Public Schools set to lose charitable status

[Duke Malcolm]

Public Schools (or by whatever other names they are known by : Independant Schools, Private Schools, et cetera) are set to lose their right to not pay taxes in the Charities and Trustee Investment (Scotland) Bill.

Auntie Provides:

Link

In my view, this is just a classist piece of law. The requirement to pay taxes will just eat away at sponsorships, grants, and bursaries provided by the schools, so even less poorer folk will be able to attend.
But what do the honorable folk here think of it all?

[doc_bean]

Won't that make grants and such deductable ?

Over here it would be an attack on the 'freedom of education'. I don't know if you have something like that in the UK.

It seems like they don't want rich kids better education, everyone should get the same crappy education (or is Brittish public education still decent ?).

Ultimately, the schools will just adjust their fees, so really, this is just a hidden tax for the wealthy.

[JAG]

Public Schools (or by whatever other names they are known by : Independant Schools, Private Schools, et cetera) are set to lose their right to not pay taxes in the Charities and Trustee Investment (Scotland) Bill.

About bloody time. Down with the elitest schooling system.

[Somebody Else]

Yes... that way everyone can be mediocre.

Who wants an elite anyway? All they do is provide most of the new ideas, run the country effectively... and oh yes, we aren't the ones whohang around on street corners terrorizing people. We have more style than that.

If a standard level of education is required, bring the bottom end up, not the top end down - that's just bloody stupid.

Anyway, as mentioned by King Malcolm, we'll still be able to afford the consequentially increased fees, excluding the peasant class even more.

Let me see. So, people should pay more than they do to go to Eton, Harrow, Radley etc. and they should pay less than they do to go to Oxford, Cambridge etc.? Because they're elitist institutions?

[English assassin]

His majesty is perfectly right, as JAG's response makes clear, that whatever else you may think of this move it is naked class warfare.

Personally I don't think a democratic parliament should be prostituted to pee on people just because you don't like the way they talk. (see also fox hunting). Its childish and its hate filled.

The correct approach would be for Labour, with its completely and totally brilliant approach to public services, to make state schools so wonderful that only a total muppet would think of paying for education.

Speaking personally I also feel rather strongly about this, since I attended a quite well known public school free gratis and for nothing since the school gave me a scholarship from my (state) primary school. But oh no, of course, they shouldn't be charities should they...

Yup, if labour had been in power when I was a kid I'd have a fulfilling life of shelf stacking (and no doubt labour voting) ahead of me. Social mobility, in a Gordon Brown stylee. Nice one.

[InsaneApache]

Ahhh yes .....education, education, education...good ol' uncle Tonys mantra back in '97....

The socialists abolished the grammar schools and then because of all the 'dumbing' down of the education system to the lowest common denominator they then send their kids to private schools....but wait!!! not any longer, at least not in bonnie Scotland...still theres always the London Oratory School if you're the Prime Minister and your old school (Fettis) is now out of bounds.

Our very own class warrior here (mentioning no names ) has again made another fatuous remark, when he knows darn well that (al)most of the cabinet went to public schools. The hypocrisy of socialism never fails to astound me.

[therother]

An interesting piece, focusing more on the schools issue, from the Scotsman.

It seems to me that the system is being given a much needed update, as there are major loopholes in the current laws, loopholes that have allowed fraudulent charities to appear and sap the confidence of the public in the charities system.

It also seems that many schools believe that they are charities as defined by the new legislation, in that they provide a "public benefit" without "unduly restrictive" fee. If so, they will not be affected by the change at all.

And even if they lose charity status in Scotland, they will still be classified as a charity under UK tax laws, so the difference will only be in local taxation rates.

[JAG]

Of course it is class warfare, but class warfare with a purpose!

There is some things which just need to be done on no other grounds except egalitarian ones, this is one of those issues. Schooling should not be better because you can pay more, period. It is not fair. Period.

Take that as class warfare if you like, I do not mind, in fact I am quite open about it, but it is done for reasons which benefit all and do not institutionalise money as a way of getting better education / services.

[Don Corleone]

Well, supposedly America is more class stratified than the UK, or so you guys always say. But private school tuition has never been tax exempt or deductible, and unless the school was religious in nature, it had to pay taxes as a business. I'm having a hard time getting worked up over the fact that a business might have to pay taxes. Based on the poor, poor, utterly piss poor state of public (government run) education in this country, I would argue that tuition to private schools should be tax deductible, but that's a losing battle.

[JAG]

I have never stated the US is more class divided than the UK, far from it. The UK still is the country with the biggest divide between rich and poor and those born into middle / upper class households and thsoe born into working class households.

The US is merely close to us that is all.

[Efrem]

There is no class system in Australia, and I very much doubt there is much of one in America. The Rich Poor divide has nothing to do with a class system, we simply don't think of ourselves as any class or classify people by their class. Britain is the only English speaking country with a class system.

[Ja'chyra]

Of course it is class warfare, but class warfare with a purpose!

There is some things which just need to be done on no other grounds except egalitarian ones, this is one of those issues. Schooling should not be better because you can pay more, period. It is not fair. Period.

Take that as class warfare if you like, I do not mind, in fact I am quite open about it, but it is done for reasons which benefit all and do not institutionalise money as a way of getting better education / services.

I don't really agree with this.

The way I see it everyone should (and is) entitled to a level of education, those who can afford to should be entitled to spend that money on giving their children a better education.

I think the only discussion is what the basic level should be and what measures there are for poor gifted students e.g. scholarships.

[Idaho]

Yup, if labour had been in power when I was a kid I'd have a fulfilling life of shelf stacking (and no doubt labour voting) ahead of me. Social mobility, in a Gordon Brown stylee. Nice one.

Cripes! What a rotter! Luckily there is someone else more suited doing your menial work.

You are right Don - they are businesses so should get taxed as businesses - what's the big deal? The big deal is that the middle classes believe that the institutions of power are theirs and any infringement on this domain is resisted.

Currently these businesses receive a massive tax subsidy from the state so that the benefits can be passed on to the select few who are permitted to enter.

Personally I don't think a democratic parliament should be prostituted to pee on people just because you don't like the way they talk. (see also fox hunting).

Funny - I thought that the vast majority of the UK wanted to stop fox hunting because they saw no merit in a bunch of people galloping around the countryside using dogs to rip up our native wild animals. You learn something new everyday.

[Don Corleone]

Idaho, I'm glad you and I actually agree in principle on something for once. I had actually given up all hope of that ever happening a long, long time ago.

But please, don't ruin the moment by hitting a hot-button issue of mine. If they're not paying taxes currently, that's not the same thing as a subsidy from the government. Raising spending by only 8% instead of the original 10% is not cutting benefits. Please, enough with the double speak.

Now, if your point is that private schools are actually getting money from the government, I apologize, I'm way off the deep end. But it's a serious pet peeve of mine.

By the way, nobody need get all that choked up. Our 'for-profit' schools over here rarely turn much of a profit. As long as they're taxed on income, not on cash flow, I believe you'll find it's a moot point.

[English assassin]

Funny - I thought that the vast majority of the UK wanted to stop fox hunting because they saw no merit in a bunch of people galloping around the countryside using dogs to rip up our native wild animals. You learn something new everyday

IMHO the vast majority of the UK couildn't care less about fox hunting, and most of those that did did so because they hate hunters rather than love foxes. But even if they did, democracy is not about suspending all judgement just because a majority wants something. The majority of the UK wants the death penalty and no doubt castration for rapists, shall we give it to them then?

Cripes! What a rotter! Luckily there is someone else more suited doing your menial work.

You know what I thought about apologising about this, and then I thought, no, "stuff" it. If you think an education system that doesn't develop kids to their full potential is the way to go then good luck to you. And "menial" was your word, not mine. For some people holding down a steady job in a supermarket would be a big acheivement, and well done to them. For me it wasn't, and well done to me. If you are putting any value judgements on those facts they are coming from you.

@ Don, they are not businesses. They do not, cannot by law, distribute any profit to their owners, which is pretty fundamental. All surpluses are retained in the charity to be re-used in providing education. They can't raise equity finance. They can't, for the most part, dispose of their assets, (not easily anyway). They can't merge. They can't change their objects. And so on. To be taxed as if you were a business when you can't do some of the more useful things a business can do is wrong.

[Don Corleone]

If they're not turning a profit, what taxes will they pay?

[Ja'chyra]

IMHO the vast majority of the UK couildn't care less about fox hunting, and most of those that did did so because they hate hunters rather than love foxes.

I think you'll find most people do care that foxes are being ripped to pieces by all those big brave hunters.

But even if they did, democracy is not about suspending all judgement just because a majority wants something. The majority of the UK wants the death penalty and no doubt castration for rapists, shall we give it to them then?

Kind of depends on the size of the majority, if 95% of people wanted to bring back the death penalty then I would have thought that we should.

[English assassin]

If they're not turning a profit, what taxes will they pay?

VAT (sales tax). 17.5% on the fees.

Also, I said they cannot distribute profit to their members. It doesn't mean they can't run at a surplus year on year. That surplus would be subject to corporation tax (its the making the surplus not the distributing the money that is the taxable event).

At the moment they are like companies that can never pay a dividend.

[Don Corleone]

I don't see why you'd have to pay sales tax (or VAT as you call it) on tuitition. If you went to a private doctor, would you have to pay 17.5% VAT on your bill?

See, I disagree with this idea now. I thought you were talking about taxing the revenue the school is generating. You're talking about taxing cash flow and this amounts to double taxation.... the parent pays a tax on the money he uses to pay the teacher's salary, then the teacher pays taxes on the received income. How is that fair?

[English assassin]

You have to pay sales tax on more or less everything in the UK. Education provided by an eligible body (which inc a charity) is exempt but education per se is not. So if you cease to be a charity, its 17.5% on your bills.

So far as I know if you see a private doctor you pay VAT on his bill also.

Without wanting to sound as if I know more about VAT than is healthy, it may in fact not affect the schools too much. The reason is you can net off VAT on supplies you make against VAT on supplies you receive. If you are a body that in fact makes only exempt supplies, it can save you money to shift some of your supplies into being liable for VAT, strange as it sounds. of couirse, this depends on your having customers who themselves do not care about paying VAT, which means the public sector (who can generally reclaim). Here the customers are individuals and from their point of view it is unequivocally bad, a 17.5% increase in cost and that's that.

[Idaho]

Idaho, I'm glad you and I actually agree in principle on something for once. I had actually given up all hope of that ever happening a long, long time ago.

But please, don't ruin the moment by hitting a hot-button issue of mine. If they're not paying taxes currently, that's not the same thing as a subsidy from the government. Raising spending by only 8% instead of the original 10% is not cutting benefits. Please, enough with the double speak.

I almost always ruin the moment.

Not paying tax is a subsidy. You get the infrastructure that the state provides at a discount. You are just look at one line of the accounts, rather than the whole of the sheet.

[ah_dut]

The socialists abolished the grammar schools and then because of all the 'dumbing' down of the education system to the lowest common denominator they then send their kids to private schools....but wait!!! not any longer, at least not in bonnie Scotland...still theres always the London Oratory School if you're the Prime Minister and your old school (Fettis) is now out of bounds.

Psst, while I agree on the mark on grammar schools, I disagree about the Oratory I go there...right now and I sure as hell don't think it's an education Oasis. I don't think that we get enough money for things we need, our music department gets all the bloody money.

Hey, our exam grades aren't that good, 1/6 of our peopel are uber low performers or have learning difficulties ranging from dyslexia to a person with Down's Syndrome. I wouldn't say we are uber elite. The R set on the other hand we spank Lady Margaret's...in more than one way in some cases

Seriously though, if you want proof of the dumbimng down, come to our school or a grammar, where they have hardcore maniacs who decided that we must do O level pass papers instead of GCSE ones and get all Cs...we get A*s in accelerated subjects at GCSE...and we have a year to go yet.

I agree with EA after hearing his strange information on VAT and school taxing. Besides, isn't it someone's right in capitalism to waste their money however the hell they like

[JAG]

London Oratory should be blown up. Everything to despise about a school system is there.

[ah_dut]

London Oratory should be blown up. Everything to despise about a school system is there.

err helping kids with learning disorders? Giving kids a decent chance to try new sports and getting fat people to do excercise (ok not as much as I'd like but still, they have to shift for at least an hour a week)

Tell me what's there to hate apart from the head's face...

[Don Corleone]

I almost always ruin the moment.

Not paying tax is a subsidy. You get the infrastructure that the state provides at a discount. You are just look at one line of the accounts, rather than the whole of the sheet.

Aaah okay. If we're going to play the double speak game, then maybe I should point that if the government didn't spend the 50% of my paycheck they stole last year well, why should I be happy about them stealing any more of it?

[Crazed Rabbit]

Schooling should not be better because you can pay more, period. It is not fair. Period.

I agree! Cars shouldn't be any better just because you can pay more, nor should food or houses! The same for everyone!

Sure, it'll stop people from innovating or trying to succeed, since they'll get the same crap they would have got if they didn't work, but that's all right! After all, it worked in the Soviet Union, didn't it? Oh, wait a minute...

This is just a stupid attempt to make the poor seem richer by preventing the rich from buying anything good with their money.

Not paying tax is a subsidy. You get the infrastructure that the state provides at a discount. You are just look at one line of the accounts, rather than the whole of the sheet.

Don't the parents of the kids there pay taxes on the money they spent to send their kids there? Don't the teachers pay taxes on the wages they get? Hardly a subsidy.

Crazed Rabbit

[Don Corleone]

CR, why are you playing the class warfare defense card against Jag? He LIVES for class warfare. And what you described sounds just peachy to him. Equally miserable is still perfectly equal.

If you want to outlaw private schools on the basis that they're unfair, you should go ahead do that straight away. Hiding behind tax policy is cowardly and doesn't speak well for the courage of your conviction in your argument. It's no better than the US government's war on tobacco. Either they should come right out and ban it or they should quit trying to tax it to death.

[ShadeWraith]

Sorry to "slightly" derail the thread and appear like Banquo's Ghost :). Was just browsing after a few aeons of inactivity and noticed my erstwhile sparring partner Idaho is still here which was a surprise..even more surprising was the fact that I agree with him :) So I couldnt resist the impulse to post and say Hi...Hi :)



Wraith

[BDC]

Nothing wrong with private education.

Wish I'd gone to a public school. Rather than making me tolerant of idiots and lazy poor people, it's [state education] just made me want to kill them all for being so bloody annoying and rude.

I've nothing against anyone really, it's just hard to remain the perfect happy socialist when confronted with certain people. You can SEE why they deserve to rot in an unmarked grave.

[English assassin]

Ironically when I left my place I was a JAG style ubersocialist.