Seems like a fair way to tax richer parent IMO. Given
Approximately 93% of children in the UK currently attend state schools, Phillipson said.
Only the richest people are actually really attending private schools and most people are already priced out of them.
The money raised would go towards investing in state schools and teacher recruitment, Phillipson wrote in the Telegraph., external She added that £1.8bn would be raised a year by 2029-30.
That would be nice. But lets be real. Will the state schools see this money? Or will it be funneled to other things?
But the Independent Schools Council (ISC), which represents most of the UK’s private schools, said the money the government claimed it would raise was an “estimate, not a fact”.
Yeah, I can believe that as well.
“Labour’s decision to tax education will mean thousands of hardworking parents will no longer be able to afford to send their children, including those with SEND [special educational needs and disabilities], to private school.”
Oh no, a few thousand not quite rich enough kids will have to attend a state schools like 93% of other children. What ever will they do!!! Not sure about that call out for SEND specifically though… seems like fear mongering to me. Are there not already loads in state schools? Are state schools not equipped for this already? And will any of those extra funds be used to improve that situation at all?
They won’t raise any money from this anyway, the new law will mean these schools will now be able to claim vat back on purchases which they couldn’t before. So most of what is charged to the parents will be offset by the schools vat reclaim.
So this is just an excuse for the schools to bump the prices (old price plus vat) while reaping a little extra in vat reclaim and a totally insignificant extra tax goes to the gov.
I’m all for taxing the richest, but this shit is dumb mediabate
The bit about SEND is a lie because they are exempt from the new tax. The “hardworking parents” bit always annoys me, it implies the 93% just aren’t working hard enough. If that’s the case I’m sure those who can’t afford the tax can just work a bit harder to cover it.
Of course. It’s just hard to be sympathetic with people who complain about losing privileged access to something that is already denied to the vast majority of others through no fault of their own. What people deserve shouldn’t be based on how much money their parents have. And don’t forget that the reason most rich people are rich is because they successfully exploit the labour of others. Resources get automatically redistributed upwards in our economy. The wonky thing about this Labour policy though is that it looks like it punishes the ‘poorer’ rich people most.
Not just the richest send their kids to private schools. My kids went there, and I’m far from rich. But it was our choice to send them there, and at the same time, I support eliminating the VAT exemption. One motivation that drives middle-class parents to send their kids to private schools is to help them queue-jump when applying for university. But from a broader perspective, teaching to optimise exam scores is not the same thing as education, and hothouse flowers are not robust.
Defunding the education rat race is a good thing in the long run. Having a two-tier system just reinforces inequality.
Just because you don’t have a Ferrari for every day of the week doesn’t mean you are not well off. The fact that you can afford to send your kids to private school kind of proves that you are richer than the vast majority of the population.
There’s nothing wrong with sending your kids to private school but you need to understand how privileged you are.
Kids plural - taking the average private school fees today at £18k/pupil and assuming there’s at least 2 gives £36k/year, if you can afford that on top of living expenses you’re better off than most.
Seems like a fair way to tax richer parent IMO. Given
That would be nice. But lets be real. Will the state schools see this money? Or will it be funneled to other things?
Yeah, I can believe that as well.
Oh no, a few thousand not quite rich enough kids will have to attend a state schools like 93% of other children. What ever will they do!!! Not sure about that call out for SEND specifically though… seems like fear mongering to me. Are there not already loads in state schools? Are state schools not equipped for this already? And will any of those extra funds be used to improve that situation at all?
They won’t raise any money from this anyway, the new law will mean these schools will now be able to claim vat back on purchases which they couldn’t before. So most of what is charged to the parents will be offset by the schools vat reclaim.
So this is just an excuse for the schools to bump the prices (old price plus vat) while reaping a little extra in vat reclaim and a totally insignificant extra tax goes to the gov.
I’m all for taxing the richest, but this shit is dumb mediabate
The new loopholes are indeed stupid, but the idea is sound.
The bit about SEND is a lie because they are exempt from the new tax. The “hardworking parents” bit always annoys me, it implies the 93% just aren’t working hard enough. If that’s the case I’m sure those who can’t afford the tax can just work a bit harder to cover it.
If private schools have better SEND provision then they should take all SEND kids.
Private schools don’t because special needs kids are not profitable. They cost a lot to support. Much better to let the state deal with that.
Of course. It’s just hard to be sympathetic with people who complain about losing privileged access to something that is already denied to the vast majority of others through no fault of their own. What people deserve shouldn’t be based on how much money their parents have. And don’t forget that the reason most rich people are rich is because they successfully exploit the labour of others. Resources get automatically redistributed upwards in our economy. The wonky thing about this Labour policy though is that it looks like it punishes the ‘poorer’ rich people most.
Not just the richest send their kids to private schools. My kids went there, and I’m far from rich. But it was our choice to send them there, and at the same time, I support eliminating the VAT exemption. One motivation that drives middle-class parents to send their kids to private schools is to help them queue-jump when applying for university. But from a broader perspective, teaching to optimise exam scores is not the same thing as education, and hothouse flowers are not robust.
Defunding the education rat race is a good thing in the long run. Having a two-tier system just reinforces inequality.
Just because you don’t have a Ferrari for every day of the week doesn’t mean you are not well off. The fact that you can afford to send your kids to private school kind of proves that you are richer than the vast majority of the population.
There’s nothing wrong with sending your kids to private school but you need to understand how privileged you are.
Kids plural - taking the average private school fees today at £18k/pupil and assuming there’s at least 2 gives £36k/year, if you can afford that on top of living expenses you’re better off than most.