Read this an tell me you still agree with VAT on school fees

[Sally20099]

DS is 3 years from finishing private school which includes 2 years in the sixth form. DD was due to start same senior school in Sept. Both went to private prep but due to talk of VAT on fees, and certainty of Labour govt for some time, we actually investigated sending DD to state secondary school. Only one in the entire city is rated outstanding but DD has got a place so we have decided to send her there. It’s very good academically but obviously hasn’t got the facilities of the private option. Currently school fees are £19,300 per year (before VAT) for DS so we have saved a reasonable sum by going to state school with DD. DS will finish at his school and we could afford DD fees (even with VAT) so we will instead put £12k a year extra in savings for DD and then spend the rest of the savings on an extra winter holiday. We would have never looked at state schools without the VAT policy and instead we have taken the place of someone at an outstanding rated school. Im not posting to annoy anyone, I wanted those who unequivocally support this to see some of the consequences. We also know a reasonable number of children in DS year who can’t afford fees with VAT and are taking their children out of private and going into state - and taking more places at the limited good schools. Its probably no surprise that most families in private schools happen to also live in good areas, meaning catchment areas tend to work out quite well when they go state.

I don’t really think trickle down economics works very well. Look at where we are with public services. I’m sure there are lots of factors but I just think public services are so much worse than they are, can’t help thinking lack of investment due to not wanting to raise taxes is a factor.

Which taxes could be increased that would be satisfactory to people, just curious?

I don't understand your bafflement.

I'm not saying that anyone is morally wrong to do what they believe is best for their children. I'm saying that I don't perceive any great moral difference between those that pay for private school fees and those that buy their way into hood catchments. Do you think that one group is morally superior to the other?

I don't blame any parent for wanting their kids to get a good education, but I do want the government to do much more to tackle the educational inequalities in our society and I want higher earners (including myself) to contribute more.

*I don't understand your bafflement.

I'm not saying that anyone is morally wrong to do what they believe is best for their children. I'm saying that I don't perceive any great moral difference between those that pay for private school fees and those that buy their way into hood catchments. Do you think that one group is morally superior to the other?*

@MrsBennetsPoorNerves

I think perhaps we are misunderstanding each other. I was the poster who said there was no real difference between these two approaches. I don't disagree with you.

I also want to see improvement in education across the board and will happily pay higher taxes for this.

I just think there's a lack of self awareness around this debate in general

But, like I said, you had a choice to spend £100k on a house or on private school, or to do neither of those things. Most people don’t have that option.

Yes, that's true but I don't understand what point you are making.

Probably like the vast majority of schools that were historically oversubscribed but now they're dropping under PAN due to a decrease in population/people moving home or into private, so are trying to fill the spaces for September to avoid a huge number of Fair Access Panel directions.

Fair enough, it sounds like we are mostly in agreement then.

I don't dispute that there may be a lack of self awareness around this issue. But I also don't think that whataboutery around inequalities within the state sector (which definitely need to be tackled) should be used as an argument not to tax private education. I want action on both fronts.

You presented it as being choice between ‘I HAD to buy a more expensive house OR spend the equivalent on private education’.

You didn’t have just those two options, you just didn’t want to do the alternative. Fair enough, you’ve demonstrated that you have options that many, many people do not.

I’m assuming it’s also in the catchment of an excellent secondary? Or are you going to give the government lots of lovely stamp duty when you move again?

Not sure that's true across the board. DS and DN same age within ten days. DS went to bog standard local state (not even outstanding) DN private school throughout. Mid thirties now. DN earns a little above minimum wage in admin, DS earns six figures. Tbf GCSEs and A levels aren't that difficult if you are pretty bright, certainly wouldn't have paid fees for that in any case. DS got better grades than DN and unconditional offers for uni despite the bog standard comp.

It’s potentially people like me! We bought the house YEARS before kids because we liked it and then once we had kids realised we had lucked out by being in the catchment of an outstanding primary and secondary.

Im guessing our complete lack of awareness at the time is what makes us morally correct 😂

@MrsBennetsPoorNerves

My main issue with this policy is that it will not affect those with the greatest privilege- they won't even notice it.

The people affected by this policy aren't what is at fault in our education system or the root cause of inequality.

I also genuinely believe that education, like healthcare, is a public good and shouldn't be taxed.

Well, we just took our combined NI rebate the last government gave us and put it straight on to a private healthcare policy because it’s all got so awful. I had to hold my nose so badly but needs must

I would l give that back to the government in a heartbeat if it meant the NHS was working again and it was being used to improve services for all and not just my immediate family. So a thumbs up from me for better funded public services!

Fair enough, I understand your perspective.

But even if the wealthiest don't notice it, they will still pay it and that will generate some revenue.

And while it's true that the people who will be most affected by this policy certainly aren't responsible for the inequalities in our society, they also aren't the worst off either and there is no reason to suppose that their kids won't be fine. There are inevitably winners and losers with most government policies, and on balance, I think that the VAT on private schools will generate enough revenue to make it worthwhile. Obviously, time will tell whether or not that is correct.

As for education being a public good...I see where you are coming from but I don't really perceive things in the same way. If the alternative to kids going to private schools was that they didn't get an education at all, then I would absolutely agree with you that it was a public good, but the alternative is for them to get educated in a less luxurious environment. For me, the VAT is really about that "luxury" element rather than the education itself. Largely because I don't actually believe that private schools add that much educational value.

@MrsBennetsPoorNerves

And while it's true that the people who will be most affected by this policy certainly aren't responsible for the inequalities in our society, they also aren't the worst off either and there is no reason to suppose that their kids won't be fine. There are inevitably winners and losers with most government policies, and on balance, I think that the VAT on private schools will generate enough revenue to make it worthwhile. Obviously, time will tell whether or not that is correct.

I completely agree with you on this which is why I said I was ambivalent about the policy overall. I think it's populist but I'm not too concerned about the impact of it.

After 20 years of working in social policy and seeing the horrific impact of Tory policies on the poorest during austerity, I can't get too worked up about this. But I do feel the need to point out the hypocrisy I see on some threads about it.

Fair enough. I think we are broadly on the same page.

@Sally20099
'We would never have looked at state other than all the talk about VAT and non charitable status'

Genuine question - why would you have never considered state education until this legislation prompted you?

Did you even look at any OFSTED reports or leagues tables before your DC started primary or secondary schools?
Have your families always educated privately?

Just wondered if this was a family tradition thing

the alternative is for them to get educated in a less luxurious environment. For me, the VAT is really about that "luxury" element rather than the education itself. Largely because I don't actually believe that private schools add that much educational value.

I disagree with you on this @MrsBennetsPoorNerves

This may be true if you are making the comparison between average private and the very best state schools but private schools are much more likely to turn out professionals, including in professions that aren't typically nepotistic at an entry level (like doctors).

Choice is also needed because there is heterogeneous amongst children including SEN, learning styles etc. Paying for private school is not buying success. And anyway, there is home schooling and private tutors and guardians - those can't be outlawed and confer an advantage. Focus should be on creating ways to improve the general offering not frustrating alternative options. Many more alternatives will spring up as we evolve - that is a good thing!

She’ll have over £100k in savings at 18 which we would have saved for her. Plus she’s in an outstanding school.

Good for you. Well done for being so wealthy. What exactly is your point? You sound quite unpleasant

They are, but I think this is more about the type of parents who choose private schools rather than the schools themselves.

My dd went to a very average comprehensive school (it was actually rated "requires improvement" at its last inspection) but she had excellent teaching and excellent support, and I genuinely don't feel that she is any less well educated, less polished, less well rounded or less confident than any of the kids of my privately educating friends that attended "big name" private schools. Nor has her schooling held her back from pursuing a career in medicine.

Likewise, having gone to a bog standard comprehensive school myself, and then having gone to university alongside many privately educated peers, I honestly don't feel that I was disadvantaged in any way - in fact, I actually feel that I had a rather better education in many ways than my closest friend who went to one of the most famous girls' schools in the country, and she has often commented on this too.

Educated, supportive and aspirational parents with a bit of money to spend will find ways of filling in any gaps in their dc's schooling in my experience. It is the children whose parents can't or won't do this that we need to worry about.

There is a lot of inverse snobbery against private schools, much of it comes from people themselves who were privately educated and then chose supposedly socially useful jobs. And now because they can’t afford private schools for their own DC, they want the playing feel levelled for their own DC. Most of it is coming out of that camp.

I just went to the school uniform shop this morning to get my DC some new school ties. The people buying the private uniforms were definitely not “posh”, far from it. They are exactly the types this inverse snobbery is aimed at. So I think those with kids with SEN are perfectly right to call the inverse snobs out, especially if there is a cost to the tax payer.
Everyone with a university education themselves needs to remind themselves that whatever school does or does not do is only ever a small part of the picture in their DCs overall attainment.

@MrsBennetsPoorNerves

I entirely agree with you that one of the greatest privileges anyone can have is loving, supportive parents who want the best for them.

I certainly never had that and struggled through to a Russel Group uni but I absolutely did not meet my potential!

You really do come over as an unpleasant person with all your crowing. I can only hope you're not like that in person.

You also come over as a bit dumb - if only you had thought to do some research into local schools before this potential vat policy you could have saved enough to give your son a lump sum too while not giving your children such an unequal education.

Hopefully you have saved enough from your sudden wise decision to pay for their therapy.

To support the majority of schools being comprehensive they should do away with ‘catchments’ and have a lottery or banded system of entry to secondary. Effectively ending paying to live in the right post code. People with money can still elect to go private if they’re unhappy with the school they’re allocated but the ‘advantage’ this may give should continue to be contextualised.

Good state schools are engines for diversity, change, ambition and aspiration. They don’t have to mimic private (grammar, selective, super leafy) to be effective. Look at London. Even Oxbridge are starting to see the light in terms of selecting on raw potential and independent thinking rather than polish and self-confidence - still a way to go with this but the direction of travel is good