services or facilities they provide. They can also charge fees that more than cover the cost of those services or facilities, provided that the charges are reasonable and necessary in order to carry out the charity?s aims, for example in maintaining or developing the service being provided. However, where, in practice, the charging restricts the benefits to only those who can afford to pay the fees charged, this may result in the benefits not being available to a sufficient section of the public.

...
The fact that the charitable facilities or services will be charged for, and will be provided mainly to people who can afford to pay the charges, does not necessarily mean that the organisation does not have aims that are for the public benefit; however,
an organisation that excluded people from the opportunity to benefit because of their inability to pay any fees charged would not have aims that are for the public benefit.

Therefore, where charities do charge fees, people who are unable to pay those fees must, nevertheless, be able to benefit in some material way related to the charity?s aims. This does not mean that charities have to offer services for free. Nor does it mean that people who are unable to pay the fees must actually benefit, in the sense that they choose to take up the benefit. They must not be excluded from the opportunity to benefit, whether or not they actually do so."

Basically they have determined that poor people must benefit in some way from private schools in order to have charitable status.

Of the five schools assessed, means-tested bursaries were advertised at four. The percentage of fee income going towards bursaries was: 14%, 10%, 5%,

Re the scrapping of charitable status of private schools - if schools are no longer charities and become businesses instead they will pay VAT. In fact, they will pay twice as much VAT as they receive in charitable tax breaks, and, will be able to claim all of this back.

Its just a misleading headline grabber. Absolutely, make the criteria for schools clearer, so that an appropriate amount of schools' income can be directed accordingly, but Suzi Leather at the Charities Commission needs to take a much broader view of what constitutes the public good.

Its not just about how much cash is given away to non gifted children in bursaries and free places, it is about opening schools up and making the excellent school facilities that often (but not exclusively) feature at private schools, work for the community and families in the surrounding area. All of which costs money, but very little of which is considered by the Charities Commission.

my dc swim at a swimming club - it's not just elitist although has some top flight swimmers - it provides a service to the local community, covering its costs but not making a profit

We use two different swimming pools - one belongs to a private school, the other a state comprehensive - the private school pool is free, but we have to pay commercial rates for the state school pool. Without the private school we couldn't afford to keep going and the local community would lose a valuable asset.

Bursaries are not the only thing a private school can offer ...

As Mimsum says, 'public benefit' is a much larger concept than just bursaries. Which is why private schools with good facilities are falling over themselves to let local residents use swimming pools, sports halls, theatres, art facilities etc.

I'm sorry, Seeker, but you really have no credibility arguing that someone should send their child to a school were 93% go when...you don't send your own child there.
GS schools are not inclusive at all.

I don't blame you for taking the opportunity for your child, but it is ludicrous for you to lecture others.

Litchick, it was me that Seeker was getting at. 100% agree that grammar schools arent just normal state schools. We still have them in Bucks. Lots of lots of wealthy parents target them. Only way to pass the 11+ realistically around here is to get a private tutor which I didnt think was the idea of grammar schools at all..

"if schools are no longer charities and become businesses instead they will pay VAT. In fact, they will pay twice as much VAT as they receive in charitable tax breaks, and, will be able to claim all of this back."

a) this is crap
b) this is factually incorrect

What are you talking about!!!???

I doubt it is factually incorrect. If its a good enough fact for the Chairman of the Independent Schools Council, David Lipscomb, to use on the Today programme, yesterday, its good enough for me.

'I'm sorry, Seeker, but you really have no credibility arguing that someone should send their child to a school were 93% go when...you don't send your own child there.
GS schools are not inclusive at all.'

M dd is at a selective state school, yes. But she got there from the sort of Primary School many on here wouldn't dream of sending their children to - an area of high social deprivation, very high % of free school meals, very high % of SEN......just the sort of place there are posts every week about. And my ds is still there - doing will and happy. If he passes the 11&divid; he will follow his sister to grammar. If he doesn't he will go to the local high school. I say high school advisedly - it is not the comprehensive I wanted for may children because there are no comprehensive schools in a grammar school area. If he does go there I have no doubt that he will do well. As most children do - despite the hysterila whipped up by the Daily Mail!

And for the record, I would want Grammar schools - certainly in their current form - abolished along with the Independents. They are devisive and unfair and give more privileged to the already privileged - not what they were intended to do at all.

I dont understand Seeker - you want to abolish the selective state school your child currently goes to - WHY?? If you dont like them why on earth did you send her there....

paid privately for both DS's til secondary school and then i was amazingly granted 2 full bursarys for both.( split up from partner whilst children at infant school) Am so grateful because, now as a single mum i couldnt have afforded it.

A gripe i did have when we were paying for schooling,was that we were also contributing in our council tax towards state schools,but not using them. Surely thats a form of charity from fee paying parents to help the state schools.Why did we not have a reduction in council tax, or we could have given that contribution to the school.

Also some public schools also offer their facilities to local schools to give them better educational facilities and sports facilities. My son helps out at a local state school in his lunch hour, out of choice to help those that are not in such a wonderful position. Both of my boys want to make a donation back to the school as a BIG BIG thankyou for the wonderful chance they have been given

Because there are no comprehensive schools in Kent.

I would much prefer to send my children to a true comprehensive school - but that choice is nto open to me without moving - which I can't do for complicated work/family related reasons.

what would anyone do about the university bursaries as well?

"My son helps out at a local state school in his lunch hour"

I do hope the poor unfortunate children are suitably grateful!

What's a University bursary?

seeker my son is also one of those poor unfortunate children that you so rudely mention( thats why we are on a bursary)...and no probably,thinking aboutit, the little buggers probably arent grateful,but the state school( they dont employ enough dinner ladies to supervise their kids.Maybe i should tell him not to waste his time. Its what he wants to do....he wasnt made to do,it.Funnily enough he actually enjoys it.
Probably should tell him not to with parents like you.

Sorry, alypaly - don't understand your last post.

Onthe subject of paying council tax towards an education system you don't use - that's what happens when you have a universal system of taxation. I (touching wood and thanking whatever gods there be) have practically never needed to use the NHS - but I happily pay tax to maintain it for those that do - and as an insurance policy for the future. The same applies for your tax that goes on education.

University Bursaries: www.independent.co.uk/news/education/higher/research-the-different-university-bursaries-and-you-coul d-tap-into-thousands-of-pounds-1747488.html

Quite reasonable things - universities, especially the good ones, tend to get some big donations, and can afford to give some away. They are also mostly funded by the state.

PS. Education is an exempt supply for VAT purposes, and hence if schools were run as businesses rather than charities they still wouldn't be able to reclaim any VAT, because you cannot reclaim input VAT in relation to exempt supplies.

I'd definitely prefer it if there were no bursaries on offer at the DC's schools.

The charitable status thing is worth next to nothing to parents. The cost to parents of retaining said charitable status far outweighs the benefit of being a charity.

I already pay substantial taxes. I also give a reasonable amount to charity and I choose the charities that I wish to give to. I don't wish to give to people to go to my DCs schools on the basis that they are not in real need.

SG: education is only exempt under certain circumstances. The withdrawal of the charity status would make a lot of independent schools' education be taxed at standard rate (Vat Notice 701/30).
They currently suffer input tax that they cannot reclaim but would be able to reclaim once they became standard-rated - which I think is what moodlum was on about when she misquoted David Lipscomb. However he failed to mention the flow of output tax to the Treasury's coffers.

Well actually the superior law is that of EU Directive 2006/112/EC, which under Article 132 provides that "the provision of children's or young people's education, school or university education" is an exempt supply.

So it wouldn't go to S rated. And even if it did, as you say, the 15/17.5% increase in fees would be much worse than the VAT saving on inputs.

According to the Times today Dame Suzi has magnanimously backed down yesterday & told the HMC that due to the current economic climate (ie that her puppet massters will shortly be out of jobs and she will lose her patronage) that the bursaries will not be imposed on schools re charitable status after all. (Sorry, read paper copu so do not have link)

found it here

Thanks, MrsGoG. Interesting article.

I know this is deeply prejudicial of me and a real weakness, but I find it difficult to take anyone seriously who calls themselves 'Suzi' (especially the the i instead of y), on a professional level. I can't see beyond Suzi Quattro.

I love the biblical name Susanna, and the various derivations. I would feel much better about the person if they held their unadulterated name high.

I know I am being petty but needed to get it off my chest.

MrsGoG - at last some common sense. It was obvious to anybody that knew anything about independent school that very few have large bursary funds. It was always about 'Eton' and pure politics of envy. I agre with HMC - it was a totally politically motivated attack.

Just forcing independent schools to hand over free places would effectively be a tax on full fee paying parents. There is nowhere else for the money to come from. It would have collapsed a lot of schools and in the end the Charity Commisison would have been presiding over the destruction of one school charity after another.

I note that as the political wind changed the Charity Commission also changed its stance. No doubt sensing the Tories would just reverse anythng they did anyway.