Election - how soon for VAT on school fees?

[Labtastic]

So I see we're likely to have an election in early July. Obviously that spells the end of the godawful tories which is great, but also hastens the incoming VAT on school fees which, for us, is bad. We are one of those families that no one believes exists who stretch ourselves with school fees, and are going to be very pushed for an extra 20%.

Question is - do we think Labour can make this happen in time for September? It'll be our DC's last year of fee paid education and was hoping the timeline for VAT coming in would be stretched out a bit...

Everyone has a tipping point. 2 years ago they might have been able to afford £30k. They might not be able to afford £42k with the VAT. £12k a year extra is quite a lot for some families!

Because quite simply that is our tipping point. You can't keep squeezing and squeezing, eventually there becomes a point beyond which you simply can't make the finances work. The 20% is that tipping point for us.

I assume you think the same when nurseries put their fees up 10% and parents complain? ‘If they can find £1500 per month for childcare, why is an additional £150 a problem? I don’t understand why they can’t just suck it up?’

@Wewelcomeyourfeedback the point being made about independent SEN provision is that it is paid for by Local Authorities who don’t have enough state provision. So it is not Mummy and Daddy who would need to “strive a bit more” it is the tax payer.

Or mortgages. Well if you could afford £750 a month, you can afford £1100 per month. I’m not sure what’s difficult to understand that everyone has a tipping point where something becomes unaffordable.

Each pupil costs the state on average 8K per year. There are over 500,000 DC at private schools. If 5% leave that means that 25000 will need state education at a cost of £200 million.

Did you not read the below?

“An analysis published this week by the Education Policy Institute (Cruikshanks, 2024) shows that the total number of pupils in state-funded primary and secondary schools are projected to fall from a peak of 7.57 million in 2022/23 to 7.14 million in 2028/29 – a fall of 436,000.”

”It estimates that this will result in school funding in England falling from £42.7bn in 2024/25 to £41.6bn in 2029/30.”

Is 5% the forecast of who will leave? That’s really not very high is it?

‘I’m not bitter or upset my child is in a state school at all.’

Ditto. We chose not to, despite being able to afford it - even with VAT changes.
This belief that private parents have that anyone who could afford to would OF course send their kids to these privileged institutions is baffling to me. State schools are so much better, richer, more interesting in SO many ways.

This will further entrench inequality and the class system. The wealthy landed gentry wont blink at it. The children that will have their education disrupted are the ones who parents are on the knife edge of being able to afford the fees, probably already heavily subsidised by scholarships. Or middle class SEN parents who are desperate and willing to make big sacrifices so their child stands a chance. It is the politics of envy and its utterly pathetic when there are so many real changes that could be made to reduce inequality. Living wages for a start, that the tax payer subsidises fulltime working people with tax credits/UC is disgraceful. Living standards in this country have plummeted in the last 20 years.

The EU thought it unreasonable enough for them to make it illegal to charge VAT on private schools.

No other country in the world levies tax on education. How come if in your opinion it’s such an obvious move?

And how much did you pay for your house in the catchment of your richer, better and more interesting state school? Because in my experience the people who can afford to privately educate, but choose state, don't choose sink schools that are failing. And top state schools fuel little property booms all around them. But no one has a go at the people in their million pound houses that surround them while bleating on about how the state system is so "rich and interesting"

Or mortgages. Well if you could afford £750 a month, you can afford £1100 per month. I’m not sure what’s difficult to understand that everyone has a tipping point where something becomes unaffordable.

Mortgages & private school are not the same though? I can completely understand why someone may have absolutely stretched themselves to get a mortgage, took an income hit & then struggled with rate rises. I don’t think that example is the same as someone who has 35k spare for school fees but 7k sends them over the age. The vast majority of people who have a spare 35k for fees will have housing equity, other investments, family wealth etc.

This argument of "well soon you wont be able to afford it and you'll be just like me" seems to suggest that they're OK with the super rich having it but just not anyone aspirational. All it does it create an even bigger divide between rich and poor. But so long as it's not politics of envy.

They may well be "overrun" in some areas. It's most likely to occur in cities with higher population densities, where there really isn't an oversupply of places. Whilst being imperceptible in lower density/small town/rural areas.

And how much did you pay for your house in the catchment of your richer, better and more interesting state school? Because in my experience the people who can afford to privately educate, but choose state, don't choose sink schools that are failing. And top state schools fuel little property booms all around them. But no one has a go at the people in their million pound houses that surround them while bleating on about how the state system is so "rich and interesting"

I paid a lot although it’s the part of London I was born & raised in so would have lived here anyway. I don’t know many people who live in a cheap area but pay for private though tbf. Why would anyone deliberately chose a sink school though?

It's most likely to occur in cities with higher population densities, where there really isn't an oversupply of places. Whilst being imperceptible in lower density/small town/rural areas.

its defo a thing in London, don’t know re other cities. I’m sure the top 50 best state schools will be as popular as ever though.

Sorry, I’m in an ordinary street in an ordinary city with a mix of private and social housing and all of the secondaries are rated ‘good’. Not an outstanding amongst them.
And we moved here early in our careers when our salaries were average and not top % that they are now.
Try to understand - there are many ordinary people in the world, who hold values that aren’t changed by a change in fortune or income.

I’m a massive net contributor. My household pays way over 100k income tax every year.

To suggest I don’t pay my way is beyond ridiculous.

Same here. It annoys me that you have to be jealous if you dare not be outraged by a mooted policy of a party that has not even been elected yet. The detail of the policy is not yet known. Thank goodness Sunak has now announced an election date and all the super-speculation can end soon. There are so many of these repetitive threads on VAT on school fees. On the scale of issues the country faces, no one is really that bothered about this single policy that may or may not happen- except for the minority of the minority who are directly impacted of course.

That’s the point. No one chooses sink schools, the children who end up there do so out of necessity, because their parents can’t afford to live closer to the good schools! Equality at its finest.

This argument of "well soon you wont be able to afford it and you'll be just like me" seems to suggest that they're OK with the super rich having it but just not anyone aspirational. All it does it create an even bigger divide between rich and poor. But so long as it's not politics of envy.

But the responses to that argument seem to be “well it was ok when I was on that side but now I’m not you should be angry at the super rich & feel sorry for me”.

No one chooses sink schools, the children who end up there do so out of necessity, because their parents can’t afford to live closer to the good schools! Equality at its finest.

Who has argued all state schools are equal? I haven’t. It’s a bit odd that so many private school parents are now worried about dc in sink schools!

My kids are NOT in a ‘top’ state school. They’re in a completely run of the mill school, where they will flourish hopefully in what they enjoy, will be challenged because of the genuine competition provided with the diversity of that school and will leave it able to make their way in the real world.
This obsession private parents have with ‘top’ - what does that even mean? Why can’t your kid go to school with ordinary children from a mix of backgrounds- you can still use your money for extra curriculars, tutors, fancy holiday experiences if you want. It’s not all or nothing.

i don’t think it will be this September. The sector are planning for it. Some schools will absorb. Others have been absorbing rising costs for too
long and won’t. Also talk about imposing VAT on boarding fees, so that’s an additional worry for schools with a significant boarding population. Schools will close, children will move into the state sector if cheaper independents don’t exist and people will lose their jobs (at our school there are 2 members of staff to every 3 students).

There’s so much hyperbole on these threads. I really can’t see many dc leaving the private sector as a result & expecting the majority of the population to be passionate and against the change is unrealistic.

Nobody is asking anyone to feel sorry for them- just pointing out that everyone seems happy to create a bigger class divide!

In reality what will we do - buy another home right next to the outstanding state school and reduce my hours so I'm not paying 45% tax, move abroad - not sure, but realistically it won't actually benefit anyone.