Vat on Independent school fees?

Phil1 said:
First world problems eh..
Click to expand...
Exactly. Sending your kids private is not a sacrifice, it's a privilege and a luxury 95% of the country can't afford. A real sacrifice would be forgoing any little treats for months on end just to take your kid to their first footie match, or heaven forbid, scrimping on your food shops for months on end to afford Christmas presents.

There's fuck all wrong with state education; teachers do an impeccable job (despite the stress, my missus loves teaching and loves her kids), I have no issue with this tax so long as the government use the money raised to plough into state funding, which should facilitate any burgeoning numbers heading into the state system.
 
west didsblue said:
Did I really have to spell it out that it was an average of 0.4, not literally four tenths of a child?
Click to expand...
I was referring to your assumption that the pupils leaving private schools could be evenly distributed across the 25,000 state schools, and that the attrition rate would be entirely uniform across the country, avoiding any bottlenecks and over-subscription.

That’s an entirely implausible assumption.
 
Brewster's millions said:
I was referring to your assumption that the pupils leaving private schools could be evenly distributed across the 25,000 state schools, and that the attrition rate would be entirely uniform across the country, avoiding any bottlenecks and over-subscription.

That’s an entirely implausible assumption.
Click to expand...
You’d have to be completely stupid to think I was making that assumption just because I didn’t spell out that it was an average. However your track record suggests that you fall into that category.

Obviously it’s going to vary school by school and area by area, but the point is there would be a very limited number of schools where the additional demand would present a noticeable problem, and a huge majority of schools where they won’t notice the difference. Pupil roll variance year by year due to fluctuating birth rates is regularly coped with and the additional demand due to this will be insignificant.
 
johnnytapia said:
SEND children at private schools are 100% funded by the LA if the child has an EHCP. And nearly 100% of SEND pupils at private schools have an EHCP. Won’t cost the parents of SEND pupils one additional pence.
Click to expand...
Have a read of the NASUWT response to the consultation on the private school VAT issue, specifically paragraphs 33 to 40.

I think their submission covers the issue very well and highlights how even SEND students receiving an EHCP could place significant demands on local authorities should private schools close or the supply of teachers be reduced. They also dispute your figures in relation to the proportion of SEND pupils at private schools having an EHCP.
 
west didsblue said:
You’d have to be completely stupid to think I was making that assumption just because I didn’t spell out that it was an average. However your track record suggests that you fall into that category.

Obviously it’s going to vary school by school and area by area, but the point is there would be a very limited number of schools where the additional demand would present a noticeable problem, and a huge majority of schools where they won’t notice the difference. Pupil roll variance year by year due to fluctuating birth rates is regularly coped with and the additional demand due to this will be insignificant.
Click to expand...
I’m afraid that you were the one that made the silly comment. Why make the comment at all if you’re not implicitly assuming that the attrition rate would be uniform, or very close to it, and therefore easily absorbed by the state sector? Without that assumption, your comment is null and void.

Your track record on here is making poorly thought through posts, as part of what is, it has to be said, stooge behaviour. This is just one example.
 
Brewster's millions said:
I’m afraid that you were the one that made the silly comment. Why make the comment at all if you’re not implicitly assuming that the attrition rate would be uniform, or very close to it, and therefore easily absorbed by the state sector? Without that assumption, your comment is null and void.

Your track record on here is making poorly thought through posts, as part of what is, it has to be said, stooge behaviour. This is just one example.
Click to expand...
You’re just embarrassing yourself with your projection.
 
Mr Kobayashi said:
And fucking build on it. A few of these institutions of entitlement going out of business would free up some land for new housing developments.
Click to expand...
FFS comrade, what is it with you did you get kicked out of the former Soviet Union for being too left wing for them?
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
You can tell who’s been privately educated on this thread and who hasn’t.
Click to expand...
Can you? Do you think I have been?

I think VAT on school fees is fucking outrageous. People should get further tax relief for unburdening the state of their child's education cost.

(Ditto private health care, BTW). And no, I went to comprehensive and I don't have private healthcare either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PPT
Chippy_boy said:
Can you? Do you think I have been?

I think VAT on school fees is fucking outrageous. People should get further tax relief for unburdening the state of their child's education cost.

(Ditto private health care, BTW). And no, I went to comprehensive and I don't have private healthcare either.
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t have said you were privately educated, no.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
They’ll still find the money, just month to month, but it will still equate to finding a few grand over the course of a year.

I’m bound to say that anyone who makes a choice to spend their money on something that cannot stand (what will ultimately equate to) around a 10% increase always runs the risk of it becoming unaffordable. It’s no different from new cars or foreign holidays vs second hand cars and holidays in the UK. People have to make those choices every year.

I completely respect and defend people’s right to educate theur children privately but if they are making that choice then it should be subject to the same tax rules as any other professional fee.
Click to expand...
Kind of where I am.

I have a son in private school but I don’t feel either way on this issue. If I need to pay more on school fees I will, but I’ll balance that by spending less on something else. Holidays, things that need doing at home, new stuff…either way the exchequer won’t make too much more that they would have already.

Where perhaps the impact hasn’t been thought through is on those people who can barely afford the fees and forgo a lot of life’s comforts to send their kids to private school for a whole variety of reasons, including SEND provision. Unfortunately they’ll be the ones who will lose out..
 
Brewster's millions said:
What a complete shambles.

Their manifesto was already a work of fiction, given that they only outlined two notable tax hikes; non doms and putting VAT on private school fees. Now they’ve had to water-down or postpone these because of a fundamental lack of foresight, judgement and preparation.

It’s highly doubtful that either of these policies will raise any money, and so all they’ve done is advertise their incompetence and aggravate concerns across the gilt market about what comes next.

Really very poor.
Click to expand...
I’m going to hold judgement until at least the budget, but I’m interested to know how they plan to borrow to fund growth….
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top