VAT on education?

[Mrs Ten Names]

So far you posted an article that says 35 wealthy people won’t relocate to the Bahamas.

It was a poll taking an estimate of feelings between many in the top 1%.

Meanwhile 1/4 of a million of ex pats base themselves in Dubai etc for tax reasons.

Then show your findings.

 

[blup]

What's affordability about private education if its not a luxury ?

Education is available to those that can't or won't pay for private

Medical treatment isn’t a luxury either

 

[Mrs Ten Names]

240,000 in Dubai don’t agree with you.

If their income is earned in UK, they'll still pay UK tax on it.

 

[Mrs Ten Names]

Medical treatment isn’t a luxury either

Is there VAT on private health?

 

[blup]

Is there VAT on private health?

For hip replacement no, for lip replacement yes afaik

 

[JohnD]

Labour was in charge then as it is now

So you have no point.

 

[JohnD]

legally

The definition was composed in the days when education of the poor was often a charitable act, before state education was universally available.

 

[Mrs Ten Names]

For hip replacement no, for lip replacement yes afaik

So medical treatment for health reasons is not taxed, but medical intervention for beauty requirements are taxed.
That sounds about right.

There are some anomalies:
Sun screen cream has VAT added. It's classed as a cosmetic cream.

 

[Brigadier]

 

[carmanmemoranda]

Medical treatment isn’t a luxury either

I'm not comparing other things. But all luxuries, not essentials should be taxed.

Why shouldn't they?

Nobody has to have private schooling. But if they want it and can afford it, pay vat on it.

It's not rocket science. Nobody is saying it shouldn't exist.

 

[blup]

So you have no point.

The point being labor fuc*ed up state education, and now have a chance to improve things but choose to penalise those who pay for private education instead, because it sells better.

 

[blup]

The definition was composed in the days when education of the poor was often a charitable act, before state education was universally available.

And continues as part of the definition today. Why not just ban private education?

 

[blup]

I'm not comparing other things. But all luxuries, not essentials should be taxed.

Why shouldn't they?

Nobody has to have private schooling. But if they want it and can afford it, pay vat on it.

It's not rocket science. Nobody is saying it shouldn't exist.

There is definitely a view that private education shouldn't exist, driven a political philosophy that says you achieve social mobility by putting everyone in the same school. That started with comprehensives and when it didn't work universities were blamed for not accepting enough state school pupils, when it was as much to do with poor teaching. If we had a successful state school system there might be a case for VAT, but we don't.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

Nobody, apart from you, is suggesting banning private education.

Just tax it, it's that simple. It's a luxury after all. Nothing wrong with luxuries if you can afford them and want them. But pay the correct price.

 

[JohnD]

Why not just ban private education?

If that's what you want, make a case to your MP.

I doubt it will get far.

Are you suggesting that taxing a commercial activity is the same as banning it?