Ruling over VAT on private school fees 'huge disappointment', say campaigners

Sky News

17 hours ago

Campaigners have described losing a High Court challenge over the imposition of VAT on private school fees as a "huge disappointment".
They say the "unjust legislation" has already had a "devastating impact" on independent schools.
During a hearing in London in April, a group of schools, pupils and their parents argued that for some children, their needs are not met by state schools.
They claimed the policy of applying VAT to fees, which came into force in January, is discriminatory, incompatible with human rights law and was being applied "irrespective" of a family's need.
Caroline Santer, headteacher at The King's School in Hampshire, said that the judgment was "a huge disappointment" but added "we will continue to challenge the legality of this policy".
"This unjust legislation has already had a devastating impact on the independent school sector, causing many children to leave their schools and even many schools to close."
Ben Snowdon, headteacher at Emmanuel School in Derby, agreed that the policy would be "devastating for independent Christian schools and many other low-cost independent schools".
"It is especially concerning to parents who are not from affluent backgrounds and who have children with special education needs (SEN)," he said.
Sophie Kemp, from legal firm Kingsley Napley, which represented the claimants, said: "It was important to challenge VAT on school fees, which both the government and the court recognised had a discriminatory impact on children at religious schools as well as significant impact on children with SEN."
But Sir James Eadie KC, representing the Treasury, HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) and the Department for Education (DfE), said abolishing the VAT exemption for private school fees was a feature of Labour's manifesto and is expected to yield between £1.5bn and £1.7bn a year.
Three judges at the High Court said any VAT exemption would mean the government would lose out on "a very substantial slice of the revenue it hopes to raise", which could be used for SEN provision in state schools.
"The aim was redistributive - and unapologetically so," the judges said.
During the 94-page ruling, they also wrote there is a "broad margin of discretion in deciding how to balance the interests of those adversely affected by the policy against the interests of others who may gain from public provision funded by the money it will raise".
Referencing the European Convention on Human Rights, the judges added that the legislation does "not include any right to require the state to facilitate one's child's access to a private school", even if parents prefer a religious one.