V.A.T, in school fees

The study which the Labour Party referred to, seems to be this one:

www.ifs.org.uk/publications/6279

The conclusion was that free school meals raise the attainment by 4-8 weeks over two years for some children. The health of the children involved showed no significant improvement.

The report stated that more research was needed. However, the pilot schemes cost £12 million and it would appear that the results weren't promising enough to justify spending more money.

It was estimated that it would cost £1 billion (at 2012 prices), which represents poor value for money, as there are more effective ways of raising attainment.

The claim that school meals are "nutritious" is spurious. I've eaten thousands of school meals over the years, mainly because they're free in exchange for doing lunch duty. There is a huge variation between schools, but my general experience is that they are heavily carbohydrate-based, the vegetables are overcooked and the fruit is of poor quality. Given a choice (as pupils usually have in secondary schools), most pupils choose pasta followed by an iced bun (or similar). There is little high class protein.

The cost per pupil is about £10pw. I would rather see that money going directly to the families who need it.

Schools already receive pupil premium funding for children who receive FSM or have been in the last six years (separate from general formula funding) at the rates of £1320 for primary pupils, £935 for secondary pupils and £300 for service children.

Schools have a great deal of flexibility over how the money is spent. Pupil premium funding has been shown to raise attainment. It doesn't have to be spent only on FSM children, although schools must be accountable and demonstrate that they have closed the attainment gap between the poorest and the rest. This was a LibDem idea and was the trade-off for student fees. Nick Clegg's argument was that it was better to support poorer, younger children than subsidise wealthier students to obtain higher level qualifications.

Private schools are becoming a playground for the wealthy, especially overseas pupils.

May save a few labour council seats next month, may not

Totally agree Harrigran my partner worked very hard to send his son to a private school , paid taxes, so effectively paid twice, not wealthy, and if they had added VAT at the time he would not have been able to send him.
I think this is very class divisive and we could even have hard working parents of privately educated children paying for children of more wealthy parents to have a free dinner if they have chosen the state system. Make school dinners free for children who need it, but not everybody did or does.

I don't see why it should save Labour seats. Free school meals and VAT on school fees have nothing to do with county councils.

There are only 8 Labour seats in Essex (out of 75). Ukip will possibly lose its six seats, probably to the Conservatives.

County councils are, however, responsible for school transport, which is due to go up to an annual cost of £1000 (approx) per pupil. This is a huge issue for people in more rural areas and it's possible that Conservatives (and Labour) will lose seats to Independents who are campaigning on the issue.

I bet he earned more than £16,000 rafichagran! Some people cannot earn enough to send their children to private school, even if they want to. 80% of children at private schools come from households with an income over £50,000, which places them in the top few percent based on income.

PS. There are millions of hard working parents who will never earn enough to send their children to private schools.

Fee paying Schools with charitable status do not pay council tax or VAT AND THEY SHOULD. As for free school dinners YUK. My son and I agree that school dinners[ in our cases paid for] put us off a lot of foods for life!

As secondary school fees are from £10,000 p.a. I think you need to be earning £90.000 p.a.
I read that Mr. Platt who lost his appeal to take his child out of school for a holiday in Florida is comtemplating sending the child private. He will have no problem in getting a cheaper hol..

I attended a small private school from the age of 3 until I was 11 (1949-1957). I grew up in a council house in Tottenham, my father was a bus inspector and my mother worked in Lilly & Skinner. I am eternally grateful for the sacrifices they made. The neighbouring children on the White Hart Lane estate went to the council school opposite and they, like me, had school dinners. Mine cost 7/6 a week. Theirs were FREE. They even went across the road in the school holidays for free school dinners and were supervised by dinner ladies even though the school was closed. They sneaked me in with them one summer day. I remember the food was much better than the dinners I received at school. But my education was superior. We learned French from the age of 6, we visited museums, art galleries, theatres. The biggest class I attended had 10 pupils. The children were from mixed backgrounds from the publician's daughter and the advertising agent's son to the factory worker who made men's ties. I sent my eldest daughter to a similar school in 1973 in Enfield. The Labour Party closed it down along with quite a few others. Seems like they're intent on doing it again. Stifle choice and battery farm education.

Private schools are exempt from VAT because they are educational establishments - a category that includes vocational training colleges, universities, EFL colleges etc. How do the LP intend to define those educational establishments that they will remove from the VAT exemption and those that will remain exempt? As I've said in previous posts, VAT is a very complex tax - and complexity breeds loopholes.
Charitable status & it's zero-rated VAT is a different issue.
One poster said that school fees paid by an employer are not taxed but in fact they are - they are classed as a taxable company benefit whether or not the employer pays the fees direct or reimburses the employee, income tax is payable by that employee.
I do agree with the posters who've said that a particular tax for a particular service causes problems - trying to ensure the taxes raised match the funds needed is fraught with difficulties. Just think of road tax and the road improvement & maintenance programmes.
Instead of this divisive measure why can't the LP offer something substantial - how to tackle off-shore and other tax avoidance schemes - for example - and not just "We'll crack down on tax avoidance" but how they actually intend to recover the £40 billion they say there is in unpaid tax.

I read that Mr. Platt who lost his appeal to take his child out of school for a holiday in Florida is comtemplating sending the child private. He will have no problem in getting a cheaper hol..

You're quite wrong there Beammeup - most Independent schools take a very dim view of absenteesim. I doubt if any such school of note would allow a trip to Disneyworld during term-time.

Sorry. Riverbank,what I omitted to say is that the private schools have longer school holidays. For example, the Summer term ends around 14th July, which give you a chance to get a considerably cheaper holiday. Our local private schools have a week longer at Easter, Half terms and whit. In all they give 17 weeks holiday a year. This is because with small classes you get more into the kids in a shorter time.

Thanks for the info about taxable income db and I stand corrected. Have school fees always been taxed? How does it work if an employee is based overseas?

Here are some other ways to reduce school fees:

www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-2558653/The-5-sneaky-perfectly-legal-ways-Britains-richest-parents-cut-tax-bill-private-school-fees.html

Tax rules might have changed since 2014, so some of these methods might no longer work.

Lillie, my grandchildren in year 1 receive the free school meals for that age group. The kitchens in their village primary school were ripped out in the Thatcher years but I am happy to report that they receive excellent, healthy school meals that are delivered to several schools in our large, rural county. Their are several choices for main course and dessert. Parents choose what the children want to eat in advance. My DGCs take a part in deciding.

I think it is an excellent idea. The charitable status of some of the richest public schools in the land has always irked me. Like any profit making organisation with a substantial turnover they should pay and charge vat. With free school meals for all there will be no stigma attached to those who have to apply for them, whilst ensuring that all have an opportunity to be well-nourished and therefore in a more suitable frame of mind to learn and to absorb what they are learning.

How much were the school fees Hollycat? The average is now £16,000. I seriously don't think that a bus inspector and shop assistant could earn enough to pay school fees and rent (not to mention other bills and food) these days, however much they scrimped and saved.

PS. I went to a state primary school (as did my children) and we all visited museums, art galleries, etc. plus many other visits. Schools have changed since the 1940s.

There is no reason to add VAT to school fees, to me. Should that change (fine, we'll pay), who will determine what to use the VAT for (from school fees)? I don't see a direct connection between paying for the childrens schooling and VAT being used to supply meals - there is nothing tangible in place to make this scheme work.

There doesn't need to be a stigma attached to free school meals. Both my children received them for a few years. Schools now have swipe cards or touch technology, so that money can be loaded on to the cards. None of the pupils need to know where the money has come from.

Deviating slightly, I think concern should also be shown for secondary school children's performance in the afternoon. In town, nearby, and in so many others, the secondary pupils, and indeed many primary ones, converge on local shops and supermarkets. We lived, until recently, on the route between Tesco and secondary school, and the number who passed with a sweet drink and a packet of biscuits in hand worried me. Certainly, they had eaten, but I'm not sure if what they'd had would be performance enhancing.

I agree with you, grannybuy. Presumably those schools allow their pupils to leave the premises at lunchtime. Many don't. The problem is in some schools that they don't have the physical capacity for 1000+ pupils for an hour at lunchtime.

I once worked in a school, where the older pupils were allowed to leave. A new head banned lunch time leaving, but had to back down, because it was soon obvious that there was literally nowhere for the pupils to go.

Even when pupils have to remain in school, many of them choose the unhealthy options at lunch time. I seriously question whether school meals are "healthy".

Hollycat unless your local authority were different (and I don't think they were) free school meal were only available to children in state schools whose parents were out of work and yes the schools did open in the holidays but ONLY for these children. I remember asking why some children I knew were allowed to go to school for their dinners and my mum telling me their dads weren't working and they needed the help.
daphnedill School dinners did vary over the years which is why nutritional standards were introduced. Can I ask how any you have eaten since 2014? (See my last post for the link)
grannybuy there was a secondary school teacher on QT last night who spoke about the problems he had and said he would like to see the scheme extended to secondary schools.

Anniebach I told you I've worked both. My parent's shop opened from 8 until 10.30pm so we did a 15 hour day. But it wasn't all work, you quite often sat around when customers were light. On the other hand when I was teaching you rarely sat down for more than 10mins so it was much more intense and harder work. I read all my English homework books when I was covering the shop. I took loads of stuff home to work on when I was teaching. And as I said the shop made more money.

As has been said some parents do without to pay for private education which is their choice, but they should not pay extra to fund other folks children's meals, some of which may have bigger in comes use state schools, and spend their money as they wish, which should include school meals for their child,

And some children do without food because their parents are on basic wages and rely on food banks to make ends meet. Shouldn't we feed children of hard working poor families?