VAT on Private Schools poll

[Swervin_Mervin]

There's a heavy assumption here that 1000's will end up in state schools and no net tax gain which is frankly nonsense, the fallout will be miniscule.

If you are that way inclined and want to send your kids to a private school it will still happen.

The other aspect not mentioned here once is who actually pays for private education. From my experience its nearly always out of capital, inheritance, an early inheritance or the grandparent/aunty etc, the latter few in turn reduce wealthy peoples estates and in turn inheritance tax.

Wages here. Sorry to burst that idea! Maybe I should start guilt tripping the old folks who, as boomers, are obviously bathing in the wealth they've stolen from Gen Z.

The tax gain wouldn't be significant. And given that this appears to be Labour's flagship policy, it says a lot about their plans (they have no fucking clue).

[Swervin_Mervin]

There's a heavy assumption here that 1000's will end up in state schools and no net tax gain which is frankly nonsense, the fallout will be miniscule.

Wiki says "There are around 2,600 independent schools in the UK, which educate around 615,000 children". It's not a big % of that to get into thousands of kids needing state places.

Agreed the net tax gain will be miniscule.

Incidentally, 615k / 2.6k = average private school is only 237 pupils. Some of those schools must be absolutely tiny.

I wonder what the split of private primary/secondary is. There's 24 kids in my boy's class. If you assume 25/class over 7 years (Rec'n > Yr6) that's only 175 kids. There's probably about 225/230 when you factor in Kindergarten and Nursery.

In my old independent secondary there were at least 6 classes of c30 pupils per year. Fairly sure the school was about 1500 pupils in total.

[Sundayjumper]

Fair point. I was mainly thinking of secondary schools with 500-1000+.

I just googled my old school and it says "over 1,200". I think it's expanded since I was there. I had something like 1,000 in mind.

[ZedLeg]

There's a heavy assumption here that 1000's will end up in state schools and no net tax gain which is frankly nonsense, the fallout will be miniscule.

If you are that way inclined and want to send your kids to a private school it will still happen.

The other aspect not mentioned here once is who actually pays for private education. From my experience its nearly always out of capital, inheritance, an early inheritance or the grandparent/aunty etc, the latter few in turn reduce wealthy peoples estates and in turn inheritance tax.

Wages here. Sorry to burst that idea! Maybe I should start guilt tripping the old folks who, as boomers, are obviously bathing in the wealth they've stolen from Gen Z.

The tax gain wouldn't be significant. And given that this appears to be Labour's flagship policy, it says a lot about their plans (they have no fucking clue).

The problem here is that everything is anecdotal and fairly personal so people get defensive.

No one is saying that it’s all intergenerational wealth but some of it will be.

Just like not everyone will have parents slaving away at the business factory and sacrificing to pay the bill but some will.

[Rich B]

That's still over £2billion raised though, which could do a lot of good (it could get the junior doctors paid more than shelf stackers and off strike for one).

And incidentally - in the spirit of jealousy, it's only about 3 times the Sunaks personal wealth!

[Beany]

Same with mortgages/home ownership - a few of my IRL mates don't know why I don't have a mortgage, because they do.

....because all of them, to a one, had parents who dropped £30k in their lap to cover the deposit

Not everyone has had that obviously, and plenty of people scrimped and saved (I don't know any IRL at the moment, oddly - that's not conspiratorial, just something I realised just now), but most people I know who think getting a mortgage is trivial absolutely didn't have to scrimp and save for a deposit, and as such I imagine they have a very different view on things than those who did.

[Rich B]

That's still over £2billion raised though, which could do a lot of good (it could get the junior doctors paid more than shelf stackers and off strike for one).

And incidentally - in the spirit of jealousy, it's only about 3 times the Sunaks personal wealth!

talking of Sunaks wealth!

https://x.com/supertanskiii/status/1798061819225104865

[duncs500]

Interesting piece to carry on the discussion!

https://westcountryvoices.co.uk/taxing- ... %20account.

Phew, I'm relieved someone has found an entirely unbiased article to balance the debate.

[Rich B]

Interesting piece to carry on the discussion!

https://westcountryvoices.co.uk/taxing- ... %20account.

Phew, I'm relieved someone has found an entirely unbiased article to balance the debate.

I didn't post it to balance the debate - I quite clearly said I posted it to carry on the discussion. Which bits do you refute and we can carry on digging more info?

[ZedLeg]

Same with mortgages/home ownership - a few of my IRL mates don't know why I don't have a mortgage, because they do.

....because all of them, to a one, had parents who dropped £30k in their lap to cover the deposit

Not everyone has had that obviously, and plenty of people scrimped and saved (I don't know any IRL at the moment, oddly - that's not conspiratorial, just something I realised just now), but most people I know who think getting a mortgage is trivial absolutely didn't have to scrimp and save for a deposit, and as such I imagine they have a very different view on things than those who did.

Yeah

Of the people I know that own

2 had houses bought for them by parents

2 had help to buy from parents

1 bought under a shared ownership scheme.

Meanwhile I’ve been paying other people’s mortgages since I was 18

[duncs500]

Interesting piece to carry on the discussion!

https://westcountryvoices.co.uk/taxing- ... %20account.

Phew, I'm relieved someone has found an entirely unbiased article to balance the debate.

I didn't post it to balance the debate - I quite clearly said I posted it to carry on the discussion. Which bits do you refute and we can carry on digging more info?

Nah, everyone seems pretty entrenched on this one, we've started going in circles and I can't be arsed.

[Rich B]

Phew, I'm relieved someone has found an entirely unbiased article to balance the debate.

I didn't post it to balance the debate - I quite clearly said I posted it to carry on the discussion. Which bits do you refute and we can carry on digging more info?

Nah, everyone seems pretty entrenched on this one, we've started going in circles and I can't be arsed.

its all fun engagement and insightful comments when you're sat on a train with time to kill, then when you're back in the office it's back to standard internet baseless digs!

In all seriousness, it's an interesting article, I'd happily see it torn apart if it's wrong though!

[duncs500]

I didn't post it to balance the debate - I quite clearly said I posted it to carry on the discussion. Which bits do you refute and we can carry on digging more info?

Nah, everyone seems pretty entrenched on this one, we've started going in circles and I can't be arsed.

its all fun engagement and insightful comments when you're sat on a train with time to kill, then when you're back in the office it's back to standard internet baseless digs!

In all seriousness, it's an interesting article, I'd happily see it torn apart if it's wrong though!

I am actually sat on a long train ride again, but I've lost my zeal. It would take some work to validate either way, and anything can be proven with statistics*, but you only need to read the way it's written to see bias. Their facts and research may be immaculate, but the way it's been presented makes me instantly skeptical unfortunately.

* - Examples that jump out would be whether their 50% in 20 years is inflation adjusted, and no regional consideration as the where the majority of the new state school places would be needed, but I'm certainly not going to go and check the numbers.

[Beany]

talking of Sunaks wealth!

Fixed. Replace x.com with twitter.com

[Swervin_Mervin]

That's still over £2billion raised though, which could do a lot of good (it could get the junior doctors paid more than shelf stackers and off strike for one).

And incidentally - in the spirit of jealousy, it's only about 3 times the Sunaks personal wealth!

0.24% of the '23/'24 tax revenue. It might be a lot but it's still pissing in the wind in practice. For comparison, the 23/24 tax revenue rose 5% from the previous year.

I guess we could maybe put it towards bailing out Thames Water.

[Rich B]

That's still over £2billion raised though, which could do a lot of good (it could get the junior doctors paid more than shelf stackers and off strike for one).

And incidentally - in the spirit of jealousy, it's only about 3 times the Sunaks personal wealth!

0.24% of the '23/'24 tax revenue. It might be a lot but it's still pissing in the wind in practice. For comparison, the 23/24 tax revenue rose 5% from the previous year.

I guess we could maybe put it towards bailing out Thames Water.

I gave a pretty good example of what it could fully cover. Which would help solve one of the Tories big 5 promises that they're failing so badly on - that's worth quarter of a percent of the budget!

[Mito Man]

0.25% of the budget to figure out how to allocate to mates

[Rich B]

0.25% of the budget to figure out how to allocate to mates

well exactly. That is a part of why we are where we are!

[Nic]

There's a heavy assumption here that 1000's will end up in state schools and no net tax gain which is frankly nonsense, the fallout will be miniscule.

If you are that way inclined and want to send your kids to a private school it will still happen.

The other aspect not mentioned here once is who actually pays for private education. From my experience its nearly always out of capital, inheritance, an early inheritance or the grandparent/aunty etc, the latter few in turn reduce wealthy peoples estates and in turn inheritance tax.

Wages here. Sorry to burst that idea! Maybe I should start guilt tripping the old folks who, as boomers, are obviously bathing in the wealth they've stolen from Gen Z.

The tax gain wouldn't be significant. And given that this appears to be Labour's flagship policy, it says a lot about their plans (they have no fucking clue).

Similar to thoughts here, most parents who put their kids in a private school do it because they want the best for their kids, it’s not a status thing as commonly perceived. We also pay out of what we earn rather than grandparents.

Approx 650 kids in the whole school, from 3 years old to 18 year old. Numerous awards and one of the best independent schools in the UK.

[Simon]

There'll be loads of empty schools and free teachers that the state can snap up cheap when the 40%* of pupils leave private schools!

Or, there'll be minimal change to pupil numbers and the whole thing will carry on as is with a bit more money going into the government pot.

I suspect option 2 is more likely.

*number provided by the daily mail.

Point of order - to be a teacher in a state school you need actual relevant qualifications, teaching placements, etc. To be a teacher in a private school you need merely just pass the interview. You may not actually be employable in the state sector at all, because the bar, ironically, is so much lower in the private sector.