| VAT on Private School 14:06 - Jun 13 with 29407 views | mutters |
Whilst it does seem like the correct thing to do (why are they granted VAT free / Charity status in the first place?), how on earth will the system cope if there is a mass migration to the state sector? We are already short of school places and also decent ones as well. |  |
| |  |
| VAT on Private School on 16:56 - Jun 17 with 2410 views | StokieBlue |
| VAT on Private School on 16:55 - Jun 17 by Zapers |
Pick a country with a low rate of suicides. |
What on earth are you on about?
You've got yourself into a right pickle and are making no sense at all.
SB |  | | |
| VAT on Private School on 22:40 - Jun 17 with 2231 views | bluestandard |
| VAT on Private School on 16:44 - Jun 17 by Mullet |
Are you talking about elderly care and disabled care? I thought the word healthcare was pretty clear and the comparison with education obvious?
If not, you’ve made a terrible mistake or a terrible point it seems. However, the fact that public healthcare and public care is in such a parlous state, more so than education only strengthens the point.
The right wing has continually stripped away and degraded the most essential parts of society. Redressing that and making the rich pay for it is not some ideological minefield. |
Yes, a lot of people don't realise that many care homes provide 'healthcare'. They receive money from the NHS directly to do so. They don't charge VAT. Its not a mistake.
Its also not a terrible point, and you describing it as such, all you are doing is revealing your own ideology. I have no issue with that, but be up front about it, rather than cloaking it in the language of righteousness. I agree that public healthcare and education are in a dreadful state, but I don't agree that this is because of the existence of private schools and private healthcare providers. |  | | |
| VAT on Private School on 22:49 - Jun 17 with 2223 views | bluestandard |
| VAT on Private School on 10:38 - Jun 17 by redrickstuhaart |
Of course its a luxury. Its a big advantage, of something much more costly and of higher quality (generally) that you can pay to enjoy, over and above what is the norm. No reason it should be vat free (i.e. a tax break).
No idea what you mean by money benefitting a legal entity. People paying school fees are legal entities, and they get a tax break for a luxury which is currently non vatable. |
Look, a tax break is defined as 'a change in the law that results in the opportunity to pay less in taxes'. I already explained why I don't think VAT registration falls into that category, although I accept that it means that the product is less expensive to the consumer than it would be. My point was that there are private schools that do a great job that can't afford to swallow this, yet are providing a vital contribution to education in the UK without having any impact on the state sector. I think I'l gracefully bow out of his back and forth because we're just restating the same points.
More broadly, where does it end. People pay more for property which is close to well-performing state schools. Shall we charge VAT on those houses? It isn't black and white like so many on here seem to think. | | | |
| VAT on Private School on 06:46 - Jun 18 with 2130 views | DJR |
| VAT on Private School on 15:50 - Jun 13 by DJR |
A consequence of this that I haven't heard mentioned is some private or public schools opting out of the Teachers' Pension Scheme.
Some already do, but this would save employers' contributions, and enable wages to be cut without affecting take home pay.
But depriving employees of pensions is not a particularly welcome outcome.
As it is, I do find it surprising that this is the one battle Starmer has chosen to wage. [Post edited 13 Jun 2024 16:23]
|
The Telegraph is now reporting this.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/pensions/private-school-teachers-pensions-thre
If the result is to deprive teachers of pensions, and affect poorer parents, that does not seem to be me to be particularly just.
Why not just bite the bullet and tax wealth (and I don't mean a wealth tax), which could raise far more money, and target the right people? [Post edited 18 Jun 2024 6:48]
|  | | |
| VAT on Private School on 07:32 - Jun 18 with 2092 views | Swansea_Blue |
| VAT on Private School on 06:46 - Jun 18 by DJR |
The Telegraph is now reporting this.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/pensions/private-school-teachers-pensions-thre
If the result is to deprive teachers of pensions, and affect poorer parents, that does not seem to be me to be particularly just.
Why not just bite the bullet and tax wealth (and I don't mean a wealth tax), which could raise far more money, and target the right people? [Post edited 18 Jun 2024 6:48]
|
Isn’t liquidity a problem with any sort of tax on wealth? Someone may own a stately home as their sole residence and still be broke, for example. |  |
| |
| VAT on Private School on 07:47 - Jun 18 with 2076 views | DJR |
| VAT on Private School on 07:32 - Jun 18 by Swansea_Blue |
Isn’t liquidity a problem with any sort of tax on wealth? Someone may own a stately home as their sole residence and still be broke, for example. |
Gains are currently treated more favourably for tax purposes than income, but such a tax only kicks in on a disposal. And when it comes to, say, the obscenity of a £150 million flat in Westminster paying less council tax than a Band D property in Ipswich, I don't see much evidence in my travels around the vast areas of London with very expensive properties of owners who are lacking in money. And as it is, were it not for the abolition of rates, such properties would be paying much more these days: that was the whole point of the poll tax, which morphed into council tax.
As regards things like stately homes, these are perhaps the sort of places that could be given special treatment for cultural or historic reasons, but perhaps on the basis that they are opened up to the public. And the National Trust is always about to step in, as it has done on numerous occasions. As it is, it is probably death duties that are much more of an issue for stately homes, but this has been the case for decades.
Interestingly, the IMF have themselves recently produced a paper on taxing wealth, and suggested this was something countries could do following the pandemic.
https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/imf-how-to-notes/Issues/2024/03/08/How-to-Ta
Here is the precis.
Tackling income and wealth inequality is at the top of the policy agenda in many countries. This note discusses three approaches of wealth taxation, based on (1) returns with a capital income tax, (2) stocks with a wealth tax, and (3) transfers of wealth through an inheritance (or estate) tax. Taxing actual returns is generally less distortive and more equitable than a wealth tax. Hence, rather than introducing wealth taxes, reform priorities should focus on strengthening the design of capital income taxes (notably capital gains) and closing existing loopholes, while harnessing technological advances in tax administration—including cross-border information sharing—to foster tax compliance. The inheritance tax is important to address the buildup of dynastic wealth. [Post edited 18 Jun 2024 8:06]
| | | |
| VAT on Private School on 08:04 - Jun 18 with 2033 views | mutters |
| VAT on Private School on 07:32 - Jun 18 by Swansea_Blue |
Isn’t liquidity a problem with any sort of tax on wealth? Someone may own a stately home as their sole residence and still be broke, for example. |
Its a tricky balance. Somebody could be wealthy in terms of assets etc but may not have much disposable income as you say. A couple of my friend's parents spring to mind in this scenario. Paper wealthy, but all cash in the house.
If a blanket tax is applied then this would enforce the sale of a house where they have lived for 50+ years and want to stay in till the end. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| VAT on Private School on 08:13 - Jun 18 with 2010 views | Swansea_Blue |
| VAT on Private School on 07:47 - Jun 18 by DJR |
Gains are currently treated more favourably for tax purposes than income, but such a tax only kicks in on a disposal. And when it comes to, say, the obscenity of a £150 million flat in Westminster paying less council tax than a Band D property in Ipswich, I don't see much evidence in my travels around the vast areas of London with very expensive properties of owners who are lacking in money. And as it is, were it not for the abolition of rates, such properties would be paying much more these days: that was the whole point of the poll tax, which morphed into council tax.
As regards things like stately homes, these are perhaps the sort of places that could be given special treatment for cultural or historic reasons, but perhaps on the basis that they are opened up to the public. And the National Trust is always about to step in, as it has done on numerous occasions. As it is, it is probably death duties that are much more of an issue for stately homes, but this has been the case for decades.
Interestingly, the IMF have themselves recently produced a paper on taxing wealth, and suggested this was something countries could do following the pandemic.
https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/imf-how-to-notes/Issues/2024/03/08/How-to-Ta
Here is the precis.
Tackling income and wealth inequality is at the top of the policy agenda in many countries. This note discusses three approaches of wealth taxation, based on (1) returns with a capital income tax, (2) stocks with a wealth tax, and (3) transfers of wealth through an inheritance (or estate) tax. Taxing actual returns is generally less distortive and more equitable than a wealth tax. Hence, rather than introducing wealth taxes, reform priorities should focus on strengthening the design of capital income taxes (notably capital gains) and closing existing loopholes, while harnessing technological advances in tax administration—including cross-border information sharing—to foster tax compliance. The inheritance tax is important to address the buildup of dynastic wealth. [Post edited 18 Jun 2024 8:06]
|
Ta. Interesting IMF piece and makes sense. Taxing the returns can be the only way really, but then we do want parity/fairness. It seems daft that say a GP’s income is taxed a chunk at 40% whereas a billionaire making an income through investments is only taxed at 20% and have a an uncapped 5% tax-free threshold (which is why Sunak’s tax rate is low for his income). | |
| |
| VAT on Private School on 08:23 - Jun 18 with 2006 views | mutters |
| VAT on Private School on 08:13 - Jun 18 by Swansea_Blue |
Ta. Interesting IMF piece and makes sense. Taxing the returns can be the only way really, but then we do want parity/fairness. It seems daft that say a GP’s income is taxed a chunk at 40% whereas a billionaire making an income through investments is only taxed at 20% and have a an uncapped 5% tax-free threshold (which is why Sunak’s tax rate is low for his income). |
Yep it is crazy. It always amazed me (but not surprised me) that the tax breaks are for the wealthier when in fact it's the poorest that need it the most. | |
| |
| VAT on Private School on 08:39 - Jun 18 with 1973 views | DJR |
| VAT on Private School on 08:04 - Jun 18 by mutters |
Its a tricky balance. Somebody could be wealthy in terms of assets etc but may not have much disposable income as you say. A couple of my friend's parents spring to mind in this scenario. Paper wealthy, but all cash in the house.
If a blanket tax is applied then this would enforce the sale of a house where they have lived for 50+ years and want to stay in till the end. |
It would be possible to build into the system the increased council tax being levied against the house, and recovered on death of the the last to die, rather like care costs.
But maybe their descendants wouldn't be so keen on this. | | | |
| VAT on Private School on 08:48 - Jun 18 with 1954 views | itfcjoe |
| VAT on Private School on 08:04 - Jun 18 by mutters |
Its a tricky balance. Somebody could be wealthy in terms of assets etc but may not have much disposable income as you say. A couple of my friend's parents spring to mind in this scenario. Paper wealthy, but all cash in the house.
If a blanket tax is applied then this would enforce the sale of a house where they have lived for 50+ years and want to stay in till the end. |
I think this misses what a wealth tax is actually for though, it's not for people with one primary residence, it's those with reams of assets and properties and if they have to dispose of stuff then so be it because disposal is the only way to stop more money going from the working classes to the super rich |  |
| |
| VAT on Private School on 08:58 - Jun 18 with 1933 views | CBMTOBWMMBG |
| VAT on Private School on 08:04 - Jun 18 by mutters |
Its a tricky balance. Somebody could be wealthy in terms of assets etc but may not have much disposable income as you say. A couple of my friend's parents spring to mind in this scenario. Paper wealthy, but all cash in the house.
If a blanket tax is applied then this would enforce the sale of a house where they have lived for 50+ years and want to stay in till the end. |
If we want to tax wealth you have to do it for all.
So if you are asset rich you should have to sell assets (shares, property etc) or take out loans against those assets (e.g. equity release) to pay for the wealth tax.
For your friend's parents it would be a simple choice: borrow against the value of the house, or move.
It may seem harsh to some, but them's the choices and wealth is where the money is.
It'll never happen. All political parties are in thrall to the older generation. | | | |
| VAT on Private School on 10:46 - Jun 18 with 1859 views | tractorshark |
| VAT on Private School on 13:37 - Jun 15 by mutters |
I'd be interested in hearing what you define Elite as these days. There is a large number of Private School kids who do not come from an Elite background, or what I would term super wealthy. |
A little late replying to this earlier question and I stress my take on private schools is limited to my experiences in cricket.
But just to clarify when I talk about the elite, I’m not referring to the parents or students.
I have seen both ends of the spectrum in cricket, the families from wealthy diplomatic circles and those pumping all the money they have to privately educate their kids.
But I have also dealt with the MCC, the ECB and the counties and that’s where elitism is still rife.
As an adult, cricket is a game for everyone. As a kid, it is rapidly becoming a game for the elite.
The majority of people in those organisations are not interested in change. They will say they are, there will be initiatives, soundbites and box-ticking exercises but there is no appetite for any revamp that will put their own comfy, cosy old-school network at risk.
I laugh when I see clips of the likes of Atherton on Sky assessing videos of kids practising. How many of those feature children in the playground with chalk on the wall for stumps? Not many. Most of them involve kids with back gardens that can accommodate Mark Wood’s run-up.
A few years ago, an academy director at a county admitted to me in the south around 75% of professional cricketers come from public school education.
The county he worked for used to announce their academy intake by listing the schools the boys and girls attended not the clubs they played for.
A very big part of the selection process hinges on what school you went to and you’re naive to think otherwise.
You will never get meaningful cricket back in state schools in the south. It’s too expensive to maintain the facilities and too high risk. Grammar schools still do well and open doors for kids.
But it’s the club system that should be pivotal to producing our cricketers not the education system. That’s where the real talent is and the rough diamonds that get lost to other sports.
When we came out of lockdown, there were better players in premier club cricket than there were in the ill-fated Division Three of county cricket.
But the counties still weren’t interested.
If a state school student performs well, the public schools will cherry pick and offer scholarships. I’ve seen one lad who still plays county cricket get 96%.
But, on the whole, kids will get offered between 10% and 40% and that will suddenly be stripped back when they fall away in the academy pathways.
During that time, their involvement in club cricket will be significantly reduced and their parents will be left wondering if the dream they were sold was really worth the £150k bill.
In terms of education alone, then perhaps yes. But that also depends on the academic appetite of the child.
A well-respected and very talented cricket master at a public school once admitted to me that you just needed to attend the sixth form of public school. The years before were irrelevant.
His reasoning was the sixth form gave you every opportunity to thrive in your chosen field, whether it be sport, music, arts or academia, and the old-school tie to network.
I don’t blame anyone for sending their children to public school. Undoubtedly, the education is superior in the same way private medical is better than the NHS.
For me, personally, I had the opportunity. My eldest was offered a sports scholarship but we turned it down because we felt it would impact on what we financially could do with my other children.
I didn’t think it was fair they may be deprived of opportunities and after-school activities just to fund their older sibling’s education.
They’ve all turned out well, I don’t regret it. [Post edited 18 Jun 2024 10:56]
| | | |
| VAT on Private School on 10:54 - Jun 18 with 1855 views | jonbull88 |
| VAT on Private School on 08:58 - Jun 18 by CBMTOBWMMBG |
If we want to tax wealth you have to do it for all.
So if you are asset rich you should have to sell assets (shares, property etc) or take out loans against those assets (e.g. equity release) to pay for the wealth tax.
For your friend's parents it would be a simple choice: borrow against the value of the house, or move.
It may seem harsh to some, but them's the choices and wealth is where the money is.
It'll never happen. All political parties are in thrall to the older generation. |
Tbh going after wealth could be a dangerous game. If you get a job, pay taxes on the income, then buy a house with the income, only to be told you’ve got to pay more as you’ve got successful will get a lot of peoples back up. Where do you stop, in terms of wealth. Because anyone super rich will just move their money out of the country. | | | |
| VAT on Private School on 11:15 - Jun 18 with 1831 views | mutters |
| VAT on Private School on 08:58 - Jun 18 by CBMTOBWMMBG |
If we want to tax wealth you have to do it for all.
So if you are asset rich you should have to sell assets (shares, property etc) or take out loans against those assets (e.g. equity release) to pay for the wealth tax.
For your friend's parents it would be a simple choice: borrow against the value of the house, or move.
It may seem harsh to some, but them's the choices and wealth is where the money is.
It'll never happen. All political parties are in thrall to the older generation. |
Yep, I don't like this one bit, it is incredibly harsh. There are so many scenarios where elderly people end up asset-rich, or cash poor, for example, one partner dies and the other is surviving on a pension etc. To force them out of their property or even borrow against it is just a no-no. The stress of being in debt at that stage of life is not right.
If we are talking about people with multiple properties, and lots of reserves then that is a different conversation.
I don't really like the idea of additional taxes on people just because they have saved or invested well. Tax is paid when you earn money when you spend money and if you are fortunate enough when you die and your estate qualifies for Inheritance Tax. Also, your pension is taxed if it goes above your tax-free threshold.
At what point do you say you've been taxed enough? | |
| |
| VAT on Private School on 11:16 - Jun 18 with 1829 views | mutters |
| VAT on Private School on 08:48 - Jun 18 by itfcjoe |
I think this misses what a wealth tax is actually for though, it's not for people with one primary residence, it's those with reams of assets and properties and if they have to dispose of stuff then so be it because disposal is the only way to stop more money going from the working classes to the super rich |
If its set at a level that the majority of the people are out of it (i.e. they are going after the super-rich) then that's a different conversation.
The Greens I believe has proposed above the £10m mark. | |
| |
| VAT on Private School on 11:21 - Jun 18 with 1808 views | CBMTOBWMMBG |
| VAT on Private School on 10:54 - Jun 18 by jonbull88 |
Tbh going after wealth could be a dangerous game. If you get a job, pay taxes on the income, then buy a house with the income, only to be told you’ve got to pay more as you’ve got successful will get a lot of peoples back up. Where do you stop, in terms of wealth. Because anyone super rich will just move their money out of the country. |
Yes, agreed, but that is where the money is.
Every year the country spends way more than it brings in through tax. So we get in more and more debt.
And we have an unsolved care home issue, a health service requiring greater funding, and a pension crisis looming as final salary schemes become less and less. And that's just issues for the older generation. That's tens of billions a year that we would ideally spend, helping everyone.
So, it's about choices.
Some examples. Taxing second homes much more, reforming and increasing council tax on all higher value properties, increasing capital gains tax, getting rid of the 7 year inheritance tax rule. All these could be done and could target wealth. | | | |
| VAT on Private School on 11:27 - Jun 18 with 1788 views | CBMTOBWMMBG |
| VAT on Private School on 11:15 - Jun 18 by mutters |
Yep, I don't like this one bit, it is incredibly harsh. There are so many scenarios where elderly people end up asset-rich, or cash poor, for example, one partner dies and the other is surviving on a pension etc. To force them out of their property or even borrow against it is just a no-no. The stress of being in debt at that stage of life is not right.
If we are talking about people with multiple properties, and lots of reserves then that is a different conversation.
I don't really like the idea of additional taxes on people just because they have saved or invested well. Tax is paid when you earn money when you spend money and if you are fortunate enough when you die and your estate qualifies for Inheritance Tax. Also, your pension is taxed if it goes above your tax-free threshold.
At what point do you say you've been taxed enough? |
Again, I agree.
But...
How do we pay for everything we want? My other post suggests some possibilities.
And again I agree every individual case is hard. No easy answers here.
But the serious politicians don't discuss the real hard choices, just tinker around the edges. [Post edited 18 Jun 2024 11:47]
| | | |
| VAT on Private School on 11:36 - Jun 18 with 1756 views | mutters |
| VAT on Private School on 11:27 - Jun 18 by CBMTOBWMMBG |
Again, I agree.
But...
How do we pay for everything we want? My other post suggests some possibilities.
And again I agree every individual case is hard. No easy answers here.
But the serious politicians don't discuss the real hard choices, just tinker around the edges. [Post edited 18 Jun 2024 11:47]
|
I think its a good question to ask.
Income vs expenditure. At a national level, it is a tough balance, but us consistently borrowing more than we spend is not a great situation to be in, especially when you consider who owns the debt. The Tories had the right idea to bring in some level of Austerity, but how they went about it was wrong and went after the wrong areas. There was no question that under Labour we did end up with a bloated public sector, which needed addressing, however again this was done in the wrong way IMO. Nowadays I am not sure any party really has a plan to resolve this, or maybe living in debt, like society, is the norm?
Most people would probably be happy to pay a bit extra (1p on income tax) if it guaranteed the NHS would become fit for purpose. I just don't trust the politicians to manage this. | |
| |
| VAT on Private School on 11:38 - Jun 18 with 1750 views | CBMTOBWMMBG |
| VAT on Private School on 11:16 - Jun 18 by mutters |
If its set at a level that the majority of the people are out of it (i.e. they are going after the super-rich) then that's a different conversation.
The Greens I believe has proposed above the £10m mark. |
£10m is a random number.
I would argue it has to be at much lower levels and gradually increase. Property taxes, for example, for those who bought houses more than 15 years ago are incredibly low compared to other countries.
We have changed this with very high property tax (stamp duty) on buying property now, so it is incredibly complex to introduce.
But that is where the wealth is: it is with those who bought property in the 70s, 80s, 90s, early 00s who are sitting on massive unearned gains (wealth). It is what could pay for what we need.
Politically toxic ! Lefties, righties, centralists. No-one likes it... | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
