Challenge to VAT on private schools ...

[Jethro_uk]

I see this has progressed to a possible court case.

A lot of private school parents (7% of all parents whose children are of
school age) seem to think it's a watertight case that will use the magic
sword of human rights (ECHR) to cut down the tyranny of tax. Their main
thrust being a rather convoluted argument around SEN children and a
barrister whose opinion they paid for suggesting they have a case.

On the other side of precedent (or it's absence) is the fact that any
discrimination being claimed is self-imposed as all children are
guaranteed a place in a state school irrespective of what parents may
feel about it. Plus no ruling from the ECHR over any countries tax
policies.

Personally it amuses me that as a Brexit benefit, it's a shame that
Farage and his choir haven't trumpeted this more.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Jethro_uk
I see this has progressed to a possible court case.
A lot of private school parents (7% of all parents whose children are of
school age) seem to think it's a watertight case that will use the magic
sword of human rights (ECHR) to cut down the tyranny of tax. Their main
thrust being a rather convoluted argument around SEN children and a
barrister whose opinion they paid for suggesting they have a case.

You can't pay a barrister to give an opinion in your favour, if his
professional judgement says there isn't a case.

Post by Jethro_uk
On the other side of precedent (or it's absence) is the fact that any
discrimination being claimed is self-imposed as all children are
guaranteed a place in a state school irrespective of what parents may
feel about it.

The problem mentioned in the reporting is that there isn't, in fact,
adequate SEN provision in State Sector.

ps I half-heard some mention that parents in the forces will be
exempted, when of course rather than leave their children in boarding
schools in the UK when posted overseas, they could [in most cases]
take them with them.

[Mark Goodge]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Jethro_uk
On the other side of precedent (or it's absence) is the fact that any
discrimination being claimed is self-imposed as all children are
guaranteed a place in a state school irrespective of what parents may
feel about it.

The problem mentioned in the reporting is that there isn't, in fact,
adequate SEN provision in State Sector.

Indeed. A lot of local education authorities outsource aspects of SEN
provision, because in many cases it requires specialist services that are
impractical for the authority to provide in-house. And the providers of
these services are not greedy, money-grabbing commercial enterprises, the
majority of them are CIOs, CLGs or other non-profit organisations. Charging
VAT on these services will inevitably increase costs to the already
over-stretched resources of the council's education department.

Mark

[Roland Perry]

Post by Mark Goodge

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Jethro_uk
On the other side of precedent (or it's absence) is the fact that any
discrimination being claimed is self-imposed as all children are
guaranteed a place in a state school irrespective of what parents may
feel about it.

The problem mentioned in the reporting is that there isn't, in fact,
adequate SEN provision in State Sector.

Indeed. A lot of local education authorities outsource aspects of SEN
provision, because in many cases it requires specialist services that are
impractical for the authority to provide in-house. And the providers of
these services are not greedy, money-grabbing commercial enterprises, the
majority of them are CIOs, CLGs or other non-profit organisations. Charging
VAT on these services will inevitably increase costs to the already
over-stretched resources of the council's education department.

If it doesn't already exist, a VAT exemption on such outsourcing would
be easy to arrange. But that misses the point, which is members of the
public paying for Private School education because there's nothing
available for them in the Public Sector - not even a public sector that
outsourses some of its provision.

[John]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Mark Goodge

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Jethro_uk
On the other side of precedent (or it's absence) is the fact that any
discrimination being claimed is self-imposed as all children are
guaranteed a place in a state school irrespective of what parents may
feel about it.

The problem mentioned in the reporting is that there isn't, in fact,
adequate SEN provision in State Sector.

Indeed. A lot of local education authorities outsource aspects of SEN
provision, because in many cases it requires specialist services that are
impractical for the authority to provide in-house. And the providers of
these services are not greedy, money-grabbing commercial enterprises, the
majority of them are CIOs, CLGs or other non-profit organisations. Charging
VAT on these services will inevitably increase costs to the already
over-stretched resources of the council's education department.

If it doesn't already exist, a VAT exemption on such outsourcing would
be easy to arrange. But that misses the point, which is members of the
public paying for Private School education because there's nothing
available for them in the Public Sector - not even a public sector that
outsourses some of its provision.

It is exempt from VAT, as long as the child has an education and health
care plan (ECHP) and the school is named in it. Sadly, I did read that
only 8% of SEN children have an ECHP

[Jon Ribbens]

Post by Mark Goodge

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Jethro_uk
On the other side of precedent (or it's absence) is the fact that any
discrimination being claimed is self-imposed as all children are
guaranteed a place in a state school irrespective of what parents may
feel about it.

The problem mentioned in the reporting is that there isn't, in fact,
adequate SEN provision in State Sector.

Indeed. A lot of local education authorities outsource aspects of SEN
provision, because in many cases it requires specialist services that are
impractical for the authority to provide in-house. And the providers of
these services are not greedy, money-grabbing commercial enterprises, the
majority of them are CIOs, CLGs or other non-profit organisations. Charging
VAT on these services will inevitably increase costs to the already
over-stretched resources of the council's education department.

Why wouldn't the council just claim the VAT back from HMRC?

[Roland Perry]

Post by Jon Ribbens

Post by Mark Goodge

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Jethro_uk
On the other side of precedent (or it's absence) is the fact that any
discrimination being claimed is self-imposed as all children are
guaranteed a place in a state school irrespective of what parents may
feel about it.

The problem mentioned in the reporting is that there isn't, in fact,
adequate SEN provision in State Sector.

Indeed. A lot of local education authorities outsource aspects of SEN
provision, because in many cases it requires specialist services that are
impractical for the authority to provide in-house. And the providers of
these services are not greedy, money-grabbing commercial enterprises, the
majority of them are CIOs, CLGs or other non-profit organisations. Charging
VAT on these services will inevitably increase costs to the already
over-stretched resources of the council's education department.

Why wouldn't the council just claim the VAT back from HMRC?

I didn't think they qualified as an organisation which could do that. As
quid pro quo for not charging VAT on many of their services. Or am I
mistaken, and that's charities.

[Brian]

Post by Jon Ribbens

Post by Mark Goodge

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Jethro_uk
On the other side of precedent (or it's absence) is the fact that any
discrimination being claimed is self-imposed as all children are
guaranteed a place in a state school irrespective of what parents may
feel about it.

The problem mentioned in the reporting is that there isn't, in fact,
adequate SEN provision in State Sector.

Indeed. A lot of local education authorities outsource aspects of SEN
provision, because in many cases it requires specialist services that are
impractical for the authority to provide in-house. And the providers of
these services are not greedy, money-grabbing commercial enterprises, the
majority of them are CIOs, CLGs or other non-profit organisations. Charging
VAT on these services will inevitably increase costs to the already
over-stretched resources of the council's education department.

Why wouldn't the council just claim the VAT back from HMRC?

Even if they can, what a waste of resources.

It is like my wife billing me for driving me to / from Lodge yesterday them
my billing her for cooking dinner today.

[Jon Ribbens]

Post by Brian

Post by Jon Ribbens

Post by Mark Goodge

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Jethro_uk
On the other side of precedent (or it's absence) is the fact that any
discrimination being claimed is self-imposed as all children are
guaranteed a place in a state school irrespective of what parents may
feel about it.

The problem mentioned in the reporting is that there isn't, in fact,
adequate SEN provision in State Sector.

Indeed. A lot of local education authorities outsource aspects of SEN
provision, because in many cases it requires specialist services that are
impractical for the authority to provide in-house. And the providers of
these services are not greedy, money-grabbing commercial enterprises, the
majority of them are CIOs, CLGs or other non-profit organisations.
Charging VAT on these services will inevitably increase costs to the
already over-stretched resources of the council's education department.

Why wouldn't the council just claim the VAT back from HMRC?

Even if they can, what a waste of resources.
It is like my wife billing me for driving me to / from Lodge yesterday them
my billing her for cooking dinner today.

That is a criticism of the entire way VAT works, it has nothing to do
with whether it's charged on private school education or not.

I don't have a strong opinion on it (except that VAT calculations are
the thing that take the most of my time out of any type of tax), but
I suspect it may be a case of "VAT is the worst form of purchase tax,
except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time".

[Brian]

Post by Mark Goodge

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Jethro_uk
On the other side of precedent (or it's absence) is the fact that any
discrimination being claimed is self-imposed as all children are
guaranteed a place in a state school irrespective of what parents may
feel about it.

The problem mentioned in the reporting is that there isn't, in fact,
adequate SEN provision in State Sector.

Indeed. A lot of local education authorities outsource aspects of SEN
provision, because in many cases it requires specialist services that are
impractical for the authority to provide in-house. And the providers of
these services are not greedy, money-grabbing commercial enterprises, the
majority of them are CIOs, CLGs or other non-profit organisations. Charging
VAT on these services will inevitably increase costs to the already
over-stretched resources of the council's education department.
Mark

I think you are confusing different aspects of SEN

In the ideal World, a pupil thought to have SEN needs should be assessed
and ‘statemented’. In simple terms, this establishes they are SEN and an
individual statement of needs is drawn up. From this, a way forward can be
established - do they need a full time learning assistant, some special
computer aid, …..


That part is (some times) contracted out.

Under one of the Education Acts (1991 I think ), as far a possible, SEN
pupils are to be taught in main stream schools. ( A remarkable,
enlightened step in my view.)

Therefore, once the above assessment process is complete ( I say complete
but pupils are - or should be reviewed regularly), it is up to the schools
to deliver.

That is where it sometimes goes awry.

Why? Several reasons. Simple poor management is an obvious one. Another is
‘unofficial’ SEN pupils diverting resources. Some schools are overly keen
to label pupils as SEN, often at the behest of parents. This helps no one,
least of all the pupil concerned and diverts resources from others.


Correctly followed, the current system should be very good. It assesses the
need, produces a plan to address the need, and has a monitoring system to
check progress and adjust if needed. Exactly the way to ensure progress.

The school I taught in had a good SEN department. They worked with subject
teachers so, for example, I always knew in advance of any SEN pupils and
could look up what I needed to do.

[Brian]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Jethro_uk
I see this has progressed to a possible court case.
A lot of private school parents (7% of all parents whose children are of
school age) seem to think it's a watertight case that will use the magic
sword of human rights (ECHR) to cut down the tyranny of tax. Their main
thrust being a rather convoluted argument around SEN children and a
barrister whose opinion they paid for suggesting they have a case.

You can't pay a barrister to give an opinion in your favour, if his
professional judgement says there isn't a case.

Post by Jethro_uk
On the other side of precedent (or it's absence) is the fact that any
discrimination being claimed is self-imposed as all children are
guaranteed a place in a state school irrespective of what parents may
feel about it.

The problem mentioned in the reporting is that there isn't, in fact,
adequate SEN provision in State Sector.
ps I half-heard some mention that parents in the forces will be
exempted, when of course rather than leave their children in boarding
schools in the UK when posted overseas, they could [in most cases]
take them with them.

Not really good for youngsters to have their education disrupted every few
years.

[Jethro_uk]

Post by Brian

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Jethro_uk
I see this has progressed to a possible court case.
A lot of private school parents (7% of all parents whose children are
of school age) seem to think it's a watertight case that will use the
magic sword of human rights (ECHR) to cut down the tyranny of tax.
Their main thrust being a rather convoluted argument around SEN
children and a barrister whose opinion they paid for suggesting they
have a case.

You can't pay a barrister to give an opinion in your favour, if his
professional judgement says there isn't a case.

Post by Jethro_uk
On the other side of precedent (or it's absence) is the fact that any
discrimination being claimed is self-imposed as all children are
guaranteed a place in a state school irrespective of what parents may
feel about it.

The problem mentioned in the reporting is that there isn't, in fact,
adequate SEN provision in State Sector.
ps I half-heard some mention that parents in the forces will be
exempted, when of course rather than leave their children in boarding
schools in the UK when posted overseas, they could [in most cases] take
them with them.

Not really good for youngsters to have their education disrupted every
few years.

That would be a problem if education was intended to teach children.

A slightly cynical person might comment that the education system is
mainly designed to provide employment for teachers. In much the same way
the health service seems designed around the needs of it's employees and
the police and legal systems around theirs. Which may be an inevitable
feature of the disconnect these systems have from their customers.

[Brian]

Post by Jethro_uk

Post by Brian

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Jethro_uk
I see this has progressed to a possible court case.
A lot of private school parents (7% of all parents whose children are
of school age) seem to think it's a watertight case that will use the
magic sword of human rights (ECHR) to cut down the tyranny of tax.
Their main thrust being a rather convoluted argument around SEN
children and a barrister whose opinion they paid for suggesting they
have a case.

You can't pay a barrister to give an opinion in your favour, if his
professional judgement says there isn't a case.

Post by Jethro_uk
On the other side of precedent (or it's absence) is the fact that any
discrimination being claimed is self-imposed as all children are
guaranteed a place in a state school irrespective of what parents may
feel about it.

The problem mentioned in the reporting is that there isn't, in fact,
adequate SEN provision in State Sector.
ps I half-heard some mention that parents in the forces will be
exempted, when of course rather than leave their children in boarding
schools in the UK when posted overseas, they could [in most cases] take
them with them.

Not really good for youngsters to have their education disrupted every
few years.

That would be a problem if education was intended to teach children.
A slightly cynical person might comment that the education system is
mainly designed to provide employment for teachers. In much the same way
the health service seems designed around the needs of it's employees and
the police and legal systems around theirs. Which may be an inevitable
feature of the disconnect these systems have from their customers.

Well, I certainly saw my role as educating pupils, as did many of my
colleagues.

I agree there are some who are ‘less dedicated’ but I was fortunate enough
to meet very, very, few.

I am the first to agree the system is going down hill - too much meddling
by the Unions, various pressure groups, and the Government.

I’m rather ‘old fashioned’ and pleased I retired before all the Woke
nonsense became over bearing.

I suspect my approach was influenced by having spent many years in
industry- I trained to teach after a career in engineering. I used that to
guide my approach not just to teaching Maths but also other aspects of the
role.

As for the NHS, I think it suffers from similar problems. Some dedicated
people but others who really shouldn’t be there. As for the Unions and
Management….

Of course, the ‘customers’ ( to use your term) aren’t entirely innocent. In
education, not all parents are as ‘supportive’ as they could be. The NHS
isn’t helped by those who, for example, turn up at A&E with trivial issues,
abuse staff, don’t turn up for appointments, ……..

[Jethro_uk]

Post by Brian

[quoted text muted]

Well, I certainly saw my role as educating pupils, as did many of my
colleagues.

Yes.

But "the system ...."

[Roland Perry]

Post by Brian

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Jethro_uk
I see this has progressed to a possible court case.
A lot of private school parents (7% of all parents whose children are of
school age) seem to think it's a watertight case that will use the magic
sword of human rights (ECHR) to cut down the tyranny of tax. Their main
thrust being a rather convoluted argument around SEN children and a
barrister whose opinion they paid for suggesting they have a case.

You can't pay a barrister to give an opinion in your favour, if his
professional judgement says there isn't a case.

Post by Jethro_uk
On the other side of precedent (or it's absence) is the fact that any
discrimination being claimed is self-imposed as all children are
guaranteed a place in a state school irrespective of what parents may
feel about it.

The problem mentioned in the reporting is that there isn't, in fact,
adequate SEN provision in State Sector.
ps I half-heard some mention that parents in the forces will be
exempted, when of course rather than leave their children in boarding
schools in the UK when posted overseas, they could [in most cases]
take them with them.

Not really good for youngsters to have their education disrupted every few
years.

Alternatively, they get to see the World, and adapt to changes that
happen every few years.

[kat]

Post by Brian

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Jethro_uk
I see this has progressed to a possible court case.
A lot of private school parents (7% of all parents whose children are of
school age) seem to think it's a watertight case that will use the magic
sword of human rights (ECHR) to cut down the tyranny of tax. Their main
thrust being a rather convoluted argument around SEN children and a
barrister whose opinion they paid for suggesting they have a case.

You can't pay a barrister to give an opinion in your favour, if his
professional judgement says there isn't a case.

Post by Jethro_uk
On the other side of precedent (or it's absence) is the fact that any
discrimination being claimed is self-imposed as all children are
guaranteed a place in a state school irrespective of what parents may
feel about it.

The problem mentioned in the reporting is that there isn't, in fact,
adequate SEN provision in State Sector.
ps I half-heard some mention that parents in the forces will be
exempted, when of course rather than leave their children in boarding
schools in the UK when posted overseas, they could [in most cases]
take them with them.

Not really good for youngsters to have their education disrupted every few
years.

Alternatively, they get to see the World, and adapt to changes that happen every
few years.

Which could indeed make them well rounded and properly "educated" but without
the required knowledge to pass British exams ( or any others if they have been
in multiple systems).

Or, if that way inclined, desperate for some basic continuity in their lives.

[Max Demian]

Post by Jethro_uk
I see this has progressed to a possible court case.
A lot of private school parents (7% of all parents whose children are of
school age) seem to think it's a watertight case that will use the magic
sword of human rights (ECHR) to cut down the tyranny of tax. Their main
thrust being a rather convoluted argument around SEN children and a
barrister whose opinion they paid for suggesting they have a case.

They can just charge VAT on the not-SEN children. Or class all the oiks
as SEN.

Better still, upgrade the state system to cope with SENs. Or change the
SEN classification: it's all artificial anyway, like the way private
children's homes can charge councils thousands for troublesome children.