KWC fees.

[2bees]

17 hours ago, trench12 said:

And new uniform from September , no mix and match old and new. Entirely new uniform required ….just to add to the fees … but at least the uniform will be zero rated

Not true. Old uniform OK for at least another year.

[Max Power]

16 hours ago, HeliX said:

Sure, there's lots of decent ideas in Communism. But you've read that the wrong way round. It's not that you dislike everythign about Communism that's the problem, it's that you automatically call anything you don't like Communist.

That’s just silly.

[Dirty Buggane]

Bit like communism, starts out great then come's the turnip (mute) envy.

Edited August 11 by Dirty Buggane

[Chinahand]

I'm still intrigued by the state focused view points this debate exposes.

If the government comes along and taxes bitter, but not lager it doesn't mean lager is now being subsidized by the government.

But most defenders of the proposal argue that the government is subisidizing private schools by not demanding 20% VAT from them.

As a Fool and his money put it ... the government doesn't want to encourage private schools, just as it doesn't want to encourage sweet biscuits. The tax is being added as the government considers a private education a superfluous luxury, something to be discouraged.

Sorry, but parent choice isn't a superfluous luxury and only someone with a mindset of state control of society will argue it is.

This argument is about state control verses free choice, it is envy and class war and using the tax system for political ends.

Its a deliberate tax on education.

[John Wright]

57 minutes ago, Chinahand said:

I'm still intrigued by the state focused view points this debate exposes.

If the government comes along and taxes bitter, but not lager it doesn't mean lager is now being subsidized by the government.

But most defenders of the proposal argue that the government is subisidizing private schools by not demanding 20% VAT from them.

As a Fool and his money put it ... the government doesn't want to encourage private schools, just as it doesn't want to encourage sweet biscuits. The tax is being added as the government considers a private education a superfluous luxury, something to be discouraged.

Sorry, but parent choice isn't a superfluous luxury and only someone with a mindset of state control of society will argue it is.

This argument is about state control verses free choice, it is envy and class war and using the tax system for political ends.

Its a deliberate tax on education.

Your argument is a false one however.

In your beer/lager comparison you’re right that lager is not being subsidised. But it is being favoured, and beer is being disadvantaged.

But ( Carlisle Brewery, historically, apart ) fermented beverages produced from grain are commercial products, not one state the other commercial. To do what you suggest would be a market distortion, akin to subsidy.

To refer to parent choice is another non starter. First, the choice will still be there. Second, it’s not a choice for the vast majority of parents.

Private Education is a service, and like all services it should be subject to the equivalent tax on services. Currently it is exempt. To remove the exemption is not envy, class war, or communist/marxist. It’s use of economic levers for economic purposes. Yes, that’s a political decision. I don’t see it at all as government seeing private education as superfluous, or something to be discouraged.

The whole thing about what qualifies as charity, and what is exempted from VAT is arcane and a minefield. It needs tidying up. I can understand exemptions based on need, but not because it’s a private service. So you can get VAT off the cost of disability aids, even a new car, if you are a full time wheelchair user. Or you can get a vehicle on Motability, who are VAT exempt and don’t have to charge on the monthly fee. That benefits the sick and disabled.

Likewise I can see the justification of zero rating, rather than blanket exemption, of VAT on private specialist education if the child has an educational needs statement.

Public sports facilities like playing fields, and changing facilities and small sports clubs can be charitable, and have some VAT concessions. Likewise with arts provision. But you wouldn’t expect MUFC or the MCC or Leeds Rhinos, or West End theatre ticket sales to be zero rated.

It gets really murky when the revenue of the Royal Manx, or the big Manx musical societies, exceed the VAT registration level. Or charity shop.

Just because education is considered charitable, there’s always been tinkering around the edges, and it’s always political, and it can never be permanent or final and set in stone, there’s no justifiable reason for total exemption.

Im not in favour of concessions on rates or tax or VAT for religion or private education, or sports or even the  arts ( subsidised or commercial.

[Chinahand]

I sorry John, but I'm not convinced at all by that.

Vat isn't charged on bus or rail fares or private health insurance.

Why? Because these are social goods valued beyond being a simple commercial service.

Private schools v private health. The arguments are basically identical.

The nub of the issue is you do not value private education as a social good and I'd guess most likely because, as you say "it’s not a choice for the vast majority of parents."

That's true - their children's education is paid for them via general taxation.

That's also a social good. 

The state should encourage social goods and not tax them.

 

 

 

[John Wright]

33 minutes ago, Chinahand said:

I sorry John, but I'm not convinced at all by that.

Vat isn't charged on bus or rail fares or private health insurance.

Why? Because these are social goods valued beyond being a simple commercial service.

Private schools v private health. The arguments are basically identical.

The nub of the issue is you do not value private education as a social good and I'd guess most likely because, as you say "it’s not a choice for the vast majority of parents."

That's true - their children's education is paid for them via general taxation.

That's also a social good. 

The state should encourage social goods and not tax them.

 

 

 

Is VAT charged on any insurance product? There’s an insurance premium tax in the UK. But not IoM. And no VAT.

VAT isn’t charged on public or mass transport, it’s an exemption or zero rating, but taxi, private hire, private coach or rail travel where you hire the bus or train or coach, or charter a boat or plane, is subject to VAT.

I won a scholarship to a private grammar school, but after discussion with my father, a teacher in the state system, I didn’t take it up.

My sister was failed by the state system and went to private boarding school, paid for by my father.

I’ve no preconceptions. But I can see the inconsistencies, and the political imperative. Maybe I’d have a little more flexibility in my views if the Tories hadn’t spent the last 14 years imposing austerity and giving their wealthier friends tax cuts and breaks.

i can see private primary and hospital health care as public good. I can’t see General private education as public good, we’ll have to disagree.

Im not opposed to the state encouraging all sorts of things, but not of it favouring private education with tax breaks that aren’t available to most other public goods/services.

in fact your view, and the practical aspect of VAT, on mass transportation, supports my outlook more than yours.

[A fool and his money.....]

2 hours ago, Chinahand said:

I'm still intrigued by the state focused view points this debate exposes.

If the government comes along and taxes bitter, but not lager it doesn't mean lager is now being subsidized by the government.

But most defenders of the proposal argue that the government is subisidizing private schools by not demanding 20% VAT from them.

As a Fool and his money put it ... the government doesn't want to encourage private schools, just as it doesn't want to encourage sweet biscuits. The tax is being added as the government considers a private education a superfluous luxury, something to be discouraged.

Sorry, but parent choice isn't a superfluous luxury and only someone with a mindset of state control of society will argue it is.

This argument is about state control verses free choice, it is envy and class war and using the tax system for political ends.

Its a deliberate tax on education.

It's not a free choice for the vast majority of people though.

To take your argument to it's logical conclusion, the government should pay the fees on anyone wanting to attend KWC, then everyone would have the free choice.

As it is it's only those with pots full of money who have the choice, and they receive a very fair whack from the tax system here as it is. Why you feel they need another tax break is beyond me.

[A fool and his money.....]

2 hours ago, Chinahand said:

I'm still intrigued by the state focused view points this debate exposes.

If the government comes along and taxes bitter, but not lager it doesn't mean lager is now being subsidized by the government.

But most defenders of the proposal argue that the government is subisidizing private schools by not demanding 20% VAT from them.

As a Fool and his money put it ... the government doesn't want to encourage private schools, just as it doesn't want to encourage sweet biscuits. The tax is being added as the government considers a private education a superfluous luxury, something to be discouraged.

Sorry, but parent choice isn't a superfluous luxury and only someone with a mindset of state control of society will argue it is.

This argument is about state control verses free choice, it is envy and class war and using the tax system for political ends.

Its a deliberate tax on education.

It's not a free choice for the vast majority of people though.

To take your argument to it's logical conclusion, the government should pay the fees on anyone wanting to attend KWC, then everyone would have the free choice.

As it is it's only those with pots full of money who have the choice, and they receive a very fair whack from the tax system here as it is. Why you feel they need another tax break is beyond me.

[Chinahand]

I've already noted I think education would improve if all pupils were given a transferable voucher which could be spent anywhere, with special needs etc provided with additional vouchers to cover their more complex needs. 

That would enable a lot more parental choice and reduce the huge marginal cost of moving into a private school which a family thinks will better cater for their child's needs. 

I can assure you any parent taking on those costs (which are about to get even steeper) values the education they are paying for. And often it isn't elitism or anything like that it is down to the school offering educational support not available in the state sector. 

[WTF]

so the end result could be nobody goes to private school so no vat coming into government   but all the pupils/students then need places in state schools, more expense for government , seems counter productive to me.

[Harry Lamb]

1 hour ago, Chinahand said:

I've already noted I think education would improve if all pupils were given a transferable voucher which could be spent anywhere, with special needs etc provided with additional vouchers to cover their more complex needs. 

That would enable a lot more parental choice and reduce the huge marginal cost of moving into a private school which a family thinks will better cater for their child's needs. 

I can assure you any parent taking on those costs (which are about to get even steeper) values the education they are paying for. And often it isn't elitism or anything like that it is down to the school offering educational support not available in the state sector. 

This was Milton Friedman's idea, which he proposed alongside abolishing medical licences and abolishing restrictions on access to drugs. Mrs T's group of happy free-marketers imported some of this thinking into the NHS, believing that operating hospital in competition would improve standards. It didn't of course. They've tried the same with education, with league tables and so on. So rich people game the system by buying houses in the 'best' catchment areas, or use fee-paying schools. A voucher system with 5 secondary schools would make what little forward planning the government indulges in pointless. There is some record of success for vouchers, but only where state spending on education is significantly higher.

[A fool and his money.....]

37 minutes ago, WTF said:

so the end result could be nobody goes to private school so no vat coming into government   but all the pupils/students then need places in state schools, more expense for government , seems counter productive to me.

Or the end result could be lots of VAT from private school fees and very few more pupils/ students in state schools at negligible cost.

Bit like the tax cap really isn't it? How many rich people has it attracted? How many were already here and got a big tax cut?

I can't imagine we'd be much worse off financially if we charged VAT on private school fees, or if we abolished the tax cap.

There would certainly be a value to the more equitable society we would have as a result, but that's invariably overlooked by people who only see pound signs.

[Chinahand]

If King Bill's goes bust the Island will all be the poorer for it.

It is close enough to the edge as it is.

We will just have to wait and see. though as always messy reality is unlikely to be so digital, but KWC is. I think, in decline. Anyone know its student numbers over the last 10 years or so?

[A fool and his money.....]

11 minutes ago, Chinahand said:

If King Bill's goes bust the Island will all be the poorer for it.

It is close enough to the edge as it is.

We will just have to wait and see. though as always messy reality is unlikely to be so digital, but KWC is. I think, in decline. Anyone know its student numbers over the last 10 years or so?

I think 350 odd were mentioned, not sure how that compares to previous years.

If it goes bust the island won't be poorer - to a vast majority of islanders it will make no difference. 

I think removing the tax breaks would make the island richer morally though.