Other Sports15 mins ago
For All Those Just About Managing To Pay For A Private Education.....
95 Answers
Happy new year from Labour.
Answers
This cynical punishment of parents, some of whom will not be rich, has 100% been driven purely by ideology.
20:51 Thu 02nd Jan 2025
There is absolutely no justification for taxing private education.
No other country in Europe does it for one simple reason – education is essential and you don’t tax essentials.
There is only one reason to levy VAT on private education and that’s simply ideological envy. Not everybody can afford it so those who can must pay tax for the privilege of relieving the State of the burden of educating their children.
Incredible as it may seem, Eton (£56,000pa) is not the only private school in the country. The average cost of day school private education is £18,000. It’s true that somebody who can afford £56k for each of their children will not be put off by another 20%. But for those who can just scrape together £18k (and who have seen fees increase by around 7% this year) an extra 20% may be the straw that breaks the camel’s back.
The government justifies its measure like this:
“In making these changes the government aims to ensure that high quality education is available for every child and that the system is fair, with all users of private schools paying their fair share,…”
"o my gawd ! I dont know where to start with that one."
Then allow me to help you a little, Peter.
Users of private schools already “pay their fair share”. They pay just as much tax as anybody who doesn’t use the State education system (who, as naomi pointed out, pay no VAT on their children’s education). They also pay 100% of the cost of that education whereas their counterparts who use the State system pay nothing. So if anybody is not paying their fair share, it must be those using the State system, who are getting a “free” education for their children.
So long as there is a State education system, every government should have the aim “…to ensure that high quality education is available for every child”. Those parents choosing the private sector do their bit to achieve that aim for their children. I don’t think the paltry amount this measure might raise (which will probably be less than 1% of the total education budget) will do much to help the government secure that aim for the rest. In any case it’s far more likely that it will be used to pay the hotel bills for the ever -increasing numbers arriving by small boat. If the new levy raises as much as the government hopes (and the small boat numbers do not grow too much) it should meet that bill for about four months.
“Essential education is covered by the state.
Private education isn't essential.”
Or…
Essential food is covered by Tesco’s.
Fortnum & Mason’s corn-fed free range quails’ eggs (or whatever – you get my gist) are not essential.
So does one attract VAT and the other doesn’t?
“…as long as their chosen commercial education company don't get away with taxes other companies have to pay.”
You misunderstand. The schools will not pay any extra taxes as a result of this measure. In fact they will be better off. The only people out of pocket will be the parents. All it means for the schools is they will act as unpaid tax collectors. They will charge parents the VAT on their fees and pass that sum on to the Exchequer.
However, prior to them having to charge VAT, even as registered charities, they could not reclaim the VAT they paid from the business. Now they can. They can reclaim all the VAT they paid on goods and services provided by their suppliers. That’s the thing about VAT – generally only the end users pay it.
This is nothing more than a tax on aspiration. It penalises parents who choose to spend their money for the benefit of a good education for their children which, in many parts of the country, the state is singularly unable to provide. That inability will worsen when the measures the latest Education Secretary proposes (among which is to “decolonise” education). It will raise very little and any sum raised will simply be lost in the noise.
i agree in principle with taxing private education but i think the state sector must be improved first. there are lots of reasons why people opt for private education other than "aspiration" (state schools are often simply not able to deal with students who have special needs or some kinds of disability for instance) and some people put themselves into debt to do so. at the moment private schools are saught after by anyone who can get within touching distance of affording them because the quality of state schools has collapsed due largely to underinvestment. provide a viable alternative first and then introduce the tax imo.
Paying VAT where appropriate is not paying twice. All taxpayers chip in for services the whole community need. If anyone wants to refuse those services and pay privately they need to cover the private cost, including taxes.
"Essential education is covered by the state. Except it isnt."
Of course it is, have you not noticed the schools & colleges?
Insulting folk by falsely implying tbeir view is down to, "Politics of hate and envy", is not a good look you know.
"Wouldn't it be nice for those who pay for their child(ren) to be privately educated get a proportionate tax refund for not using the state system?"
No it most certainly wouldn't. Why should they be let off contributing to necessary services for all simply because they chose to opt out of using them ? It'd be an incentive to opt out of a civil duty were that the case.
Schools do pay extra taxes because of this change. Tax they should always have been paying. It's simply that they have the option of raising prices to customers in order to cover them.
The state systems aren't free in as much that the public pay for them. So those using the state system have paid. If others refuse the state system it is still an obligation to ensure it's funded, and then they are on their own finding an alternative they can afford.
There is absolutely no justification for taxing private education
o my gawd ! I dont know where to start with that one."
We arent . There is - almost every transaction involving money also involves taxation
now which President said that ? was it president Trump ? alot of ABers think so.
Does anyone remember selective employment tax ?
o gawd why do I ask these questions? the editor has already told me the percent "no" or "no wot foo" is likely to be over 90%.
Is that money not recovered by the state in 'unused' taxes paid by parents of privately educated children?
Luvvie - there are no unused taxes. This is what it is all about, erm overspent taxes which aren't there
If they have to pay VAT on their child's education they are in effect paying twice.
No sweetie, THEY dont pay VAT the school does. VAT as a transferable tax o gawd where do I start ? Very much the OAPs refrain of " I have paid tax once on my pension, why do I have to pay again"
there are times when I want to shoot myself
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.