V.A.T, in school fees

"Middle" and "average" are two of the most misused words when discussing pay (and other subjects), because there are different definitions of "average" and the percentage "in the middle".

I haven't paid any income tax for the last three years, because I didn't earn enough, so I didn't have anything to worry about anyway. I will have to pay something (not much) for the tax year which has just ended, because I now receive occupational pensions. Another reason I declare everything is because I want to earn enough to pay NICs to increase my state pension.

I don't know what the definition of "middle income" is. However, I know the DWP and council don't regard me as having a low income, because I'm not eligible for any benefits or council tax relief (apart from the 25% single occupier rebate). That would imply that "middle income" starts at below the threshold for paying income tax (currently £11,500). Errrmmm...however hard I prioritised or saved, I couldn't afford school fees.

gillybob No, I don't buy a lot of materials - maybe £200pa. When people pay me, all they're really getting is ME - lucky them! I do keep records such as fuel used, which are tax deductible.

Most of the children I teach from independent schools are "busy" after school and at the weekend with private tuition. Competition is very fierce and intense as the local schools receive far more applicants at 11+ than they have spaces available. They continue to have extra tuition throughout senior school. Joint parental income is well over £100,000.

Thank you, Lillie. That's the impression I have too. I've obviously never asked them, but I see their houses, expensive fixtures and fittings, cars, clothes, know what jobs the parents do and how many expensive holidays they take a year. Unless they rob the occasional bank, I really don't think they could manage the lifestyles they have on less than £100k.

My heart actually sinks when I take on students from independent schools, because I have a feeling that some parents think that throwing money at a problem will guarantee higher results.

Yes, daphne, there are all sorts of pressures in the independent sector too, quite different from the state sector. That's why I find it totally incongruous - back to the original subject - that Corbyn tries to talk about them both in the same breath on an emotive subject such as nutrition.

Two people in a household on average incomes or below average will be above average income-wise.

I don't know what whether or not we have a mortgage now has anything to do with our outgoings when we had DC at home incuding a mortgage
As they are in their late 30s and 40s now it is totally irrelevant as I am not paying for extra tuition for them any more.

My misunderstanding. I thought you were still paying for tuition. I assumed you were talking about current tuition rates and the people who pay them.

Lillie I know this is anecdotal (partially), but I find it quite ironic that there seems to be such a high rate of eating disorder amongst independently educated girls.

I agree with you about the different pressures. Being expected to "perform" well educationally in addition to being a brilliant musician, sportsperson as well as being thin and well-groomed takes its toll. I'm not going to give details, but working with a teenager for a year or more in his/her own home does give you an insight into family dynamics - although, of course, I have to keep my mouth shut.

Jalima What range would you consider to be "middle income"?

I don't know what tuition fees are now.

Middle income is not average income then?

I can't find the later charts. This one is from 2014, but incomes haven't changed much since then. This is household income - not individual.

It can be seen quite clearly that there's quite a difference between mean and median. There are far more people earning below mean income and the mode is somewhere around £300. The top quartile begins at about £700pw. This is household income, so might be a single person (with or without children) or a couple (with one or both working). It's before housing costs, which could cost 50% or more of income,and includes any benefits.

So where would you consider "middle income" to be? It really isn't that simple to define. I do know that a couple on median household income of about £440 with the average 1.8 children, paying average mortgage or rent couldn't afford private school fees and would struggle to pay tuition fees, the average rate for which is £25-30 an hour outside London.

Which average? And what range would you include? Average plus or minus how much?

Yes, it was a struggle.

Apologies! That's the 2011 chart. I copied the wrong one, but it really isn't that different from 2014.

So where would you put "middle income" on the chart?

I'm suggesting that a couple with a median income of £440pw, probably paying 50% of net income for housing plus over £1000pa for council tax and bills, food, clothes, transport, etc etc would need to be magicians to afford an additional £100+ per month for private tuition. I think they would be worse off than struggling.

Just call us Paul and Debbie.

Debbie, may I ask what attracted you to Paul?

Well it certainly wasn't his millions

No sensible reply? Ah well!

I honestly don't know what you are expecting in answer to your questions daphnedill which seem to have wandered far from the OP.

fullfact.org/economy/income-inequality-resolution-foundation/

As incomes appear to be going to become even more unequal, there will be even fewer able to pay for private education.
However, as that is only 7% of the population, I am sure that 7% do not care about the rest of us, even those who have more than the median.

Yes, they have wandered far from the OP. I agree.

The point is that people talk about "middle income" but can't define it.

The point is that most people can't define it either and think they are poorer relative to others than they actually are. The chart I posted shows why. The figures have changed, but the shape of the income distribution curve hasn't.

A household income of £50kpa places it firmly within the top quartile. They don't regard themselves as rich, because they know of people earning 6 or 7 figure salaries. Another common misconception is how much people on benefits receive and there was evidence of that earlier on the thread. Some people really seem to think that everybody could afford private school fees, if only they worked hard, prioritised and saved.

The fact is that only households in the wealthiest 10-15% of households can afford private school fees, however hard they work, whether they prioritise or save.

It's also a fact that private schools, free schools and academies have tax advantages which ordinary state schools don't. For example, state schools have to pay business rates on solar panels, but private schools receive an 80% exemption.

Private schools compete against each other to have the best facilities. The standard of teaching isn't significantly better than state schools, but the taxpayer is subsidising better facilities, such as swimming pools and tennis courts, which just aren't available to the majority of pupils. It's difficult to understand how anybody, especially somebody with socialist principles, can justify that.

I am not sure the alleged 7% do not care about the rest of us, but I don't know that 7% , so wouldn't judge .

Going back to these children who need these free sschools meals , Thornberry said these children were obese did she not?

Money breads money, and parents paying for a private education want the "value added" extras beyond the education itself.
20 or 30 years ago there were many sole proprietorship schools offering the basics at an affordable cost, but with all the new regulations these have found it impossible to survive. We are now left with the big business independent schools run by bursars and financial experts in the field, and they are just that - businesses.
dj is right that the 7% of the population in private education don't waste a second thinking about the rest. Call it smugness if you like, but they are successful earners and you can't really criticise them for not wanting the very best for their children.