Page 11 | Tax on school fees

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

PrimativoZinfandel · 30/12/2024 19:03

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

I'll take that as a no. Is that really the best you can come back with? How eloquent!

Barbadossunset · 30/12/2024 19:09

@PrimativoZinfandel
In my DC's cohorts there were many DC who found super selective 11+ admission untutored a breeze.

Were these children prepared for the 11+ by their primary school?

SavingTheBestTillLast · 30/12/2024 19:17

TheWrongBus · 30/12/2024 17:40

“They also use free of charge flats from their millionaire mates to ensure their kids have peace and quiet during GCSEs. Yet they are simultaneously very happy to force other people's kids out of schools in GCSE and A Level years with either no state option to go to, or ones that don't offer the same subjects/syllabus.
Fucking hypocrisy doesn't come near!”

@twistyizzy , in fact Starmer continued to use of his millionaire mate’s flat for 3 weeks after his son’s exams finished!

So he’s a liar as well as a fucking hypocrite, quite happily chucking other kids doing GCSEs under the bus. Absolutely no reason why the implementation of policy could not have been staggered exempting those already embarked on GCSE and A Level courses.

I couldn’t stand the Tories but at least we were under no illusions about them, unlike Sanctimonious Keir and chums…

Well said 👏👏

SavingTheBestTillLast · 30/12/2024 19:20

Barbadossunset · 30/12/2024 19:09

@PrimativoZinfandel
In my DC's cohorts there were many DC who found super selective 11+ admission untutored a breeze.

Were these children prepared for the 11+ by their primary school?

That must have been a really easy and very unusual 11plus then.
Its not possible to master how to do verbal and non verbal reasoning whilst your faced with it for the first time in the exam.

Think you’ll find your dcs cohorts parents were lying Prima . Seen that before

Araminta1003 · 30/12/2024 19:22

My DC also passed 11 plus London grammars with no tutoring, just a few past papers at home. But they were always big readers, loved word searches/cross words and sudoko, monopoly, scrabble, boggle etc. These things seemed to have helped more than any tutoring as there were plenty of DCs in their schools who had years of tutoring and did not pass.

So what exactly is the definition of tutoring? If you grow up in a house with a thesaurus and a library, is that tantamount to tutoring, in essence?

twistyizzy · 30/12/2024 19:24

Araminta1003 · 30/12/2024 19:22

My DC also passed 11 plus London grammars with no tutoring, just a few past papers at home. But they were always big readers, loved word searches/cross words and sudoko, monopoly, scrabble, boggle etc. These things seemed to have helped more than any tutoring as there were plenty of DCs in their schools who had years of tutoring and did not pass.

So what exactly is the definition of tutoring? If you grow up in a house with a thesaurus and a library, is that tantamount to tutoring, in essence?

Under Labour's definition probably and therefore you should be taxed for giving your children an advantage and privilege for having engaged parents

SavingTheBestTillLast · 30/12/2024 19:33

twistyizzy · 30/12/2024 17:58

Seeing as you support the policy please can you explain the following:

Beluga Caviar @ £20k per kg - No VAT
• Fendi Jnr Puffer Jacket @ £1.5k - No VAT
• Placing thousands of pounds worth of bets - No VAT

But...

• Children's education and specialist SEN provision - 20% VAT

Show quote history

😆
what a fantastic comparison twisty !
👏👏

PrimativoZinfandel · 30/12/2024 20:02

Araminta1003 · 30/12/2024 19:22

My DC also passed 11 plus London grammars with no tutoring, just a few past papers at home. But they were always big readers, loved word searches/cross words and sudoko, monopoly, scrabble, boggle etc. These things seemed to have helped more than any tutoring as there were plenty of DCs in their schools who had years of tutoring and did not pass.

So what exactly is the definition of tutoring? If you grow up in a house with a thesaurus and a library, is that tantamount to tutoring, in essence?

I think the reference is to paid tutoring. My DC were all like yours and passed super selective 11+ without any paid tutoring. We are both Oxbridge grads and lots of books, travel, theatre and museum trips etc so not saying it came from nowhere but it certainly wasn’t from tutoring. Some parents were hell bent on these schools and tutored in vain. It was probably a blessing the DC didn’t get in as they would have struggled to keep pace without more tutoring.

Skipthisbit · 31/12/2024 09:03

PrimativoZinfandel · 30/12/2024 18:58

You are missing the point. You are suggesting that only a minority are untutored with the use of the word 'often'. You don't know this. In my DC's cohorts there were many DC who found super selective 11+ admission untutored a breeze. Have you had any direct experience of these schools and cohorts?

Show quote history

I do. And your statement is nonsense. The super selective in my county does a year 7 survey every year - one with the parents and one with the pupils. The parent survey generally comes out with around 60% of pupils tutored and around half of these for more than a year. The pupil survey (asks the same questions) is over 90% of pupils tutored with over 70% for more than a year so please don’t believe the “we don’t tutor” line from parents because it’s nonsense. Your DS friends were most likely tutored - they just are telling you that.
There are over 250 grammar tutors that come up if you google “grammar test and my county name”

The school above shares its data with other grammar schools who bother to collect and it’s about the same everywhere.

nervouslandlord · 31/12/2024 09:15

Nearly twenty years ago we were in SW London, and doing the school rounds. Open evening at Tiffin, and every single boy we asked admitted to having been tutored. Most often since the start of Y4. We asked because parents simply aren't honest about this and we wanted to know what we might be getting into.
And that was close onto decades ago. We also knew super bright kids who weren't tutored and weren't successful - tho went on to ace their A levels and get great degrees.
So in hindsight I think we were right to run away from that atmosphere.

And all was well

nervouslandlord · 31/12/2024 09:17

We knew from play dates too that there was a lot of 'tutor guarding' that went on. Children would tell ours that they couldn't come to play because they had tutoring. If you then asked the parent to share the tutor's details you'd be met with a plethora of excuses. Competition was a dangerous thing.

All very amusing when you look back at it.

PrimativoZinfandel · 31/12/2024 10:47

Skipthisbit · 31/12/2024 09:03

I do. And your statement is nonsense. The super selective in my county does a year 7 survey every year - one with the parents and one with the pupils. The parent survey generally comes out with around 60% of pupils tutored and around half of these for more than a year. The pupil survey (asks the same questions) is over 90% of pupils tutored with over 70% for more than a year so please don’t believe the “we don’t tutor” line from parents because it’s nonsense. Your DS friends were most likely tutored - they just are telling you that.
There are over 250 grammar tutors that come up if you google “grammar test and my county name”

The school above shares its data with other grammar schools who bother to collect and it’s about the same everywhere.

Show quote history

My statement reflects my direct experience. Yours seems to be very indirectly based on one school in one county. I would say yours in nonsense. But please do share the 'surveys'. I would be very interested to see them in black and white. Do the private schools do the same surveys? I would be even more interested in seeing those.

PrimativoZinfandel · 31/12/2024 10:52

nervouslandlord · 31/12/2024 09:17

We knew from play dates too that there was a lot of 'tutor guarding' that went on. Children would tell ours that they couldn't come to play because they had tutoring. If you then asked the parent to share the tutor's details you'd be met with a plethora of excuses. Competition was a dangerous thing.

All very amusing when you look back at it.

So you cross examined kids showing you round the school to find out if they were tutored and then ran away from all that because you didn't like it. You were also asking parents to share their tutor's details with you? Am I missing something? This seems a bit contradictory.

nervouslandlord · 31/12/2024 10:57

@PrimativoZinfandel I knew that would be levelled! It was an open evening. The y7 kids are there to answer questions. What on earth is wrong with a simple 'did you have any tutoring?' Or 'would you recommend taking the test without tutoring?' Other questions might have been 'how much are subjects set?'
What the heck is wrong with that?

nervouslandlord · 31/12/2024 10:58

And no we didn't cross examine on play dates. It came up when I or my children asked if X or Y could come to play. 'No I can't because Tuesday is tutoring' might have been the answer. In fact frequently was

Twitchy much @PrimativoZinfandel ?

PrimativoZinfandel · 31/12/2024 11:48

nervouslandlord · 31/12/2024 10:58

And no we didn't cross examine on play dates. It came up when I or my children asked if X or Y could come to play. 'No I can't because Tuesday is tutoring' might have been the answer. In fact frequently was

Twitchy much @PrimativoZinfandel ?

I was referencing the open evening quizzing of asking DC whether they had been tutored. My DC were asked the same questions and also their scores. Several parent pretty much inferred that they were lying when they told the truth. Maybe as a parent you can understand why that makes me a little twitchy.

You still haven't responded on your two statements that you ran away from it all as you didn't like all the supposed tutoring but you were also asking parents for tutor details. Surely the two are mutually exclusive?

nervouslandlord · 31/12/2024 12:16

@PrimativoZinfandel sure. If you find it that interesting!

One question at open days/evenings - were you tutored/ would you recommend tutoring?
To be honest I knew so little about the process that it wouldn't have occurred to ask for scores and so didn't. We'd been living and working overseas so we're clueless.

Also, we went through the open day process with several schools and in the end opted for a quiet life. Our work allowed us to be early remote workers so we ran away to our roots in Cornwall. Kids went to the same comp we'd gone to. And that's that.
Both things can be true.

Fortunately our children were very able, and we ourselves had good careers and educations (despite our own comp educations) so there was no harm done.

See? Not that interesting. And it was a long time ago. I just feel parents aren't honest about tutoring - or at least weren't back in the day. Kids are terribly honest though, and the fact of tutoring seems to leak out between friends.

Original poster

CheekyUser · 01/01/2025 11:00

DuckDuckG00se · 30/12/2024 01:04

If parents have been able to afford private schools for their children prior to this then they can afford additional tuition & extra curricular activities when moving their children to state school.

Plenty of children move schools at inopportune times, even mid-term, and turn out fine.

As with any paid service, one should always be prepared for price increases. Capitalism does love them. If parents can only just afford the fees of independent schools without rises, then they take the risk that they will have to withdraw their children should the fees go up more than they can afford.

When balancing this against the injustice of tax breaks for fee-paying schools, I really don't see the problem. As with all fiscal decisions there will be some people who fall through the gaps, it's unfortunate but that's they way it is. Sounds brutal? I wonder how many parents of privately educated children protested all the many policies of governments over the last 15 years which have at best disadvantaged and at worst actively harmed, even killed, many others.

It's not that I don't care about your children, but I don't care as much as you do how this decision will affect them. They will not be plunged into a lifetime of hardship as a result of this. They have supportive families who are able to spend many thousands on securing for them advantages others don't have. It isn't class bitterness (I'm well educated, middle class, white) - your children will be OK.

I feel much for SEN children who attend fee paying schools because there is quite literally no other education for them, but this is a policy which is long overdue and needs to happen.

Independent schools are businesses. If they're liable to fold because of a removed tax break then they're not particularly well run businesses. If your child will not be able to access their services any longer, that's really not the fault of the government.

Show quote history

Why not end the tax break on University Education - please explain? You are mistaken if you think that all private schools are businesses. My brother and I attended a private boarding school after a very difficult family situation. We lived in a council house, my mother was on benefits. The school paid half our fees and a charity (Buttel) paid the other half. The school was full of kids ‘with a boarding need’. No one was wealthy. The school just about survives today. The point of this vindictive policy is not to raise money - it is the politics of envy and a misunderstanding of what most private schools do.

OP posts:

Original poster

CheekyUser · 01/01/2025 11:11

DuckDuckG00se · 30/12/2024 13:18

The amount of charity public schools supply barely qualifies them as charities. For the majority of their 'service users' there are hefty charges, of which you're all complaining, which is hardly charity.

It's a tax on fee-paying education. There is free education for all so your plea "but they're taxing education" doesn't hold water, I'm afraid.

As for the freemasons comment 🙄 Whoever said they should retain charitable status? If you're bringing the freemasons into it then you've already lost the argument.

Show quote history

Why not tax University Education? That’s fee paying.

OP posts:

Original poster

CheekyUser · 01/01/2025 11:39

DuckDuckG00se · 30/12/2024 15:03

Which is unfortunate but it's a risk you take if you pay for a service, any service, but notably public education at a time when the cost of everything is rising.

I still maintain it's unreasonable to hold the government up as some ogre for raising taxes which will (directly) affect those who are financially better off than most but it's fine if you disagree.

I don't believe those paying independent school fees are being treated harshly by the government, nor do I believe (in case it wasn't clear) that independent schools should hold charitable status. While Labour have decided not to remove it for the time being, one lives in hope.

You pay for a service. Those that provide that service are seeing a rise in costs and are passing that cost onto you. It wasn't unexpected, your children have already benefitted immensely and neither their world or yours is likely to collapse as a result.

You're, presumably, unlikely to end up on benefits, your children are likely to still do well educationally. You can no longer afford a privilege, that's all. There are much more important government decisions to worry about.

Show quote history

What about very wealthy people who send their kids to state schools? They won’t be paying any additional tax. Surely a more sensible approach would have been to increase taxes on the most wealthy - not simply on those who decide the prioritise their spending in education. I spoke to someone last night who owns three house (Surrey, Marbella and Chelsea). They drive a Range Rover. All his 4 kids are educated in the state sector and he pays no more tax! There is little logic to this policy.

OP posts:

Liddlemoreaction · 01/01/2025 15:18

CheekyUser · 20/12/2024 00:23

of course it won’t affect the really wealthy but we have three kids at private school and we are now going to withdraw them all. We will see them through the remainder of this school year and from September we have secured places at local state schools. When the alternative is free why would we carry on drawing down on our mortgage and sacrificing holidays and be taxed for doing so. Let the state pay.

Er, ok? Good for you? Not sure what you expect! What a waste of money, 3 kids in private.

Liddlemoreaction · 01/01/2025 15:19

CheekyUser · 01/01/2025 11:39

What about very wealthy people who send their kids to state schools? They won’t be paying any additional tax. Surely a more sensible approach would have been to increase taxes on the most wealthy - not simply on those who decide the prioritise their spending in education. I spoke to someone last night who owns three house (Surrey, Marbella and Chelsea). They drive a Range Rover. All his 4 kids are educated in the state sector and he pays no more tax! There is little logic to this policy.

Show quote history

And? Someone using normal education ( free to everyone, but yes funded by taxes) is hardly unusual? 94% of us send our children to state school.

PrimativoZinfandel · 01/01/2025 15:32

No they weren’t prepared for 11plus but their primary schools @Barbadossunset . State schools are not allowed to prepare for 11plus exams.

twistyizzy · 01/01/2025 16:27

Liddlemoreaction · 01/01/2025 15:19

And? Someone using normal education ( free to everyone, but yes funded by taxes) is hardly unusual? 94% of us send our children to state school.

Show quote history

So why aren't the 94% able to improve state schools. The majority go there so why do you think that 7% will magically transform them?
FYi the maths doesn't add up: to incentivise 6,500 new teachers, NEFR suggests it will cost £4.9 billion every year from 2026/27. VAT is only forecast to bring in 1.5 billion at the most, and more likeky 0.5 billion seeing more kids have already left indy schools in 1 yer. than originally forecast for the whole academic year.
Brilliant Labour economics as usual.

PrimativoZinfandel · 01/01/2025 16:51

twistyizzy · 01/01/2025 16:27

So why aren't the 94% able to improve state schools. The majority go there so why do you think that 7% will magically transform them?
FYi the maths doesn't add up: to incentivise 6,500 new teachers, NEFR suggests it will cost £4.9 billion every year from 2026/27. VAT is only forecast to bring in 1.5 billion at the most, and more likeky 0.5 billion seeing more kids have already left indy schools in 1 yer. than originally forecast for the whole academic year.
Brilliant Labour economics as usual.

Show quote history

😂Your maths: 94%+7% = 100%!!! and you are telling someone their maths doesn't add up.