Private schools, times a changing?
Discussion
ClaphamGT3 said:
It is not a tax break - education has never been subject to Value Added Tax and no other component of education will be subjected to it
Independent education is not, despite what Philipson, Reeves, Rayner etc al would have you believe, the preserve of the rich. Independent schools - even the elite ones - have a few pupils in each year who are from genuinely rich families, a few who could never afford Independent education but for bursaries, scholarships and immense sacrifice on the part of their parents and a majority of children from affluent but not wealthy backgrounds where parents (and often the wider family) are making hard choices to find the money to pay the fees because they want the best for their kids
As for your "positions of power" point, I hate to tell you this, but the "old school tie" thing ceased to be anything other than a left- wing trope about 40 years ago
Indeed. Independent education is not, despite what Philipson, Reeves, Rayner etc al would have you believe, the preserve of the rich. Independent schools - even the elite ones - have a few pupils in each year who are from genuinely rich families, a few who could never afford Independent education but for bursaries, scholarships and immense sacrifice on the part of their parents and a majority of children from affluent but not wealthy backgrounds where parents (and often the wider family) are making hard choices to find the money to pay the fees because they want the best for their kids
As for your "positions of power" point, I hate to tell you this, but the "old school tie" thing ceased to be anything other than a left- wing trope about 40 years ago
VAT on school fees is simply a tax grab on those who already subsidise state education to the tune of billions.
It’s a political move that will raise a small amount of tax, play well with Labour’s class believers, but do little or nothing to improve education for anyone.
And of course it will widen the education gap and make private provision even more elitist. But that’s fine for certain politicians because grievance is good.
TownIdiot said:
Or just extend the means testing that already happens.
Charge those that can afford it more, charge those that can't less.
I suppose it all depends what one wants from the private school system.
It wouldn't work though. You'd be means testing on income. Ergo, a doctor and teacher combi earn enough to pay fees in lieu of cars and holidays etc but a hedge fund manager earns less than them despite earning many multiples more. Charge those that can afford it more, charge those that can't less.
I suppose it all depends what one wants from the private school system.
This is why it hasn't been very well thought through. Why would someone with an extremely high income be having it paid onshore or as taxable income?
In short, you cannot actually calculate what it is that you would like to calculate.
TownIdiot said:
richhead said:
One of my parents was a book keeper, the other a pharmacist, hardly the jobs of rich people, and what i would consider fairly normal
People with those jobs can't afford private school fees now so they won't be affected.Unless they have other means, of course.
richhead said:
that may well be true, i know schools cost alot more now , but my point does remain that some are only just affording to pay, and they will be hit by this. not every kid at a private school has minted parents was the point i was trying to make.
I am sure that is true.But it will be a very small cohort, and one that an improved means testing system would assist.
Leithen said:
Indeed.
VAT on school fees is simply a tax grab on those who already subsidise state education to the tune of billions.
It’s a political move that will raise a small amount of tax, play well with Labour’s class believers, but do little or nothing to improve education for anyone.
And of course it will widen the education gap and make private provision even more elitist. But that’s fine for certain politicians because grievance is good.
The first of many taxes. I fully expect property taxes via the eco umbrella and a pension grab. None of which will filter through to the lower incomes, many of whom will also be caught up in the grab. And none of which will filter through to the genuinely wealthy. VAT on school fees is simply a tax grab on those who already subsidise state education to the tune of billions.
It’s a political move that will raise a small amount of tax, play well with Labour’s class believers, but do little or nothing to improve education for anyone.
And of course it will widen the education gap and make private provision even more elitist. But that’s fine for certain politicians because grievance is good.
I'm not actually sure how much middle England has left to extract given that the stats already show they have next to no savings or pension.
richhead said:
p1stonhead said:
richhead said:
p1stonhead said:
richhead said:
p1stonhead said:
richhead said:
p1stonhead said:
okgo said:
p1stonhead said:
Surely anyone who can afford it now, can afford it with an increase, and if they can’t, they’ll be just like the rest of the country?
I fail to see the issue. Anyone who can’t afford it, can’t go. It’s how everything works.
Who wouldn’t love to buy a 911 without VAT on it?
You’ve ruled yourself out of being listened to with that post tbh. I fail to see the issue. Anyone who can’t afford it, can’t go. It’s how everything works.
Who wouldn’t love to buy a 911 without VAT on it?
It was an example of another ultra luxury that rich people buy.
And private schools for the wealthy having charity status is the whole point. Completely mad
The entire argument will simply be the wealthy vs everyone else.
All the worlds tiniest violins couldn’t hope to cope with it.
Edited by p1stonhead on Saturday 25th May 10:35
I was sent to a private school until i was about 12, I then went to a state school, the difference was amazing, i was probably about a year ahead academically, and way physically fitter, pe once a week at the state school , every afternoon at the private school.
My parents weren't rich, and made big sacrifices to send me to a private school, an extra 20% would have made it impossible.
they weren't poor, we had food on the table, but no luxuries apart from private education, well for a few years until it became to expensive.
I agree some at my school were what i call rich, but most weren't.
That was their choice tho, others might choose other things to spend money on.
Its people like them that will be hit by this.
And what will it cost the tax payer compared to the income from the vat raised. it will be interesting to see, but i would be surprised if there will be a gross profit from this.
So much delusion in this thread as to how much people think they earn when compared to others.
You may not think so, but they did.
But they really were, so i will agree to disagree.
And yes we can agree to disagree. I believe in numbers and actual money existing. You can keep believing you somehow paid with magic beans if it makes you feel better?
Look I’m not saying you had Bentleys and Ferraris but why can’t people who grew up wealthy ever own it?
It’s always ‘oh we sacrificed loads’ and went without and trying to claim average earnings when it was clearly by the fact you had tens of thousands spare a year, not average at all.
Edited by p1stonhead on Saturday 25th May 13:27
DonkeyApple said:
It wouldn't work though. You'd be means testing on income. Ergo, a doctor and teacher combi earn enough to pay fees in lieu of cars and holidays etc but a hedge fund manager earns less than them despite earning many multiples more.
This is why it hasn't been very well thought through. Why would someone with an extremely high income be having it paid onshore or as taxable income?
In short, you cannot actually calculate what it is that you would like to calculate.
You could means test in many different ways.This is why it hasn't been very well thought through. Why would someone with an extremely high income be having it paid onshore or as taxable income?
In short, you cannot actually calculate what it is that you would like to calculate.
However if people play that game then there isn't a lot that can be done.
Maybe those affected by the vat should be more pissed off at those people rather than just accepting it.
Reminds me of my my old business partner's family motto.
Selfo besto, bugger resto.
TownIdiot said:
kiethton said:
On what basis?
I can't afford a lot of things but know I'll have to send my kids to private school owing to where I live. I don't qualify for child benefit, any free nursery hours and get my trousers pulled down by the income tax system....but I don't have wealthy parents, I have next to no savings, my mortgage is massive.
Who is this "solution" going to target?
The couple with a household income of <£40k but no mortgage and parents in a £5m house? Or people in higher income brackets but with nothing to fall back on?
Charge those that can afford it more, and those that can't less.I can't afford a lot of things but know I'll have to send my kids to private school owing to where I live. I don't qualify for child benefit, any free nursery hours and get my trousers pulled down by the income tax system....but I don't have wealthy parents, I have next to no savings, my mortgage is massive.
Who is this "solution" going to target?
The couple with a household income of <£40k but no mortgage and parents in a £5m house? Or people in higher income brackets but with nothing to fall back on?
It's inevitable that people will try and game the system but that's life.
Edited to ask: will a 20% increase stop you from your goal of sending your kids to a private school?
Edited by TownIdiot on Saturday 25th May 12:31
The benefits of a family personal services company, wife and kids as named directors, allowing me to claim back VAT has never been stronger.
Alternative is we move, along with hundreds of others, away from the area, to somewhere state schools are decent, excluding the less well off and recreating what we would have otherwise had at the state's expense.
Edited by kiethton on Saturday 25th May 13:30
There are some people on this thread who seem to want to believe left-wing rhetoric when, to anyone who has enough mental capacity to type, it should be clear that it is false.
"The rich keeping the poor down" sounds a bit like an excuse for people who don't want to believe that they have failed in life. "I haven't failed. It's the rich keeping me down".
kiethton said:
It would make me avoid every single tax far more aggressively than I do at the moment. Point is I probably pay over 200k of tax a year - why come for another £5k.
The benefits of a family personal services company, wife and kids as named directors, allowing me to claim back VAT has never been stronger.
Well at least the policy won't alter your schooling choices.The benefits of a family personal services company, wife and kids as named directors, allowing me to claim back VAT has never been stronger.
TownIdiot said:
kiethton said:
It would make me avoid every single tax far more aggressively than I do at the moment. Point is I probably pay over 200k of tax a year - why come for another £5k.
The benefits of a family personal services company, wife and kids as named directors, allowing me to claim back VAT has never been stronger.
Well at least the policy won't alter your schooling choices.The benefits of a family personal services company, wife and kids as named directors, allowing me to claim back VAT has never been stronger.
kiethton said:
It would make me avoid every single tax far more aggressively than I do at the moment. Point is I probably pay over 200k of tax a year - why come for another £5k.
The benefits of a family personal services company, wife and kids as named directors, allowing me to claim back VAT has never been stronger.
Alternative is we move, along with hundreds of others, away from the area, to somewhere state schools are decent, excluding the less well off and recreating what we would have otherwise had at the state's expense.
Just to reply to your edit which came after my other post.The benefits of a family personal services company, wife and kids as named directors, allowing me to claim back VAT has never been stronger.
Alternative is we move, along with hundreds of others, away from the area, to somewhere state schools are decent, excluding the less well off and recreating what we would have otherwise had at the state's expense.
Edited by kiethton on Saturday 25th May 13:30
Seems a drastic step to avoid a small amount of extra tax. But we all have choices to make and the state would welcome the contribution you'd make in SDLT.
I'd also have thought many state schools would benefit from having more kids with engaged and motivated parents.
Remove pin from grenade...
I find the simple line between 'rich' and everyone else much too simplistic. The late great Felix Dennis covered this in his masterpiece How to get Rich, which is a must-read (but only if you fancy getting rich...)
Based on the comments above and Mr Dennis' work, I would suggest there are people whose lives will be affected by a 20% bump in fees and those not. Based on my experience (paying for private West London day schools and boarding school), the former will be heavily affected and zero of the latter. There will be a trickle-down effect as people sell off property near those day schools and move to areas with better state education (mainly suburban areas of our biggest cities). This will obviously make prices more affordable in areas where people don't want to live and driving up the cost where they move to..
One other comment. I would be really really considerate of 'weaponising' wealth creation. None of us like the idea of lazy oligarchs leaving empty flats across the country - but I personally feel the benefit of very wealthy people paying tax much more than the negative impact of their presence
I find the simple line between 'rich' and everyone else much too simplistic. The late great Felix Dennis covered this in his masterpiece How to get Rich, which is a must-read (but only if you fancy getting rich...)
Based on the comments above and Mr Dennis' work, I would suggest there are people whose lives will be affected by a 20% bump in fees and those not. Based on my experience (paying for private West London day schools and boarding school), the former will be heavily affected and zero of the latter. There will be a trickle-down effect as people sell off property near those day schools and move to areas with better state education (mainly suburban areas of our biggest cities). This will obviously make prices more affordable in areas where people don't want to live and driving up the cost where they move to..
One other comment. I would be really really considerate of 'weaponising' wealth creation. None of us like the idea of lazy oligarchs leaving empty flats across the country - but I personally feel the benefit of very wealthy people paying tax much more than the negative impact of their presence
p1stonhead said:
This must be some of the ‘we’re altruistic/doing the state a favour with private schools’ type of point of view we keep hearing about
Apart from proving you could have done with some extra schooling, why are you suddenly in this thread?You also would do well to look at how schooling prices have outstripped wage growth.
okgo said:
p1stonhead said:
This must be some of the ‘we’re altruistic/doing the state a favour with private schools’ type of point of view we keep hearing about
Apart from proving you could have done with some extra schooling, why are you suddenly in this thread?You also would do well to look at how schooling prices have outstripped wage growth.
Classic.
okgo said:
p1stonhead said:
“Hur dur dur anyone who doesn’t agree rich people getting private business VAT discounts is stupid”
Classic.
Your arguments have been remarkably short sighted and without any real critical thought. That’s why I was puzzled. Classic.
Why is this controversial? The schools won’t be affected. Those paying will be.
And I’m sure most will afford it just fine. If they can’t well that’s just how capitalism works isn’t it? Nearly everyone already can’t afford it.
Leithen said:
Indeed.
VAT on school fees is simply a tax grab on those who already subsidise state education to the tune of billions.
It’s a political move that will raise a small amount of tax, play well with Labour’s class believers, but do little or nothing to improve education for anyone.
And of course it will widen the education gap and make private provision even more elitist. But that’s fine for certain politicians because grievance is good.
Yes - classic beggar-my-neighbour Socialism; they see no wrong in making the poor and disadvantaged poorer and more disadvantaged so long as the rich and privileged are less rich and privileged VAT on school fees is simply a tax grab on those who already subsidise state education to the tune of billions.
It’s a political move that will raise a small amount of tax, play well with Labour’s class believers, but do little or nothing to improve education for anyone.
And of course it will widen the education gap and make private provision even more elitist. But that’s fine for certain politicians because grievance is good.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff