Tax paying parents are already helping the state by not sending their kids to state!! It would otherwise cost the state 7.5k annually so why so we be double penalised by a selfish vote seeking policy that is 100% sure to backfire on all students. 1) exodus of kids leaving state 2) increase burden on state sector 3) parents who originally were using state will just buy houses in the best school catchment areas, making it even more difficult for other families to buy in best school locations 4) property prices going up in good catchment schools 5) all kids have their studies impacted and destroyed! 6) well done SIR Keir, you in Parliament now HOW are you going to fix this mess!!!!! If you were really in favour of this policy as a gesture of good will your wife should be forced to pay back taxes on her private school education!!!!
@@Sheets-qi6pu agree with all of your points. I would add, it’s madness that those who don’t use the state school service have to pay extra for not using it. I don’t know how anyone can look at this as a good policy
Keir Starmer has nothing against private schools? Of course he doesn’t because his last two years were spent in one when his grammar school became an independent one and he was happy for the school to pay for his bursary. Two years of free private education for Starmer and then on to Oxford but heaven forbid todays kids get those opportunities…a man after Corbyn’s heart.
It is pretty obvious why not. Universities are not only educational establishments but also research facilities. You know, like Covid vaccines, MRI, liver transplant technology, etc. These are partially funded by school fees. If the uni has less money, means less research, and less inventions. Once the universities fall behind other European or US unis, foreign students stop coming, which means a decrease in cash (they pay high fees to learn in UK universities) which deteriorates the quality of the research programmes further. Also, there are many university spin-outs which are paying taxes, employing people, inventing new technologies, etc.
Slapping VAT on private school fees will make the schools even more exclusive and elitist. At my daughter’s school, around 19% of pupils will be leaving for the state sector within a year or two. The parents being priced out seem to be the ones on doctors’ salaries or other middle class professions. This policy has already FAILED
Why should parents who work hard and sacrifice to afford to give their kids the best chance they can, pay for kids whose parents don’t make these sacrifices? This is genuinely not fair. Instead of this, stop paying the lazy to stay at home and not contribute toward society, only take from it, and use this money to fund your extra teachers. Also what about the tax money saved by kids going to independent schools? See how this never gets mentioned. Labour is anti success. The best way to survive a labour government? Give up work and become dole scum.
my kids go to state school, so this doesn't affect me but I think its a very poor idea indeed. many children will be forced out of Private, they will go to state school, and there arent enough places as it is meaning that class sizes will grow even further and results will suffer. Not to mention this is further divides the haves and have nots in the UK making it even more difficult for state school kids to get decent jobs......
He should spend the money on assessing children’s special needs. It takes 3-4 on average to get an assessment for ADHD or Autism. It takes far too long.
It's often the after school clubs that attract parents to private schools. Eg, Doctors that save lives. Not something Labour would care about. Also, what about the tax break on university fees? Come on, make it fair across the board. Will state schools now provide the services that private schools do? There are doctors out there that simply couldn't function without private education. Who needs doctors though?
Extra VAT? What's the big deal? In 2011, Osborne raised it to 20%. Where's the proof that extracting more VAT will help state schools? Either that or we've already paid the bill!
The problem with socialist labour is they eventually run out of other peoples money. Kier Starmer literally gave no concern to that man and what he is working so hard for in giving his children private educations, he is clearly going without things in life to give them that opportunity and Starmergeddon is already taking its toll.
If you look at the manifesto instead of using a thatcher quote you would see that spending compared to the amount coming in from windfall tax and investment is half of that. The conservatives have actually pledged more spending this election
@@Connorpunk2024 the government saves £4.88 Billion by not having those kids in state schools do you want larger calsss sizes for all and to pay more tax to fund a bigger state education budget.
Get the school to invoice for the coming full school year on the 3rd. July 2024 - NO VAT. So forget how many kids are taken out of private school, ask Starmer has he "fully costed" that scenario into his bull shit manifesto. Oh, and just in case you're wondering, it's already happening out there in the private school sector.
So why not charge VAT on these VAt excempt service if more money is needed: Financial Services: This includes most banking, insurance, and investment services. Examples: Loans, savings accounts, insurance premiums, and investment advice. Education and Training: Educational services provided universities, private tuition and other educational institutions are exempt. Healthcare Services: Medical services provided by registered health professionals. Examples: Services by doctors, dentists, and opticians. Charitable Activities: Certain activities carried out by charities. Examples: Fundraising events and sales of donated goods by charity shops. Cultural Services: Services provided by non-profit organizations in the cultural sector. Examples: Admission to museums, art galleries, and zoos, provided they are non-profit. Property Transactions: Most sales, leases, and rentals of land and buildings. Examples: The sale of a house and long-term lease agreements. ???
Hope Stammer can provide sufficent places in schools for all these children who can no longer afford private school and the right teacher to student ratios after extra kids join state schools
Stammer needs to look at what happens to children. He is bent on usinfg funds to supply teachers let us have an independent organization audit this goverment and this goverment to reverts VAT criteria
Kier Starmer earns more than many parents of kids in private education. Is it fair that people less wealthy than him should pay a whacking great tax to further subsidise state schools that his children attend? Oh no they wouldn't answer that question would they. They'll give you the answer to their own question instead.
This argument is so basic I’m not even going to entertain it. Because in terms of tax gained it’s minuscule. It won’t make any change. Let’s talk about something that can be taxed and make a huge difference. Religion! In all its forms and denominations. Massive land and property owners that play little part now days.
Love it! The Jealous Labour Party voters have actually managed to make private school more elitist. Extra 20% will not affect the real wealthy. In fact they will take the view (Real Wealthy parents) that the last of the Riff Raff (Poorest private school kids)have been banished to State sector. Expect a massive building boom at Private Schools and school improvements. The VAT can now be reclaimed on all new capital expenditure, the money for new buildings will actually come from wealthy old boy school donors. I expect Labour will actually lose money on this. All funded by Taxpayers!😂😂😂 (Schools can claim VAt back for last 8 years on those shiny new classrooms) Why on earth would you make something more expensive if it was actually taken the burden off the state system?🤦🏼♂️ Well done chaps. Keep it up.
But why tax so un-equally… he never answers such questions, or (American here), I’m told evidence abounds of “whiplash” Starmer (changes of position) or evidence on camera, no deep fakes, of outright lying to cover him (or make a ludicrous try at it) in the moment, as if his immediate past or his illogical or evasive statements won’t speak for themselves. I fear for Britain. Seems like it could still rescue itself… eg police could engage in actual policing. Example: buy (if not enough are already on hand) for location of stolen property within 20 mins (to days or weeks of “dilatory” response is part of the job), IMSI catchers and the like. These are NOW CHEAP and have long been available to law enforcement in the US and much of Europe. They can be used by law enforcement so as to IMMEDIATELY TRACE AND LOCATE STOLEN PROPERTY (if electronics are among the stolen property no one should have to sureender just bc they have got it in public!) TO WITHIN ONE METER (3 feet). NO EXCUSES EXIST IN BRITAIN FOR THE HUGE SECONDARY MARKET in such stolen goods… the entire form of crime would largely END in UK if police just took this one step. Just destroy the MARKET for stolen goods by retrieving them fir their rightful owners. Sometimes property crime is not only not a “victimless” crime or “mere inconvenience,” it can be a matter if life fortunes forever altered, even (as inflated as this may sound it is true) life abd death consequences for the targeted victims of these “property crimes” increasingly ACCEPTED BY THE PUBLIC who seen unaware their lives need not be plagued by this type of crime.
Badly thought out policy, would be better to up basic rate tax by 1% to fund improvements to State schools. Parents sending their kids to private schools will still have to pay the 1% but not see the benefit. I’d respect Labour more if they did this rather than this politics of envy approach because they seem to forget a good number of its own ex-prime ministers, ministers and MPs also went to private schools. Sadiq Khan increased taxes and got re-elected. Starmer should follow his example and grow a pair😂
Reckon real reason Kier Starmer put. VAT on the fees is so he won’t come into contact with White Van Man when he is at the Private School gates with his kids.😂❤
Why do parents buy a private education for their children? Is it a selfless sacrifice to help the government provide more places and resources to the general population? Of course not. It is because they know that having a private education will give their children an advantage over their peers whose parents cannot (or, in some cases, choose not to) afford a private education. It's not merely a product of quality of instruction or class size either: in addition to being educational institutions, private schools are, inevitably, social institutions, and they function as exclusive social clubs for children from affluent families. When you buy a private education for your child, you also receive as an added bonus a ready-made network of influential connections that will benefit that child for the rest of her or his life. They will form strong bonds with peers who will one day inherit wealth, property, businesses, political legacies and social standing that others outside their school will have to fight very hard to gain. A private education is therefore an extremely valuable and, understandably, an extremely costly product. A private education is an unfair advantage that one can, provided they have the means, purchase for their child. I frankly struggle to understand how anyone justifies giving people a tax break to purchase such a product.
Tax relief that's right tax relief on private schools is a privilege not a right. They can pay their taxes like everyone else, I am not subsidising them. If they have enough money to pay for a private school they have a enough to pay their taxes.
No but we are currently saving the Government and the tax payer £4.8 billion in tax by not sending them to state. If you want to pay for that then by all means but suspect you want your cake and eat it. Popel that send their kids to private school all pay taxes. Universities dont have VAT but are you suggesting they should. Its a very selective viewpoint
@@rupertcooper7268 I guess we should be grateful that we can give you a 20% tax break for your sacrifice. I guess all kids will end up in public school as a result of the schools - which are profit-making businesses - will be required to pay the exact same taxes as any other businesses. Btw, the schools are not required to increase the school fees....you know there are other methods to find that money too. Maybe they should visit a fellow business which actually has to pay taxes or even a state school where they have to find money every year because of budget constraints. The public should not finance the tax breaks of the privileged for their education, especially when state schools are struggling. As for unis...apples and pears. Universities are research facilities as well not only educational establishments. Also, loans with good terms can be obtained for the less fortunate as well. Not exactly the same as when certain groups of society try to recreate themselves using public funding. So I think it is you who wants the cake and eat it, given you want private education for your kids, but expect that the general public - who sometimes have to decide between food and heating despite these are working - should partially finance it.
You can see that Starmer was really about to say something really rude to this entitled idiot and rightly so. According to him, a private educational establishment should have a tax break financed by the general public - including the people who cannot afford private education - so it is more affordable to the already privileged to go to private school. Basically what he says is that the "poor" people should stay where they are, his kids should be separated from them and this should be partially funded by the state in the form of tax breaks. And before anyone says that these schools don't receive funding directly. Their operations are cheaper because their income is tax free and this money is missing from the budget...
the government saves £4.88 Billion by not having those kids in state schools do you want larger class sizes for all and to pay more tax to fund a bigger state education budget?
@@rupertcooper7268 That's a very convenient excuse. The plan is not to close these establishments, just to make them pay VAT like every other business. This is what they are crying about. I hope you don't believe that all private schools will close and all those kids will end up in state schools. This is the same BS as the excuses to tax the ultra wealthy where the whole country is being held at ransom of the "but if they have to pay, they go somewhere else". So apparently the solution is to let them not to pay.
Tax paying parents are already helping the state by not sending their kids to state!! It would otherwise cost the state 7.5k annually so why so we be double penalised by a selfish vote seeking policy that is 100% sure to backfire on all students.
1) exodus of kids leaving state
2) increase burden on state sector
3) parents who originally were using state will just buy houses in the best school catchment areas, making it even more difficult for other families to buy in best school locations
4) property prices going up in good catchment schools
5) all kids have their studies impacted and destroyed!
6) well done SIR Keir, you in Parliament now HOW are you going to fix this mess!!!!!
If you were really in favour of this policy as a gesture of good will your wife should be forced to pay back taxes on her private school education!!!!
@@Sheets-qi6pu agree with all of your points. I would add, it’s madness that those who don’t use the state school service have to pay extra for not using it. I don’t know how anyone can look at this as a good policy
Keir Starmer has nothing against private schools?
Of course he doesn’t because his last two years were spent in one when his grammar school became an independent one and he was happy for the school to pay for his bursary. Two years of free private education for Starmer and then on to Oxford but heaven forbid todays kids get those opportunities…a man after Corbyn’s heart.
Absolutely
Sounds like “pulling up the ladder” to me.
Why remove the tax break for private schools but not universities? Politics of envy.
It is pretty obvious why not. Universities are not only educational establishments but also research facilities. You know, like Covid vaccines, MRI, liver transplant technology, etc. These are partially funded by school fees. If the uni has less money, means less research, and less inventions. Once the universities fall behind other European or US unis, foreign students stop coming, which means a decrease in cash (they pay high fees to learn in UK universities) which deteriorates the quality of the research programmes further. Also, there are many university spin-outs which are paying taxes, employing people, inventing new technologies, etc.
@@rkk578now make the same argument for early years and nursery settings 😊
what a terrible policy. will just push more kids into our state schools
Agreed.
yes i agree with you
Slapping VAT on private school fees will make the schools even more exclusive and elitist. At my daughter’s school, around 19% of pupils will be leaving for the state sector within a year or two. The parents being priced out seem to be the ones on doctors’ salaries or other middle class professions. This policy has already FAILED
Why should parents who work hard and sacrifice to afford to give their kids the best chance they can, pay for kids whose parents don’t make these sacrifices? This is genuinely not fair. Instead of this, stop paying the lazy to stay at home and not contribute toward society, only take from it, and use this money to fund your extra teachers. Also what about the tax money saved by kids going to independent schools? See how this never gets mentioned. Labour is anti success. The best way to survive a labour government? Give up work and become dole scum.
What utter nonsense
my kids go to state school, so this doesn't affect me but I think its a very poor idea indeed. many children will be forced out of Private, they will go to state school, and there arent enough places as it is meaning that class sizes will grow even further and results will suffer. Not to mention this is further divides the haves and have nots in the UK making it even more difficult for state school kids to get decent jobs......
He should spend the money on assessing children’s special needs. It takes 3-4 on average to get an assessment for ADHD or Autism. It takes far too long.
It's often the after school clubs that attract parents to private schools. Eg, Doctors that save lives. Not something Labour would care about. Also, what about the tax break on university fees? Come on, make it fair across the board. Will state schools now provide the services that private schools do? There are doctors out there that simply couldn't function without private education. Who needs doctors though?
Extra VAT? What's the big deal? In 2011, Osborne raised it to 20%. Where's the proof that extracting more VAT will help state schools? Either that or we've already paid the bill!
The problem with socialist labour is they eventually run out of other peoples money. Kier Starmer literally gave no concern to that man and what he is working so hard for in giving his children private educations, he is clearly going without things in life to give them that opportunity and Starmergeddon is already taking its toll.
If you look at the manifesto instead of using a thatcher quote you would see that spending compared to the amount coming in from windfall tax and investment is half of that.
The conservatives have actually pledged more spending this election
@@Connorpunk2024 It isn't when you add in the Green investment, that then outweighs the income by £1bn.
@@Connorpunk2024 the government saves £4.88 Billion by not having those kids in state schools do you want larger calsss sizes for all and to pay more tax to fund a bigger state education budget.
Get the school to invoice for the coming full school year on the 3rd. July 2024 - NO VAT. So forget how many kids are taken out of private school, ask Starmer has he "fully costed" that scenario into his bull shit manifesto. Oh, and just in case you're wondering, it's already happening out there in the private school sector.
So why not charge VAT on these VAt excempt service if more money is needed: Financial Services: This includes most banking, insurance, and investment services.
Examples: Loans, savings accounts, insurance premiums, and investment advice.
Education and Training: Educational services provided universities, private tuition and other educational institutions are exempt.
Healthcare Services: Medical services provided by registered health professionals.
Examples: Services by doctors, dentists, and opticians.
Charitable Activities: Certain activities carried out by charities.
Examples: Fundraising events and sales of donated goods by charity shops.
Cultural Services: Services provided by non-profit organizations in the cultural sector.
Examples: Admission to museums, art galleries, and zoos, provided they are non-profit.
Property Transactions: Most sales, leases, and rentals of land and buildings.
Examples: The sale of a house and long-term lease agreements.
???
Hope Stammer can provide sufficent places in schools for all these children who can no longer afford private school and the right teacher to student ratios after extra kids join state schools
Stammer needs to look at what happens to children. He is bent on usinfg funds to supply teachers let us have an independent organization audit this goverment and this goverment to reverts VAT criteria
Labour make massive mistake on VAT on private schools..
I have just lost my job thanks to “political changes”. Thanks Labour!
Labour are not the workers party anymore, they're just other Tories as Tories are just other Labour. Two sides of the same coin now.
Old Labour may have been stuck in the past but they weren't spiteful.
Tax Mosques😊
School can buy Teslas for teachers on salary sacrifice, reclaim VAT and pass it to clients in discounts. Besides, 20% is not much.
Kier Starmer earns more than many parents of kids in private education. Is it fair that people less wealthy than him should pay a whacking great tax to further subsidise state schools that his children attend? Oh no they wouldn't answer that question would they. They'll give you the answer to their own question instead.
Hope he has organized to help from private school to state schools
This argument is so basic I’m not even going to entertain it.
Because in terms of tax gained it’s minuscule.
It won’t make any change.
Let’s talk about something that can be taxed and make a huge difference.
Religion! In all its forms and denominations.
Massive land and property owners that play little part now days.
Love it! The Jealous Labour Party voters have actually managed to make private school more elitist. Extra 20% will not affect the real wealthy. In fact they will take the view (Real Wealthy parents) that the last of the Riff Raff (Poorest private school kids)have been banished to State sector. Expect a massive building boom at Private Schools and school improvements. The VAT can now be reclaimed on all new capital expenditure, the money for new buildings will actually come from wealthy old boy school donors.
I expect Labour will actually lose money on this. All funded by Taxpayers!😂😂😂 (Schools can claim VAt back for last 8 years on those shiny new classrooms)
Why on earth would you make something more expensive if it was actually taken the burden off the state system?🤦🏼♂️
Well done chaps. Keep it up.
But why tax so un-equally… he never answers such questions, or (American here), I’m told evidence abounds of “whiplash” Starmer (changes of position) or evidence on camera, no deep fakes, of outright lying to cover him (or make a ludicrous try at it) in the moment, as if his immediate past or his illogical or evasive statements won’t speak for themselves. I fear for Britain. Seems like it could still rescue itself… eg police could engage in actual policing. Example: buy (if not enough are already on hand) for location of stolen property within 20 mins (to days or weeks of “dilatory” response is part of the job), IMSI catchers and the like. These are NOW CHEAP and have long been available to law enforcement in the US and much of Europe. They can be used by law enforcement so as to IMMEDIATELY TRACE AND LOCATE STOLEN PROPERTY (if electronics are among the stolen property no one should have to sureender just bc they have got it in public!) TO WITHIN ONE METER (3 feet). NO EXCUSES EXIST IN BRITAIN FOR THE HUGE SECONDARY MARKET in such stolen goods… the entire form of crime would largely END in UK if police just took this one step. Just destroy the MARKET for stolen goods by retrieving them fir their rightful owners. Sometimes property crime is not only not a “victimless” crime or “mere inconvenience,” it can be a matter if life fortunes forever altered, even (as inflated as this may sound it is true) life abd death consequences for the targeted victims of these “property crimes” increasingly ACCEPTED BY THE PUBLIC who seen unaware their lives need not be plagued by this type of crime.
Badly thought out policy, would be better to up basic rate tax by 1% to fund improvements to State schools. Parents sending their kids to private schools will still have to pay the 1% but not see the benefit.
I’d respect Labour more if they did this rather than this politics of envy approach because they seem to forget a good number of its own ex-prime ministers, ministers and MPs also went to private schools.
Sadiq Khan increased taxes and got re-elected. Starmer should follow his example and grow a pair😂
taking from peter to pay paul how about the 31 billion to overseas countrys for net o
Ofcourse he went to private school.
Short memory when some forget their own education ,eh?
Reckon real reason Kier Starmer put. VAT on the fees is so he won’t come into contact with White Van Man when he is at the Private School gates with his kids.😂❤
Why do parents buy a private education for their children? Is it a selfless sacrifice to help the government provide more places and resources to the general population? Of course not. It is because they know that having a private education will give their children an advantage over their peers whose parents cannot (or, in some cases, choose not to) afford a private education. It's not merely a product of quality of instruction or class size either: in addition to being educational institutions, private schools are, inevitably, social institutions, and they function as exclusive social clubs for children from affluent families. When you buy a private education for your child, you also receive as an added bonus a ready-made network of influential connections that will benefit that child for the rest of her or his life. They will form strong bonds with peers who will one day inherit wealth, property, businesses, political legacies and social standing that others outside their school will have to fight very hard to gain. A private education is therefore an extremely valuable and, understandably, an extremely costly product. A private education is an unfair advantage that one can, provided they have the means, purchase for their child. I frankly struggle to understand how anyone justifies giving people a tax break to purchase such a product.
Bullshit
Tax relief that's right tax relief on private schools is a privilege not a right.
They can pay their taxes like everyone else, I am not subsidising them.
If they have enough money to pay for a private school they have a enough to pay their taxes.
No but we are currently saving the Government and the tax payer £4.8 billion in tax by not sending them to state. If you want to pay for that then by all means but suspect you want your cake and eat it. Popel that send their kids to private school all pay taxes. Universities dont have VAT but are you suggesting they should. Its a very selective viewpoint
@@rupertcooper7268 I guess we should be grateful that we can give you a 20% tax break for your sacrifice. I guess all kids will end up in public school as a result of the schools - which are profit-making businesses - will be required to pay the exact same taxes as any other businesses. Btw, the schools are not required to increase the school fees....you know there are other methods to find that money too. Maybe they should visit a fellow business which actually has to pay taxes or even a state school where they have to find money every year because of budget constraints. The public should not finance the tax breaks of the privileged for their education, especially when state schools are struggling. As for unis...apples and pears. Universities are research facilities as well not only educational establishments. Also, loans with good terms can be obtained for the less fortunate as well. Not exactly the same as when certain groups of society try to recreate themselves using public funding. So I think it is you who wants the cake and eat it, given you want private education for your kids, but expect that the general public - who sometimes have to decide between food and heating despite these are working - should partially finance it.
You can see that Starmer was really about to say something really rude to this entitled idiot and rightly so. According to him, a private educational establishment should have a tax break financed by the general public - including the people who cannot afford private education - so it is more affordable to the already privileged to go to private school. Basically what he says is that the "poor" people should stay where they are, his kids should be separated from them and this should be partially funded by the state in the form of tax breaks. And before anyone says that these schools don't receive funding directly. Their operations are cheaper because their income is tax free and this money is missing from the budget...
the government saves £4.88 Billion by not having those kids in state schools do you want larger class sizes for all and to pay more tax to fund a bigger state education budget?
@@rupertcooper7268 That's a very convenient excuse. The plan is not to close these establishments, just to make them pay VAT like every other business. This is what they are crying about. I hope you don't believe that all private schools will close and all those kids will end up in state schools. This is the same BS as the excuses to tax the ultra wealthy where the whole country is being held at ransom of the "but if they have to pay, they go somewhere else". So apparently the solution is to let them not to pay.
Quite right to increase vat. Eton regularly puts up it's fees. Do parents take their kids out of eton, I think not.
You’re confusing Eton with other private schools. Not every private school is like eton. Around 5-10% are
Uneducated argument…I’m actually embarrassed for you😲