Private schools, times a changing?
Discussion
Sway said:
Zolvaro said:
Swervin_Mervin said:
Zolvaro said:
The simple fact is private education is buying your child an advantage over their peers, I have no issue with that at all in fact my kids are about to go private, but the tax break is a bonus not a right.
It isn't a bonus, and it isn't a tax break. It has never been subject to VAT. Somehow, Labour is going to have to untangle those wider exemptions in order to levy VAT on public school fees, but not (for example) a charity billing for first aid courses.
TownIdiot said:
said:
Oh yes you are right.
Unlike the other lot we respect the courts.
On we move.
Good outcome for him.
Edited to add: just been reading and doesn't look like this will derail the plan.
Edited by TownIdiot on Friday 28th June 20:56
Wombat3 said:
Lord Pannick now advising that Starmers VAT raid on school fees likely illegal under ECHR law...:
....here we go!
TPA article suggests the ECHR argument is a non starter....here we go!
https://taxpolicy.org.uk/2024/01/26/school_fee_vat...
markh1973 said:
Wombat3 said:
Lord Pannick now advising that Starmers VAT raid on school fees likely illegal under ECHR law...:
....here we go!
TPA article suggests the ECHR argument is a non starter....here we go!
https://taxpolicy.org.uk/2024/01/26/school_fee_vat...
Edited by Wombat3 on Saturday 29th June 07:13
markh1973 said:
Wombat3 said:
Lord Pannick now advising that Starmers VAT raid on school fees likely illegal under ECHR law...:
....here we go!
TPA article suggests the ECHR argument is a non starter....here we go!
https://taxpolicy.org.uk/2024/01/26/school_fee_vat...
I disagree with VAT on school fees and private schools paying business rates. I don't think education should be taxed over and above the income tax that's already been paid on the money being used to pay for it. VAT is going to cost us roughly £5k/year, and only that much because the elder two have finished school already.
However, somebody has to pay more than others into the overall tax pot because the Tories have totally screwed things up over the last 14 years, especially the last 8. Not all parents whose children go to a private school will be able to absorb the extra cost easily, but almost all are in a better position to be able to do so than any other strata of the population as a whole. While I disagree with one of the Labour policies, I disagree with a hell of lot more policies of the others, so I'm not going to base my voting decision on this single issue alone.
However, somebody has to pay more than others into the overall tax pot because the Tories have totally screwed things up over the last 14 years, especially the last 8. Not all parents whose children go to a private school will be able to absorb the extra cost easily, but almost all are in a better position to be able to do so than any other strata of the population as a whole. While I disagree with one of the Labour policies, I disagree with a hell of lot more policies of the others, so I'm not going to base my voting decision on this single issue alone.
QuickQuack said:
I disagree with VAT on school fees and private schools paying business rates. I don't think education should be taxed over and above the income tax that's already been paid on the money being used to pay for it. VAT is going to cost us roughly £5k/year, and only that much because the elder two have finished school already.
However, somebody has to pay more than others into the overall tax pot because the Tories have totally screwed things up over the last 14 years, especially the last 8. Not all parents whose children go to a private school will be able to absorb the extra cost easily, but almost all are in a better position to be able to do so than any other strata of the population as a whole. While I disagree with one of the Labour policies, I disagree with a hell of lot more policies of the others, so I'm not going to base my voting decision on this single issue alone.
Green taxes such as rebranding Council Taxes above F as the more expensive the property the more polar bears it kills. Removing the VAT discount on all utilities above a base consumption level that doesn't kill polar bears. However, somebody has to pay more than others into the overall tax pot because the Tories have totally screwed things up over the last 14 years, especially the last 8. Not all parents whose children go to a private school will be able to absorb the extra cost easily, but almost all are in a better position to be able to do so than any other strata of the population as a whole. While I disagree with one of the Labour policies, I disagree with a hell of lot more policies of the others, so I'm not going to base my voting decision on this single issue alone.
You could then have a look at pension pots and IHT. Lots of free money to be had there but you need to lift it out in the right way. So what you'd do is remove the tax breaks on investments that weren't govt sanctioned projects. Want all the cash immediately from Granny? Well that's fine but you'll pay 80% tax on it or you could instead buy this low coupon gilt where the money will be thrown into the black hole that will be the British Energy fiasco. Got a private pension? Well, why don't you invest in what we want the money for or lose your tax exemptions?
To pay the bills they're going to have to either borrow more, tax income more or tax assets/wealth. They probably won't be able to borrow what they need, people's incomes are pretty tapped out now and all going on funding massive consumer debt habits and living beyond means while waiting for inheritances, lottery wins or a call-up from Man U. So it does look likely that the prime targets will be property, pensions, cars and utilities.
Personally, the terrifying silence from the hard left within Labour is deafening. The early and endless statement that 'no wealth taxes are planned' means the precise opposite and that they'll be rebranded as eco taxes. I suspect Starmer's assassin has already been selected along with the date.
TownIdiot said:
DonkeyApple said:
I suspect Starmer's assassin has already been selected along with the date.
How will this bit work when it looks like he's going to have a substantial majority of largely hand picked new MPs?I think we're in for many years of Labour as the Conservatives need to go away, butcher themselves and rebuild with credible and competent humans who actually represent more than just the retired and soon to be dead. And I suspect that Starmer will have been reduced to puppet status before the next election. He is very weak and only set to win because the incumbents have been so utterly terrible for so long. It's not a scenario where he is set to win because he is better than his opposition but merely a function of breathing. Liz Truss's lettuce could win next Thursday if you pines a red rosette on it. Reeves and Raynor both have plans. The Unions are silent. The regional mayors are silent. Momentum and the other extreme entities are silent. The point being that they haven't gone away, they are just an enormous flank waiting silently in the trees.
20% VAT on fees isn't going to push many who are currently in, out but all the increasing costs elsewhere that will appear and be aimed at them will.
I suspect the real issue is going to be the war for Labour's soul between Starmer and Rayner.
Sources tell me that, as well as her DLUHC role, she is also insisting on a fully staffed Office of the Deputy Prime Minister which will operate with departmental status. That can only be a - tax payer funded - platform for her to launch political manoeuvres
Sources tell me that, as well as her DLUHC role, she is also insisting on a fully staffed Office of the Deputy Prime Minister which will operate with departmental status. That can only be a - tax payer funded - platform for her to launch political manoeuvres
I've said it before...I detest Rayner. Its a failing of the current incumbent and system that someone like her becomes Deputy PM. That's not a criticism of any party in particular. I can see eventual division in Labour as time goes on as the factions are temporarily united to take the podium. Starmer is of a higher calibre than her.
Saying that - this thread is about independent schools therefore education and kids. The state schools are often schools that are in a state. That's not the fault of those who have sought instead to pay for their kids' education. Labour's targeting of something that works is disgraceful and iniquitous.
Saying that - this thread is about independent schools therefore education and kids. The state schools are often schools that are in a state. That's not the fault of those who have sought instead to pay for their kids' education. Labour's targeting of something that works is disgraceful and iniquitous.
TUS373 said:
Saying that - this thread is about independent schools therefore education and kids. The state schools are often schools that are in a state. That's not the fault of those who have sought instead to pay for their kids' education. Labour's targeting of something that works is disgraceful and iniquitous.
So much teaching time appears to be being consumed by failed parents who are unable to raise a child and get them to school or ensure they behave if they do turn up that society surely needs to have an honest debate as to whether this small number of people should continue soaking up the resources needed by the majority or whether they are just cut loose? It's a horrible concept but we've surely reached the point where excessive appeasement of a handful of terrible families is now doing serious harm to the prospects of all children? The money taken from the top 7% is just going to be swallowed up by the bottom 7% with nothing improving for anyone?DonkeyApple said:
So much teaching time appears to be being consumed by failed parents who are unable to raise a child and get them to school or ensure they behave if they do turn up that society surely needs to have an honest debate as to whether this small number of people should continue soaking up the resources needed by the majority or whether they are just cut loose? It's a horrible concept but we've surely reached the point where excessive appeasement of a handful of terrible families is now doing serious harm to the prospects of all children? The money taken from the top 7% is just going to be swallowed up by the bottom 7% with nothing improving for anyone?
Surely extra cash into the bottom 7% will have some impact?TownIdiot said:
DonkeyApple said:
So much teaching time appears to be being consumed by failed parents who are unable to raise a child and get them to school or ensure they behave if they do turn up that society surely needs to have an honest debate as to whether this small number of people should continue soaking up the resources needed by the majority or whether they are just cut loose? It's a horrible concept but we've surely reached the point where excessive appeasement of a handful of terrible families is now doing serious harm to the prospects of all children? The money taken from the top 7% is just going to be swallowed up by the bottom 7% with nothing improving for anyone?
Surely extra cash into the bottom 7% will have some impact?You can lead a horse, but you can't make it drink, especially without parental support.
I agree. In the many threads on PH where people have difficult neighbours, the advice is 'move away'. Same with education really. Take the decision to seek out what you consider to be the right, conducie environment for learning. You pay for that, on top of a portion of tax that a government can use to fund stated education. And then they want to add another layer of tax on to that. Bonkers.
TownIdiot said:
Surely extra cash into the bottom 7% will have some impact?
None. It'll just be consumed as all the cash currently is. And don't forget, none of the funds projected to be raised from the 20% VAT are actually destined for the state school system anyway. Of the projected £2bn to be raised a maximum of just £200m has been earmarked and that's for the 6500 teachers who don't exist which have to be found from somewhere before any money is spent. All that will happen to any minor spend increase is that it will merely go on further appeasements and rewards for bad parenting.
The he free school meals is a great example. On paper it is superb. It would mean that children with parents unwilling to feed their own children will at least get one meal a day but in reality all it will mean is an increase in parents who don't need to feed their own children.
Any new teachers will end up having all their time consumed by the bottom few percent not in helping the majority to excel.
You can't just put a bit of money in and expect anything to change. It requires something far more Draconian to facilitate the reversal of a cultural shift.
The state school system needs £bns pumped in for new infrastructure, better facilities, paying off the bad teachers, buying in more of the good teachers, adding more GCSE options, getting more to take A levels, offering a wider choice of A levels. None of which will be done. Millions of children every year will continue to be failed. The costs will keep creeping up and more and more valuable resources will be hijacked by loser parents.
It's no different really to blighted housing estates where a minority of families destroy the environment for everyone else who lives there and is trying to move forward in life but vast sums of taxpayer money that should be used on them to help them move forwards is instead being consumed by the minority who are subsequently empowered to actively hold everyone else back.
Carrots for those who deserve carrots, sticks for those demanding sticks. Just continuing to take money off the majority to pay off and appease a minority hasn't worked and we've been throwing more and more money at that for 25 years. At some point we will get the message that blaming everyone other than those responsible and hurling endless money into a pit isn't really working.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff