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

@ageratum1

"Connections open many doors that otherwise would be closed to you"

40 years ago maybe but not now - go for a job interview and nobody gives a shit what school you went to, in fact if you were privately educated then it would more likely work against you.

More connections would be provided by parents, social circle and wider family than the fact that you went to a particular private school. For example if you come from a family of doctors you would probably have a better chance of medical work experience, understanding of medicine etc and therefore a better chance of becoming a doctor. The same would apply if you came from a family of builders and so on.

Despite what you may believe the days of the old boy / girl school tie network are long gone for many years now.

Connections happen in all walks of life, state schools included. Taxing private education isn’t going to make that disappear. The whole “private schools open up a network of connections” thing is hugely exaggerated.

Obviously those children are in immediate need of help but how is sending loads of kids from private school into state school (lots of people then won't be able to afford the fees) going to help anyone in the long run.

We are constantly hearing how stretched the state system is at the moment, where are these children going to go? It's going to be at the detriment of all children as far as I can see.

The government estimate there will be 800,000 fewer school age children in 8 years time.

@JessS1990 I'm actually really surprised that someone would say that.

For us personally we chose to send our son to private school as he has SEN and would struggle hugely in a school with large class sizes. That's the only reason. I have no aspirations of him getting top grades (if he does excellent, if not that's fine too). I want him to get through school with his mental health intact. Even in a small class he sometimes doesn't cope so it's actually not a given that he will make it through school but we wanted to give him the best option that we knew of.

@JessS1990 I hadn't heard that so will look it up thank you.

But still, if a load of kids from a private school left tomorrow what would happen?

It is estimated that there are 600 more reception places in Hackney alone than are required in September...

@JessS1990 That's great but that's certainly not the case everywhere.

I would have absolutely no problem with a ‘sin’ tax- but why not have both! The more money the better to help those at at the bottom!

It is the case also in NI- the birth rate is dropping and there is an over supply of nursery places, loads going to two year olds.

If only there was some way of predicting how many school places would be needed in advance. Some kind of record of how many children there are or something.

@JessS1990 well obviously. But where are all the teachers going to be employed from? There are teachers leaving the profession in their droves.

The fact is that if a load of private school kids suddenly had to leave then the state school system which is already struggling would be put under huge pressure.

It wouldn't really be of much initial help that the birth rate is slowly decreasing, where would the secondary age kids go?

Personally I'd favour abolishing private schools altogether, for the reasons @carmel1974 mentions, but charging VAT is start.

I read an interesting article recently about the damaging social effects of private schools, especially private boarding schools, in Britain:

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/education/2024/03/the-price-of-private-education-charles-spencer

In the interests of factual accuracy I would like to point out that there are fewer students in private schools in the UK, than the amount by which school rolls are expected to fall in the next 8 years.
Since state schools are funded on a per pupil basis, falling rolls present considerable challenges, as costs are fairly fixed for any given school. I think therefore it may be possible to put forward an argument that students from private schools moving to state schools, would reduce some of those challenges?

Might be an idea to address the reasons why so many teachers are leaving the profession.

@JessS1990 Again, that's fine, but I'm saying what would happen if a great majority had to leave tomorrow?

I know why teacher are leaving in their droves. I have a few teachers as friends. The situation is dreadful.

For what it's worth I'm not sure that we are even needing to be disagreeing. I don't actually have any huge objection to the increase in prices.

I also think that the education system should be such that both state and private sectors have the same facilities and opportunities, therefore removing the demand for private education but I unfortunately can't see that happening any time soon.

I'm simply saying that I'm not sure that an already overstretched state system could easily cope with a sudden influx of private school kids which is what will happen if this goes ahead.

And as has already been mentioned there will always be inequality in education due to parental education, parental input, and yes, finances to buy books, educational days out etc, etc, etc.

None of it fair on the children who don't have any of this but I wouldn't know where to start to help with that.

Kind of...but actually, we should just raise whatever is the best tax, and all taxes have tradeoffs.

Probably better to do sin tax twice than to tax education for all the reasons the ASI outlines.

That MAY be true in aggregate. Nobody (and I mean nobody) has any idea how it maps out at local level. Borough councils and local authorities haven't so much as opened the book on spare capacity and whether/how it maps to private school demand migration and, of course, they can't, because they (like you, me, the IFS and Labour) have no idea which parents will pull out, and from which schools.

It's definitely true that many of the Marxists in state education are itching for this policy to be an excuse to turn the knife on private schools (which face the same market size concerns) so that private schools close in the interests of propping up the fixed costs of state schools. You actually do have to be a Marxist to think that's a good argument. As a more balanced economist, I'd say both state and private sector should adapt to waxing and waning demand, and it's not the job of one to be sacrificed for the other.

A more enlightened view might be: it's an opportunity to reduce class sizes and the significant overhead that's been run-up in the DoE coping with the pupil bulge of recent years. £18.1bn according to Oxford Economics, that's right, more than 10x the VAT even Labour allege they will reap from this dimwitted tax on education.

@carmel1974

"It's not about anger or envy, it's about wanting progress, working towards reducing the massive inequalities in society. I believe in a meritocracy, not a society run by people who aren't necessarily particularly bright or skilled or honest but who went to private school"

I also fully believe in meritocracy and a far more effective means of achieving this would be to tax all inheritance with no threshold but this would be massively unpopular with voters especially older voters that are more likely to vote.

I also agree that you find in society people in positions of power or doing well that are not bright or skilled but this is due to a number of reasons - family connections, promoted to levels of incompetence etc - I mean just look at the Beckham or Ramsey children. It is not because of a private education.

As for politics yes it does attract a higher proportion of people from well off backgrounds (who in turn are more likely to be private educated) because quite frankly they can afford to become politicians. Meanwhile capable people from poorer backgrounds tend to focus on real jobs that increase their wealth so that they are no longer poor.

I mean if you came from a poor background and had the drive and ability why would you want to get involved in politics when you could make a lot more money in the private sector or your own business.

"As for politics yes it does attract a higher proportion of people from well off backgrounds (who in turn are more likely to be private educated) because quite frankly they can afford to become politicians. Meanwhile capable people from poorer backgrounds tend to focus on real jobs that increase their wealth so that they are no longer poor."

Great point, in agreement with what Birbalsingh says here about social mobility. Success not all about getting to top, says social mobility chief Birbalsingh - BBC News

Apols of I’ve missed it but presumably this will also affect all private education - so after school tutoring, music lessons, swimming classes etc??

It will surely hit the middle classes hard, and affect many more people than supporters think?

I wish I could remember where I read it but I did read something last year about this policy unfairly targeting ethic minorities - who apparently make up the bulk of private school & tutoring customers.

There is no reason to suppose there would be an influx of students from private schools to state schools in the next few years. The cost of going to private school has gone up rapidly in the past 5 years, and at the same times their rolls have increased.

Why should the next few years be any different?

Why this assumption that everyone who supports the policy doesn't understand it and where VAT will be added? It's quite bizarre!

We know the number of students currently in private schools, around 600,000.
We know the government's projection is that there will be 800,000 fewer school age children in the UK in 8 years time.
So there is no MAY about it.

Local authorities no longer have much ability to plan the number of school places to meet the demands in their areas due to the ideological drive to academies free of local authority control.

As far as I know, there are no proposals to change state school funding away from a per pupil model, which would be the only way to ensure class sizes reduced.

Additonally any government could at a stroke increase the effective funding to state schools by reversing the employer pension contributions that were increased this month, and massively increased in 2019. Since those contributions go into the same pot as general taxation it is a mystery to me why no one is asking why the Conservatives have repeatedly chosen to tax state schools more.

@MisterChips

That's a really good article but Birbalsiingh, sadly I fear that the hard left would criticise it as encouraging children from poor backgrounds just to set their ambitions lower.

Also one of the best ways to improve social mobility is to tax all inheritance but that would never receive public support especially amongst the older voters.

It depends on what they choose to exempt but yes in theory it will be applicable to private tutors, music lessons, sports clubs etc if those clubs are VATable. If Labour exempt these areas then private schools could change their pricing strategy to also exempt these elements. The tutoring is an interesting one because in theory it could bring online schooling for Home Ed pupils into the equation too. It will obviously also impact many DC trying to get into grammar schools through private tutoring.
This is why it is more complex than it first appears, and definitely more complex than the strapline of taxing the rich minority!