The effect of VAT on private school fees.

[HeadDeskHeadDesk]

If this is brought in, and it seems likely it will be, I've been thinking a lot about how it's going to shape things in future.

Personally I think it's outrageous to introduce it from day 1 and it should only be introduced immediately for new pupils who are not already in (or signed up to be in) the private system.

Parents should have at least 1 academic year of notice that VAT will be levied on their fees, as their child moves up through each stage of their education, between infants, juniors, year 7 or sixth form. Or in the case of public schools it would be moving from Prep to common entrance.

You should be exempt from paying VAT until your child reaches the end of whatever stage they are at, as it's a natural break with the opportunity to move into the state system with less trauma and disruption to the child. At least that way, you'd have fair warning and plenty of time to make alternative arrangements. People with kids in private junior school will be pushing really hard to get them through the 11+ and hopefully into a super-selective state grammar school, but plenty already do that anyway and only keep their children in private school from year 7 onwards if they are unsuccessful at 11+.

The disruption to children will be terrible if they get pulled out mid-key stage or halfway through the two year GCSE programme, or whatever. Getting a state school place anywhere within sensible distance of home, let alone a good state school place is going to be hugely problematic.

Obviously it goes without saying that very good or outstanding state schools will already be heavily oversubscribed. I can see private school parents pushing up property prices around outstanding state schools (or decent Community Schools where they are obliged to take you at any stage so long as you live in catchment) even more than they already are, or renting out their main home and moving into catchment of those decent state schools in order to secure a place.

Either way, there is no doubt it's going to be carnage.

I'm thinking that as Home Education or Home Schooling is already a burgeoning thing, lots will go that way. But most people who were previously in the position of being able to pay school fees probably don't fit the typical profile of most home educators. The private school parents are most likely people running their own businesses or earning high salaries in professional or corporate jobs that require their full attention, so they are probably not in a position to undertake the home schooling themselves.

I see these parents potentially banding together to create Home Ed co-operatives where they sign their children up to online learning schemes, then collectively employ freelance teachers as private tutors, rent workspaces and meeting rooms etc.

So their 'home schooled' children now learn with with maybe 10 or 20 other children, five days a week, dipping in and out of different sessions according to age and subject and which teachers are available that session, to oversee and supplement the online learning.

It wouldn't take that much to organise and it would be far cheaper than private school if enough families grouped together to fund it.

I am sure that many private schools can make some savings that are not terrible, and not have to pass on the 20% in full.

I would have preferred the money to be raised in a different way, but things such as an SUV/large car tax were never going to be proposed.

@HeadDeskHeadDesk if you want your thread to seem different to the eleventy million already started, call it something like 'should parents start small tutoring groups if they want to leave private schools?'

Have to be careful they can’t be seen to be an unregistered school

This is what always happens with socialism though. It’s impossible to raise the outcomes for everyone, so instead, they just get lowered for everyone. The only unusual thing with Starmer is that he’s made this clear that this is his plan before he gets into power.

I think you'll find state educated people are able to spell 'fuming', @DarkForces but you've revealed your prejudices beautifully with that comment

Oh mate. I went to the local state school.

Our local private school increaes their fees by 4% every year.

The bit they do for the community is limited classes for preschool and year 6. Why have they chosen those years? Sales pitch.

They have £38m in reserves. They increased these by £1m last year.

Whats stopping them from absorbing some of the increase. If they operated as a charity they would. But they operate as a business.

As a business then they should pay vat.

They may well absorb some of the increase - if the current fees are £20k a year, say, VAT would make them £24k. The base fee would need to reduce to £16.7k to keep the parental cost at £20k, or they could go in between with a base fee of £18k, say.

News flash: 61 year old Keir Starmer is not bound by the choices made by the parents of 11 year old Keir Starmer.

@SheilaFentiman but he has said that he benefited from going to that school

err, so what?

He went to a direct grant grammar which was different from a state grammar. The majority of pupils would have been fee-paying whilst the minority ( inc Starmer) were funded by the LA. When the direct grants were removed, the school became completely fee-paying apart for those pupils who were already funded by the LA. So in short Starmer attended a fee-paying school.

Why? That was a choice his parents made, not him.

DH and I were both educated privately. We made the decision to send our dc to the local comprehensive. We both support the VAT on school fees plan. There's no hypocrisy in this stance.

There are already are cooperatives and a lot of home educators use private tutors.
Labour are anti home education and I would expect organising these kind of groups to be made more difficult once they are in power.

I may be called an idiot here, but I don't see the problem with VAT on private education. I know there are a number of families who won't be able to afford the increase, but the majority will, won't they?
The argument for private schools not paying VAT doesn't make sense. Of course they should, they're a business.

But of course, they're a business that benefits the rich so that's why they've been allowed.

I do actually agree that it should be an incremental thing though. Rather than disrupting kids education in critical years, it could be introduced now for new kids and all kids currently in education can see out their current KS.

It’s an old MN saying

You are probably right that the majority will still pay, certainly in public schools but not in small independents. You do have to ask yourself though, given that all these parents are already paying for the state education system via general taxation and not using the places their children are entitled to, what would happen if everyone stopped using private education altogether?

Already as each year goes by, any perceived benefit is eroded as the best universities are encouraged to give more and more places to state school students with lower grades, so that they are not disadvantaged by the lack of a private education.

There are currently thought to be around 615,000 children in private education in the UK. Some will be international students but even if you estimated that the UK students were only around 500,000, consider this: The average size of a state secondary school is just over 1000 pupils. So you'd need the equivalent of 500 new state secondary schools to accommodate all the UK resident children currently in private school. Where would the money for that come from, when people are already being taxed so highly? Closing private schools down left right and centre doesn't put a penny more into the state education budget, does it?

It's funny but I never heard anyone say that about Pritti Patel or Suella Braverman over their immigration policies when they were accused of cynically 'pulling up the drawbridge' behind them so other immigrants can't benefit from a life in the UK the way their parents did.

Yes, I am aware. I just wondered if we can expect to see parents pulling their children out of private school and banding together to do the same.

I actually think if there was no private education then state schools would be better.

Obviously we would need more than we currently have, but if more 'influential' or 'powerful' people had skin in the game, I don't think the government could get away with underfunding as much as they do and under paying the staff.

It wouldn't happen overnight and there would be years of shite to wade through, but eventually I do think state schools would be better.

You do have to ask yourself though, given that all these parents are already paying for the state education system via general taxation and not using the places their children are entitled to, what would happen if everyone stopped using private education altogether?

Hmm, I wonder.

I expect that all children would receive a state education, in that case.

I agree with this. It would be more likely to be organised among a very few extremely good friends sharing some time and talents, and perhaps a specialist tutor.

Not before more schools were built/bought and staffed.

So you think the state would have no problem with suddenly absorbing 500-600,000 more pupils into non-existent state school places, with no more money coming in to fund it?

But that's what I meant. I don't mean doing it on the scale of a small school because then it is a school. But groups of between 10 and 20 children wouldn't be.