Private school : VAT : labour

[Usernamerequired123]

I have recently come across this petition. Not sure if many of you have seen this.

https://www.change.org/p/stop-labour-from-adding-20-vat-to-private-school-fees-and-forcing-kids-to-change-schools?recruiter=false&utmsource=shareepetition&utmcampaign=psffcomboshareeinitial&utmmedium=whatsapp&utmmcontent=washarecopy376858822en-GB%3Acv451328&recruiteddbyid=44b8f4b0-d22c-11ee-82d6-61cc5900aa84&shareebanditexp=initial-37685882-en-GB

@JessS1990 from the parents that I know with children at private school.

A good number have said that they won't be able to afford the fees if the 20% extra is added on.

Purely from people that we know but I would imagine that they won't be the only ones.

Because many posters who support the policy aren't even aware that Labour scrapped the charitable status policy and they frequently get the 2 things confused. Therefore it is a natural assumption that the majority haven't delved into the figures or read the reports that counteract the IFS one and therefore haven't looked beyond the headlines.

Because many posters who support the policy aren't even aware that Labour scrapped the charitable status policy and they frequently get the 2 things confused. Therefore it is a natural assumption that the majority haven't delved into the figures or read the reports that counteract the IFS one and therefore haven't looked beyond the headlines.
The general feeling is "it won't hurt me because I'm not part of the wealthy elite" without the understanding that this policy won't impact the wealthy elite at all but it will hit middle income/middle class parents.

Ah so you're talking about a few people who've posted on this thread. It certainly doesn't mean the majority of people who support this policy (which by all accounts is the majority of the population) don't understand it.

It feels a bit of a cheap shot to just tell posters who disagree with you that they don't understand the issue. Many of us think VAT should be charged, it doesn't mean we're not capable of considering all aspects of the topic

Since when was understanding a policy a requirement to have an opinion on it?
See for example Brexit, even those who campaigned for it seemed surprised to learn about NI.
See for example Rishi Sunak (who I note has been a migrant) and immigration. One week he is saying stop the boats, the next he wants to increase migration by increasing climate change, little realising that he voted for much increased migration to the UK in 2019 when the visa rules were changed.

It is especially odd when posters who say VAT shouldn't be charged don't seem to think they are paying for an advantage and don't realise that school rolls are set to fall by more than the private school population anyway.

You only have to read any of the threads on here about this subject to see that lots of supporters don’t understand the basics; the difference between input and output VAT, and the irrelevance of charitable status being 2 examples.

Given that even the Labour Party themselves didn’t understand or consider all aspects of their previous policies on private schools (abolishing them and removing chairitable status), I think it’s fair to assume that they haven’t considered all aspects of this latest policy, and nor have the majority of the supporters of it.

Its kind of reminiscent of knowing what Sadiq Khan thinks whilst simaltaneously saying no one has asked him.

They’ve made their own announcements so we know what they think. They voted to abolish private schools at their party conference. They clearly didn’t look at the detail and realise this was nigh on impossible. Then they said that they would remove charitable status in order to change the tax position (ie VAT). They didn’t look at the detail before announcing the policies. The current policy is no different. Even the IFS haven’t considered the full picture

I think many people are missing the point- most people really don't care about potential economics. This is an ethical issue and the money to cover any additional costs from kids entering the state system etc will just have to be found.

I think many people are missing the point- most people really don't care about potential economics.

This is precisely why this policy has nothing to do with improving state schools, and everything to do with harming private schools, in a quest to bring everyone down to the same low level in the pursuit of “fairness”.

any additional costs from kids entering the state system etc will just have to be found.

Ah yes, the famous magic money tree……

That's not the basis on which Labour are campaigning. The stated goal is to raise £1.7bn. The assumption is no children will move across, "the rich will pay even more, they always do". Starmer says "I want private schools to thrive". Reeves says "all my policies are fully funded".

Perhaps you're right, and they should campaign on the basis of harming private schools, hang the economics, and the "additional cost will just have to be found". That is, at least, the reality as many of you on here seem to agree.

It isn't about deliberately harming private schools- they can do whatever they like! just don't expect the public purse to support it!!!

And yes- the magic money tree that always finds money for wars, and MP's pay rises!

As I said, the vast majority really don't care if fewer kids get to go to private school.

The majority will be happy to have the 1.7 billion. Anything that happens as a result is just speculation- no one actually knows. Having direct experience with private schools the parents will find the money as the the thought of sending kids to state schools is too horrific a thought. It will be grand 😜

Here we are again. On one hand "stop assuming people who support this policy don't understand it". And here "the public purse supports private schools".

The public purse supports....the schools funded by the public purse. The public purse does not support....the schools funded privately, by people like you before you stopped being a private school parent and started getting free taxpayer-funded grammar school and arguing for improvements to free taxpayer-funded education to be paid for by other people.

But the public purse is supporting them by not receiving the full amount of VAT due!!! allowing the schools to make more money. It is money that should be going to public services not to the reserves of these instititions!

The public purse doesn't support private schools though.
Just be careful what you wish for because once you open the doors to taxing education it is a slippery slope.

VAT isn't due because the EU don't allow education to be taxed and only Brexit has allowed that to happen.

It isn't taxing education- it is charging VAT to private business which are a luxury service for a privileged few.

You mean reserves that provide bursaries and scholarships? Out reach programmes and free activity weeks for local children?

This is a loop hole that should rightly be closed.

If the money was being spent it wouldn't be sitting in reserves it would be restricted income. Go and have a read of the audited accounts of local private schools.

I have, none of them are sitting on large reserves. We are NE England so the private schools serve local communities and aren't full of oligarchs etc.
We don't have grammar schools as alternatives to comprehensives.
I find it incredibly hypocritical that your DC have benefitted from amazing state education plus private and yet you now want to draw the bridge up behind you. You wanted the best for your DC and yet you are happy to now support a policy which prevents other parents from having the same aspirations and opportunities as your DC had.