The vast majority of the rich use state schools, so it’s both pointless and spiteful.
The vast majority of the rich use state schools, so it’s both pointless and spiteful.
God help us all. We will own nothing and be happy.
Oh dear. Insults now. Why are the left such bullies?
PS parent does not equal affluent (see data from UCL below) so taxing them doesn’t fix anything. How and why do you propose we stop parents trying to do the best for their kids with the resources they have, state or private, tutors, books, trips?
That should have said the same. Do you propose banning the reading of books to children and the use of tutors or taking kids on holiday or educational trips? Can’t be buying an advantage after all. Same with houses in good catchments.
Not really over state grammars. Maybe it’s selective schools or parents invested in their kids’ education. Oxbridge offer ratio of interviews to places insane for state and PS.
And when were the elite judiciary educated?
Still wrong. At best based the education landscape in the 70/80s not now and even then still from a limited number of elite boarding schools. There are some incredible state schools around which are only accessible through exams and buying an expensive house. They actually cost the state money.
‘Elite Institutions’!? You confuse the whole sector of 2600 diverse, mostly small local day schools with a tiny number of elite public boarding schools and hate them because of it. The dictionary definition of bigotry.
VAT isn’t one of those policies. Not really. The divide between the best and worst state schools is enormous, far more widespread and governed by ability to afford a house in the best catchment.
I’d like to understand why you think it’s a good idea. There are a lot of misconceptions on the subject floating about.
And you don’t want to try and justify it. Got it. You have a nice day too.
Education is a benefit to society, which benefits from a more educated workforce. A sector that does this well for 600k kids at no cost to the state is a huge plus.
Sounds terrible, were it true.
Data from UCL study on PS family incomes. Education is a merit good like food (zero rated), medicine, dentistry, books. More of it benefits society. It’s daft to tax it and it still is exempt unless you are 5-18.
That isn’t an argument it’s an insult. Please grow up.
Voting against private school VAT is a very sensible and principled thing to do. It’s a stupid idea that achieves nothing but damage to young lives and is borne entirely of spite.
I am supportive of measures which make a positive difference. VAT ain’t that. No one is arguing state school funding shouldn’t be improved. VAT does do that (either at all or to any appreciable degree) What argument have you actually made?
Not interested in reasoning. Understood. Struggling to understand what your point actually was then.
I’m perfectly calm thanks. You are the one resorting to insult over argument. What are you taxing to fund abolition and how does it help? Stop being childish.
Do you engage with arguments, or just insult people. I did not vote conservative, or go to private school. Out of all the major parties, only Labour support it. Greens want to abolish tbf, but are economic lunatics.
You’ll be paying it then. You aren’t finding £16.5bn without everyone chipping in. Not enough of other people’s money.
The manifesto and all comms from the government t since are very clear their justification for it is revenue generation. It is also the reason the high court accepted as justification for it when the government were challenged. It is not a social ill. Grow up.
I looked at all schools in the area, state and private. We wanted a well-rounded education for our girls with a sensible emphasis on arts and sports.
I’m not sure they know tbh. Can’t agree on much between them. It’s pointless spite.
When did I argue that? Above median does not mean rich. The vast majority of the really rich use state schools and get you to pay for their kids’ 1st class education they access through house price. PS parent is a shit proxy for rich.
Stupidly adversarial approach to government if you ask me. Grow up.
Where are you finding the £16.5bn a year that will cost mate?
Do you know why he thinks Ps are all bad? Does he just Eton in his head and is he a bigot?
12.5% of PS families are on median income and below. 1/3 on basic rate tax incomes. Vast majority of the rich use state schools. Why not raise some real money by charging them more?
And if they all did, that’s a real £16.5bn a year black hole in the economy.
Why is it bad? Did the Labour Party tell you?
It’s the worst kind of spiteful, faux class war politics that’ll raise a rounding error at best (likely cost. We are already a long way from best) and damage the education of 10000s kids. I guess they are the wrong kind of kids.
It is anyway. Raises next to nothing (quite likely costs money) and damages the education of 10000s of kids.
Voting against private school VAT is a perfectly sensible position.
Who is Lancelot? Many choose it because their SEN child has been failed by the system. Many just because they want a well-rounded education, free from gov pedagogy, with a sensible emphasis on sports and arts.
That really isn’t the definition of entitled at all.
What is entitled about paying all your taxes, not taking up the state spaces to which you are entitled (collectively saving the state £4.5bn pa) and instead paying again out of post tax income to educate you kids. Entitled are the vast majority of the rich who use state schools and get you to pay.
That is complete rubbish. The government’s own projections are that the year 1 impact is small in comparison to the medium / long term. They expected 3k by July 25. We saw nearly 16k in Jan 25. We are already way past expected numbers for July 26.
Most do. A couple of examples.. www.gloucestershire.gov.uk/media/2ukjpm... www.wakefield.gov.uk/schools-and-... www.sthelens.gov.uk/article/5472...
Spite is all that’s left once it became clear the revenue projections were nonsense.
All the local authorities are wrong and you are right I suppose.
VAT on fees and IHT on family farms are both appallingly spiteful policies that raise next to nothing at best and cause nothing but damage.
Many state schools are selective academically and most are selective based on ability to pay for a house in the best catchments. There is zero state funding of independent schools.
All local authorities advise in the strongest terms that moving a child mid-year, or at any time outside a transition year (eg yr7) is to be considered only as a very last resort, due to the damage done to their educational attainment and mental health. But you’d like that I guess.
Which bit? They are not even claiming they’ll raise much money and their claims are wildly optimistic.
They are faux virtue signalling nonsense or tinkering yes. They barely raise any money (in some cases more likely to cost). If we want to raise more tax for public services, ALL need to contribute more.
It’s economically stupid and spiteful. Raises next to nothing (more likely a cost) and damages the education of 10000s of kids.
What’s upset you?
No. It isn’t a subsidy and PS parents are not the wealthiest 6-7%. The vast majority of the rich use state schools and get you to pay for their kids’ first class state education by buying a nice house in the best catchment.
I’m not saying there is anything dark about either side. Education was and should remain exempt from VAT. It still is in fact, unless you are a child aged 5-18. It’s economically illiterate nonsense.
VAT on private schools is an awful idea. Raises next to nothing at best (and we’re a long way from best already) and damages the education of 10000s of kids. The only reason is spite.
Why do you think pupil numbers are rising so much in FE and sixth forms?
They have effectively done all of these things by increasing use of these services, meaning we need ever more money to fund the ever-expanding needs.
And that would be a bloody good thing. We don’t need economically illiterate policy, rooted in spite.
And Labour evaporating to Reform, and to a lesser extent the Greens.
Bollocks. You can’t offset VAT with second hand uniform.
I think for most just higher income. Still nowhere near what their compatriots in the public sector enjoy.
More likely because for the last 20 years annuity rates have been awful.
Because no one can predict when they are going to die. These people are not in receipt of index linked pensions, guaranteed for life.
What needs looking at is the disparity between those who have saved for a pension in the private sector vs what is available in the public sector, through taxpayer funded contributions well in excess of 20% pa and index linked and guaranteed until death. Compare that to an equivalent 550k annuity.
25k then. The avarice.
550k gets you a 20k a year pension at the recommended 4% withdrawal rate. They aren’t living like kings.
What were these lies?
If you think anyone’s tax is going to be reduced, you really haven’t been paying attention.
If we are talking about people in the south east who own a house, then their pension pot doesn’t need to be very big, and their standard of living does not need to be much more than basic, for this to affect them.
That’s an excellent point. I still think it’s a silly idea for the main reason that it will encourage pensioners to withdraw and spend more than they should to avoid the taxman getting hold of any, leaving them destitute in older age if they outlive their pots.
Quite rightly so. It’s a stupid, counterproductive tax that damages the education of 10000s of kids for nothing, or at best next to nothing (we are along way from best).
No. It’s more “let’s stop the false virtue-signalling with perceived punishment taxes that don’t raise any money, and accept everyone needs to pay more tax”
If you are going to charge IHT, the beneficiary should then be able to access it without further taxation.
Not in this case. The income drawn from the asset is (or usually is, unless the pot is very large or the income taken very small) reducing the value of the asset.
Auto correct. Income tax.
The number of pupils leaving private school is 5x that which the government expected in its revenue projection.
If you inherit a pension pot from some over the age of 75 when they died, you pay inclement on any money taken out anyway. Why should also pay IHT on it?
Quadruple council tax for Dulwich I say. Comes close to what ps parents are being asked to pay for having the temerity to not use the public services to which they are entitled.
So it’s outstanding. That’s great. Dulwich is an incredibly privileged place to live. Great schools, public transport, parks. Huge amounts of public money lavished on it an incredible amounts of wealth held by its residents. Maybe they should all pay more tax?
That comment wasn’t aimed at you. Read the one before it.
What is that list from? Link please?
Finland also has private schools, and its results have been in decline for decades.
They both have private schools and neither are especially better than England in terms of outcomes. You took all day to find those. Just take it back.
So you have no countries name to back that up? Yes I think we will. And yes I think you are and bias is prejudice. Dangerous?
Nonsense. Which ones are they then? They already contribute hugely.
If it’s their land, why should your son’s school be allowed to build on it? So you damn the whole sector on the basis of this dubious claim. You do you. Sounds like prejudice to me.
They aren’t undermining anything. It’s a good thing if state schools are improving. The half that are charities are charities. Majority are non-profits regardless.
Yes it is . It’s certainly not about the money. Nothing or next to nothing. That’s great. What’s the problem then? Education is not a zero sum game.
Dulwich is not a mid-ranking boarding school. Eton’s fees were £50k before VAT. The average private school fee is (or was) £18k pa (average. Many much lower) The elite public boarding schools are absolutely nothing like the vast majority of private schools.
They already charge those on lower incomes far less. That’s what a bursary is. Books, education, medicine, dentistry, food. All merit goods. All exempt from or zero-rated for VAT. Unless you are 5-18 years old now in the case of education.
So you do t lie Dulwich and believe they should be punished. What of the 2500+ other (mostly small local day) schools with a far less wealthy group of families using them?
No. They still need to meet the criteria.
That’s 3x the average day school fee. And saying “if you can afford one number, you can afford another” is just moronic.
Second bit is hearsay and opinion. They are a charity according to the law. Change charity law if you don’t like it. They can’t just claim to be one, you know?
How much money do you think is worth the disruption of 10000s kids education?
And if it’s no money or costs? VAT is not a luxury tax.
Which you would expect would impact both equally. State down 0.5%, mainly primary. Indy sector down 2.3%, spread over all years and not in nursery.
Why would this lead to more than twice as many leaving the indent sector than the state sector? If you don’t care about that, then it isn’t about the money is it?
Here is another one- www.gov.uk/government/c... Pupil numbers have dropped faster than ever recorded, 5x faster than the government expected (and faster than state schools so no it’s not demographics) 16k vs an expectation of 3k this year, riding to 37k in 5 years. What’s it going to rise to now?
There were no stories suggesting that. Of course all have to pay it. It is only those at the bottom of the income distribution of parents there that have to move though. And there are more of them than the government led you to believe.
PS pupil numbers are however falling, much faster than expected, much faster than seen before and much faster than state school numbers. School closures is red herring. That the pupils are leaving the sector is what’s important for revenue (or no revenue).
They haven’t. 0.5% of pupils left largely due to demographics. 2.3% is larger than 0.5% to the tune of 1.8%. This month 1 The expectation for year 1 was 0.5%. That’s at least 4x, most likely 5x the rate allowing for timing.
They are not unconnected. They may not entirely overlap (as I accepted) but they most certainly not unconnected. I tried to convince you that at the rate currently seen the costs would top a billion over the next couple of years but you proved incapable of grasping the shape of the impact expected