Labour’s plans for VAT on Private Schools

[Busydadof2]

The Labour Party has proposed introduction of VAT on private schools.

In the scheme of things the money they will bring in from this is tiny compared with total expenditure on state schools, while it will drive more burden on the state system as some parents leave private schools. I think this is a populist ploy to get traditional Labour voters to vote for what is in any other sense a centrist party.

Have you considered signing this petition to make sure the policy gets scrutinised and the weight of public sentiment against it is known?

Change.org petition: Stop Labour from adding 20% VAT to private school fees and forcing kids to change schools

www.change.org/p/stop-labour-from-adding-20-vat-to-private-school-fees-and-forcing-kids-to-change-schools

Various perspectives from the signatories of this vote come to mind and resonate with our own situation, including this: “I work in a state school with over 30 in a class and oversubscribed. My 2 kids went or go to private schools and we have sacrificed loads to do this. We are NOT wealthy, many of the kids at the school I work at live in bigger houses and have much more disposable income than we do. We chose to send our kids to private school rather than live in a bigger house instead of our semi detached on a main road. We holiday in the UK every year and I work full time. I buy my clothes on the high street or in charity shops. Many parents at the school my kids attend are in exactly the same situation. I agree there are some very wealthy parents there too and the addition of VAT will not even make an impact on them, they will pay it without batting an eyelid. All this will do is push the kids like ours back into an already oversubscribed state system, increase class sizes even more and create a bigger divide as private education will become truly elitist.”

"looking at it in a vacuum" is what Labour are doing.

• "unfair tax breaks", compared to state schools without taking into account state school funding or positive externalities
• "raising £1.7bn because the rich will pay" without taking into account any migration to state schools, and the severe economic downsides when it happens

The chart correctly brings in the upstream and downstream economics, and is conservative. that's the cost of equality, £22k per pupil that migrates and £30k if they cut back their income accordingly. £2.7k tax exemption is a bargain.

...which is why no country in the world taxes education in any form, and many countries and US states subsidise private education as A-level economists could prescribe. This policy is bonkers.

The story that Labour's plans will make "our society fairer" or improve the quality of state schools is a fairy tale.

State schools are highly socially segregated, and children from the top performing quintile of "comprehensive" schools are more than twenty times more likely to attend a highly selective university than children from the bottom quintile. Children from the private sector will go to the top performing comprehensives and grammar schools and they don't need to be improved.

The socioeconomic composition of the private sector is more or less indistinguishable from that of the top comprehensive schools. 10% of children in private schools are from the bottom two socioeconomic quintiles, (these are the pupils who will predominantly leave). In a typical Guardian diatribe some years ago, Kynaston made the mistake of pointing out that 40% of families with an income of more than £200k (now >£250) educate their children in state schools.

So if it will have a negative macroeconomic effect, and inevitably increase the school premium on house prices, beyond burnishing privately educated Sir Keir's left wing credentials, what is the point?

I guess @MisterChips and @Marchesman we will
just have to agree to disagree on this.

fair play to you @JumpinJellyfish you're the only person who's admitted this tax is only about equality and not about whether it makes any actual improvement to anyone. have a nice day.

It’s not a question of “admitting” as if there is some kind of secret conspiracy or that I have the inside track on Labour’s intentions here - I personally support this policy because I believe that it will promote equality and I also believe it will make a positive difference to society.

You disagree with me which is absolutely fine.

@JumpinJellyfish

You have said that your position is ideological and, in not refuting the various reasons that have been given for thinking that Labour's plan is a terrible idea, you have been consistent. This pretty much sums up Labour's position too. Do you understand why this policy, that evidently has no rational basis, is causing concern to people, regardless of the education sector that they use?

On a slightly different but related tack, you say that you support a system that allows the most talented to succeed. Where do you stand on Oxbridge favouring the admission of applicants from state schools who demonstrably underperform en masse compared with applicants from private schools? Presumably Oxford and Cambridge should increase the proportion of students they admit from private schools?

@Marchesman just because I haven’t engaged with some of the arguments made on this thread does not mean I accept them. My last message to you was meant as a sign off because I think we are each fairly entrenched in our respective positions and I don’t see the point in a debate in those circumstances.

As for Oxbridge, I wasn’t aware that state school students underperformed - the last time I saw anything about this reported it was the opposite- that state school pupils outperformed private school pupils at Oxbridge (which was certainly the case in my subject at my college) - but I’m sure you will be able to correct me if that is wrong.

The table is Cambridge data, from an FOI.

See also: E. Samoylova and L. Hall, Analysis of student characteristics and attainment outcomes at the University of Cambridge, Academic and Financial Planning and Analysis (2020), 8-11. This shows that the state education effect is as significant as that of cognitive and learning disabilities.

Ironically, in 2021 the FT ran an article to the effect that what the universities have done is justified: " 'We want to select the academically most able — the really strong candidates versus those that are average but have been well-prepared,' says Samina Khan, Oxford’s director of undergraduate admissions."

This is where ideology leads.

@Marchesman interesting but not sure I understand your point here - are you saying that the fact people who have paid for a superior education reap the benefits of that at university level proves that they are also, coincidentally, more intelligent than their state-educated counterparts?

I don’t think anyone denies that private education gives kids an advantage. My point is that that advantage is not reflective of natural ability but rather the parents’ ability to pay.

Oxbridge entry is a lottery and I don’t know why people are so obsessed with it. I guess it must be galling to realise you can’t buy absolutely everything you want.

My point is that ideologues are impervious to reasoning and they have no interest in the consequences of their beliefs.

The consequences of biasing university entry in favour of state schools were logically inevitable. The consequences of Labour's plan for Independent schools will not be known for a few years, if they go ahead with it, but they are no less predictable.

Privately educated students at Cambridge are 30% more likely to be awarded 1sts than students from comprehensive schools - admission is not a lottery, it is a game that is rigged to achieve the house's desired outcome, again with no thought for the consequences.

You may like to think that private education gives children an academic attainment advantage and that everyone agrees with you. However, it is broadly accepted that exam differences between school types are primarily due to the heritable characteristics involved in pupil admission.

What Left-leaning ideaologues think and what is in fact true are typically different things, but for them this is not a problem.

@Marchesman just because I don’t agree with you does not mean I am “impervious to reasoning” … how arrogant 🤣

no thought for the consequences - I’m sure Oxford and Cambridge will be able to cope with the loss of those great minds. And you can rest assured that the kids who end up going to Durham or Bristol instead will still end up with a great education and no doubt succeed due to all those “heritable characteristics”.

Best of luck to you and your DC @Marchesman.

It is nonsense to say that students flooding out of private schools ( I’ll believe it when I see it) will affect state school budgets. Schools are funded per child - more pupils mean more money. End of.

There was a case recently in the press of an outstanding state comprehensive in the leafy suburbs that wanted a bulge class for the third year - initially rejected, after parental pressure it was allowed. Good schools have capacity to grow If ( and it’s a big if) they are needed and there’s no reason to believe other pupils will be ‘pushed out’.

As for all of these private school teachers who will be out if work, don’t worry there’s a massive shortage of teachers - they can easily find work. What’s that you say? They may not want to work in the state sector because it’s too hard? Well then maybe they’re not as good as you think they are.

Many pages ago someone said, to sum up, ‘you just don’t want to pay the extra money’. However many pages on, that is it in a nutshell.

Many jobs in the private sector don’t even exist in the state sector (very few Latin, Greek, German etc teachers in the state sector for example).

There are lots of arguments that go around in circles. Everything you've written has been dealt with, again and again, and every time there's no answer except "well you're biased and stuck-up".

But you've definitely raised a new idea here, that when private school pupils demand state school places, the money appears by magick. Where it actually comes from is either the DoE budget (and something else has to give) or from the Treasury. If it comes from the Treasury, it reduces the fiscal argument (which is, according to Labour, the only argument) for the policy.

Teacher vacancies. Done it to death so many times. I'm afraid you're wrong, it's all in the Adam Smith paper. 2.5k vacancies today vs 5-25k teachers redundant due to the education tax. Some might work in the state sector and most won't match for location, subject, motivation, qualification and capability.

Would you like to point out where I said ‘you’re biased and stuck up’?

Again, your hyperbole and aggression are really disconcerting and off putting.

I don't think you have. Others have. Sorry for being unclear on that.

But everything in your post has been dealt with again and again. I suppose it's a feature of message boards, more people write than read.

Of course they'll fund it using Labours Magic Money Tree

Please sign this petition if you haven’t already done so and make sure you add a comment! Every comment and vote counts. We will certainly be leaving the private sector and going to state if the change happens as we can’t afford the raise especially in light of increased interest rates. We aren’t wealthy and work super hard to pay.

https://www.change.org/p/stop-labour-from-adding-20-vat-to-private-school-fees-and-forcing-kids-to-change-schools

Many thanks - Signed!

This misinformed policy will certainly end up costing the UK more than it will save (reminded of the much touted 'Brexit savings').

My two kids are at private school, but in the face of likely tax, we have already made pre-emptive applications for 2 places at an exceptional state school for start Sept 2024. This will of course end up displacing other kids who could have benefited from this school at some point -- and it will cost the Government much more than they recoup - I will stop paying school fees, won't contribute tax to their new private school fees tax scheme because I won't be paying it, and it will cost the Govt extra for now needing to accomodate two extra kids in the state system

Great!

This misinformed policy will certainly end up costing the UK more than it will save (reminded of the much touted 'Brexit savings').

My two kids are at private school, but in the face of likely tax, we have already made applications for places at an exceptional state school to start Sept 2024. This will end up displacing other kids who could have benefited from this excellent school at some point -- and it will cost the Government much more than they recoup - I will stop paying school fees, and therefore won't contribute tax to their new private school fees tax scheme because I won't be paying it, and it will cost the Govt extra for now needing to accomodate two extra kids in the state system!!

Home goal!

@Busydadof2 let's hope you meet the admissions criteria- are there places available?

@Busydadof2 It's quite unusual for an exceptional school to have spare places in years 8-11. Good luck, though.

Well, we'll be on a wait list, and are in no hurry to make the switch.. So we'll take a place if it is offered, and keep applying

Labour will put vat on private schools as they can afford it, ie all MPs many have second jobs some have three jobs

Therefore, get paid well above average salaries, just look up the figures inc perks and some have 2nd jobs and some have a third job - therefore they can afford the VAT

However, many parents that send kids to private schools are ordinary people of avg wages and doing overtime, not going on hols, buying a new car in order to get the best education for their kids/ - they will be the ones that wont be able to afford it

Thank you Labour

Absolutely. They are desperate to maintain the stereotype that all independent school families are gazillionaires. Truth is the vast majority are top-third earners, but not top 1pc, and if paying for independent school are living pretty unglamorous lifestyles.

In contrast to high-earning state school parents like Starmer and Phillipson, who really do have disposable income to stash in spare houses or take endless skiing holidays.