logo
‘My own country can't serve my child': The families fleeing Labour's school tax raid

‘My own country can't serve my child': The families fleeing Labour's school tax raid

Yahoo20-02-2025

Jemima's promotion came at what she thought was a fortuitous time. After half a decade of living in Hong Kong, she was ready to bring her four-year-old twins back to London and take on a new, bigger role at her consultancy firm. But after crunching the numbers and contacting schools in Britain, she realised that what she had assumed was a crystal-clear plan to come home was now impossible.
Jemima's daughter has a genetic disorder that causes muscle weakness. As a result, she physically needs more care than the average child, including help climbing the stairs and going to the bathroom. In Hong Kong, she attends a mainstream private school with a high teacher-to-child ratio, but the recent imposition of VAT on private schools means Jemima can no longer afford fees in the UK.
'I'm a single mother and the 20 per cent increase took the fees from being a very large expense to unaffordable,' she says. 'I have twins, so I'd either have to separate them and give the healthier child fewer opportunities, as with the hike I cannot afford to pay for two, or send them both to state school.'
To explore the second option, Jemima – who owns a flat in London – contacted Tower Hamlets council to see if the local comprehensive could accommodate her daughter, but was blocked at every turn. 'Because she's not in a wheelchair and so couldn't tick that particular box, they more or less said no to everything. It felt like they were trying to get rid of me.'
In the end, Jemima turned down the promotion. 'It's maddening that I can't go home,' she says. 'The whole dialogue has made me angry. They make me sound like some kind of elitist person, but I went to a state school myself and I'd be delighted to send the twins to one if it was any good. But when my own country can't serve my child and yet also taxes me so much that I can't afford to serve her myself, then I have no choice but to stay abroad.'
For an increasingly large cohort, Labour's VAT charge on private schools has made Britain as a place to live and work a far less attractive prospect. More than a quarter of wealthy parents - those with investible assets of more than £250,000 - are now considering moving abroad within the next 12 months in order to keep their children in private education, a new survey has found.
Among the respondents who had children already in private education, 42 per cent said they would face disruption as a direct result of the VAT increase, the bi-annual Saltus Wealth Index revealed. One in nine of those surveyed said they were planning to move their children into the state sector as a result of the policy, while seven per cent said they would keep them in private education, but required financial support from family or friends to cover the additional costs.
Labour, which introduced the VAT hike in January, claim the policy will raise £1.8 billion a year by 2029-30 and help fund 6,500 more state school teachers. Critics argue it will prove disastrous, leading to the closure of well-established schools and heaping pressure on an already stretched state sector.
For some, moving abroad to find cheaper schooling alternatives has been the impetus to start a new life, for others, it is the reason to delay coming back. But whatever their circumstances, many would argue they are the exact demographic Britain needs to hold onto: high earners who prop up the economy and contribute far more than they take out.
'VAT is absolutely on people's radar,' agrees Ed Richardson, the managing director of Keystone Tutors – a company that works with parents both abroad and in the UK. 'I didn't expect this but I'm seeing it in conversations with families in Asia and the Middle East. Suddenly, they're asking whether the value judgement for going to the UK is worth it. It's not as if school fees haven't been increasing for years – but because this is such a high rise, it's having a real impact.'
Amelia and Francis are one such example. They have been living in Singapore for over a decade and had always planned to bring their daughters, currently nine and seven, back to Britain for senior school. Now, they have changed their minds.
'The tax on fees has redirected many people's lives,' says Amelia. 'We are 100 per cent staying here for this reason – two years ago we could just have scraped the money together but now there's not a hope in hell we could afford to privately educate the girls at home.'
As the financial director of a successful company, Francis has a very good salary but worked out that in order to send just one daughter to Sherborne Girls as a day boarder – the Dorset school near where they'd planned to live in the UK – he'd need to earn an extra £74,000 a year pre-tax; for the Tanglin Trust School school in Singapore, he needs to make less than half that.
'The reason many of us were here in the first place was for the low tax salaries, so we could save to move home and send kids to good schools,' says Amelia. 'But now the goalposts have moved, it's out of reach. It's great for us because it means our friends won't disperse like they otherwise would have done. But it's a huge disappointment for all the grandparents at home, who ultimately miss out on having the depth of relationship with their grandchildren.'
Europe, too, is seeing an influx of Britons. 'Our clients used to come mostly from the US and Israel but we have seen a very noticeable rise in British families enquiring about schools over the past year,' says Naomi Crompton, who runs Alesco – an education consultancy in Portugal. 'The international schools here provide a high-quality education at what is now a significantly lower cost than the UK.'
Even the family members of former prime ministers are feeling the pull. For Max Johnson – brother of Boris – whose three-year-old daughter has a place at both a private school in west London, which costs around £30,000 a year, and at St Julian's in Cascais near Lisbon, which is closer to £12,000, it's an easy choice. 'I went on a tour of St Julians and I thought it was brilliant,' he says. 'It reminded me of a school I went to called The Dragon [in Oxford] – it has a lot of history and tradition and even follows a British curriculum.'
Johnson repeats a sentiment that every parent I interview for this piece echoes – despite being among some of the most privileged people in the country. 'Life in Britain just feels too hard when you're drowning in tax and getting very little back,' he says.
For Kate and Alex Kindersley, who were living in the Cotswolds with their four children just over a year ago, everything felt like a struggle after their mortgage quadrupled overnight. Once they realised that school fees were also likely to skyrocket when Keir Starmer became Prime Minister, they decided to move their family to Cape Town – a city they had both lived in during their 20s.
Alex runs a handful of companies in east Africa and Kate owns popular interiors brand Hadeda. Their three sons currently attend a school in Constantia which costs around £8,000 a year-per-child. 'I love it,' says Kate. 'The head teacher knows everyone's name, they run around in bare feet and do so much sport and seem so happy and healthy. And we've worked out that educating them all here will cost about a quarter of what it will in Britain.'
'Seeing the children really flourishing, I just can't imagine going back and taking them away from what they now have,' she adds.
Sophie Gamborg, who works in property and now also lives in Cape Town, is in a similar situation. She and her husband Tom, who runs drinks brand Van Hunks, left London for what was initially supposed to be a few months during her second maternity leave two years ago. They extended their stay a few times until they realised that the VAT increase meant that they could never afford the life they wanted in Britain.
'We suddenly thought – there are such amazing schools here, why leave?' she says. 'Our son is in a small class and is taught to have excellent manners and gets so much attention from teachers – every day he plays golf or rugby, cricket or goes swimming.'
Unsurprisingly, private schools in Cape Town are now oversubscribed and are having to tell parents to sign their children up at birth. 'We are seeing a lot of South Africans coming back from the UK,' says an admissions officer from one prestigious institution.
The parents – she explains – tend to be leaving jobs in London where, despite earning high salaries in finance and consultancy and working at firms like Goldman Sachs, they find they cannot afford to give their children the education they had planned. Losing them means permanently losing people who would have ploughed money into the UK – in income tax and stamp duty, yes, but also in propping up local high streets and entertainment.
Of course, the question many readers will ask is why these people don't just send their children to a comprehensive like 90 per cent of the population. But the truth is that when you are earning a six-figure salary, you tend to have more options than most – options that make Britain feel like a bad deal.
'All my children started at state school and if there had been an outstanding state locally that would have continued,' says Isabel Oakeshott, a journalist who moved her family to Dubai late last year.
'But our local primary school was in special measures and so I have had to, for many years now, pay well over £100,000 a year in school fees out of highly-taxed income – something that has almost broken me financially. Since the VAT rise, it has become completely unsustainable. Private education is a wonderful thing but everything has a ceiling.'
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Labour MPs in call for benefits U-turn after change to winter fuel payment cut
Labour MPs in call for benefits U-turn after change to winter fuel payment cut

Yahoo

time4 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Labour MPs in call for benefits U-turn after change to winter fuel payment cut

Labour backbenchers have called for a Government U-turn on planned disability benefit cuts, after Chancellor Rachel Reeves restored winter fuel payments to a majority of pensioners. Ms Reeves' £1.25 billion plan unveiled on Monday will see automatic payments worth up to £300 given to pensioners with an income less than £35,000 a year. It followed last year's decision to strip pensioners of the previously universal scheme, unless they claimed certain benefits, such as pension credit. Nadia Whittome, the Labour MP for Nottingham East, warned ministers they risked making a 'similar mistake' if they tighten the eligibility criteria for personal independence payments, known as Pip. Leeds East MP Richard Burgon called on pensions minister Torsten Bell to 'listen now' so that backbenchers can help the Government 'get it right'. In her warning, Ms Whittome said she was not asking Mr Bell 'to keep the status quo or not to support people into work' and added: 'I'm simply asking him not to cut disabled people's benefits.' The pensions minister, who works in both the Treasury and Department for Work and Pensions, replied that the numbers of people receiving Pip is set to 'continue to grow every single year in the years ahead, after the changes set out by this Government'. In its Pathways to Work green paper, the Government proposed a new eligibility requirement, so Pip claimants must score a minimum of four points on one daily living activity, such as preparing food, washing and bathing, using the toilet or reading, to receive the daily living element of the benefit. 'This means that people who only score the lowest points on each of the Pip daily living activities will lose their entitlement in future,' the document noted. Mr Burgon told the Commons: 'As a Labour MP who voted against the winter fuel payment cuts, I very much welcome this change in position, but can I urge the minister and the Government to learn the lessons of this and one of the lessons is, listen to backbenchers? 'If the minister and the Government listen to backbenchers, that can help the Government get it right, help the Government avoid getting it wrong, and so what we don't want is to be here in a year or two's time with a minister sent to the despatch box after not listening to backbenchers on disability benefit cuts, making another U-turn again.' Mr Bell replied that it was 'important to listen to backbenchers, to frontbenchers'. Opposition MPs cheered when the minister added: 'It's even important to listen to members opposite on occasion.' Liberal Democrat MP Mike Martin warned that 'judging by the questions from his own backbenchers, it seems that we're going to have further U-turns on Pip and on the two-child benefit cap'. The Tunbridge Wells MP asked Mr Bell: 'To save his colleagues anguish, will he let us know now when those U-turns are coming?' The minister replied: 'What Labour MPs want to see is a Labour Government bringing down child poverty, and that's what we're going to do 'What Labour MPs want to see is a Government that can take the responsible decisions, including difficult ones on tax and on means testing the winter fuel payment so that we can invest in public services and turn around the disgrace that has become Britain's public realm for far too long.' Conservative former work and pensions secretary Esther McVey had earlier asked whether the Chancellor, 'now that she and the Government have got a taste for climbdowns', would 'reverse the equally ridiculous national insurance contribution (Nic) rises, which is destroying jobs, and the inheritance tax changes, which is destroying farms and family businesses'. Mr Bell said: 'This is a party opposite that has learned no lessons whatsoever, that thinks it can come to this chamber, call for more spending, oppose every tax rise and expect to ever be taken seriously again – they will not.' Labour MP Rebecca Long-Bailey pressed the Government to make changes to the two-child benefit cap, which means most parents cannot claim for more than two children. 'It's the right thing to do to lift pensioners out of poverty, and I'm sure that both he and the Chancellor also agree that it's right to lift children out of poverty,' the Salford MP told the Commons. 'So can he reassure this House that he and the Chancellor are doing all they can to outline plans to lift the two-child cap on universal credit as soon as possible?' Mr Bell replied: 'All levers to reduce child poverty are on the table. 'The child poverty strategy will be published in the autumn.' He added: 'If we look at who is struggling most, having to turn off their heating, it is actually younger families with children that are struggling with that. 'So she's absolutely right to raise this issue, it is one of the core purposes of this Government, we cannot carry on with a situation where large families, huge percentages of them, are in poverty.' Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

MP calls for ‘chronic under-supply' of Gypsy and Traveller sites to be addressed
MP calls for ‘chronic under-supply' of Gypsy and Traveller sites to be addressed

Yahoo

time8 hours ago

  • Yahoo

MP calls for ‘chronic under-supply' of Gypsy and Traveller sites to be addressed

A Labour MP has called on the Government to address the 'chronic under-supply' of Gypsy and Traveller sites across England. Mary Kelly Foy said planning decisions on these sites 'have frequently been underpinned by prejudice', with just 30 created over the past 30 years. The MP for City of Durham tabled an amendment to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill which proposes that Gypsy and Traveller sites are included in spatial development strategies. Speaking in the Commons, she said: 'Today I rise to speak to amendment 134, in my name, that works towards addressing a long-standing and deeply entrenched failure in our planning system, the chronic under-supply of Gypsy and Traveller sites across England. 'And my amendment seeks to increase fairness into the system to enable, rather than hinder, the provision of adequate, culturally appropriate accommodation for Gypsy and Traveller communities. 'For too long, the accommodation needs of Gypsies and Travellers have been overlooked by the planning system.' She added: 'The Government has committed to delivering 1.5 million new homes by 2029, if that ambition is to be truly inclusive, it must include everyone, and that means by making space, literally and politically, for communities who have been moved on, fenced off and forgotten.' Ms Foy said just 30 sites have been created over the past 30 years, adding: 'Decisions on Gypsy and Traveller sites have frequently been underpinned by prejudice, whether overt or institutional. 'Too often, proposed developments are blocked or delayed by local opposition that's not met with political will or leadership. 'Site delivery also suffers from a lack of inclusion at the strategic planning level, where Gypsy and Traveller site provision can be absent from local plans and excluded from land allocations. And this absence isn't an accident, it's a result of years of structural marginalisation that this Bill must now correct.' Ms Foy said the UK is 'seeing a troubling trend' with the number of socially rented pitches declining. She argued that leaving out Gypsy and Traveller sites from future strategies would be 'repeating mistakes of the past'.

The five considerable problems with the chancellor's U-turn on winter fuel payments
The five considerable problems with the chancellor's U-turn on winter fuel payments

Yahoo

time8 hours ago

  • Yahoo

The five considerable problems with the chancellor's U-turn on winter fuel payments

There are considerable problems with the winter fuel payment U-turn, but perhaps the political argument in favour outweighs them all? First, Rachel Reeves has executed without working out how to pay for it. This, for an iron chancellor, is a wound that opponents won't let her forget. A summer of speculation about tax rises is not a summer anyone looks forward to. Politics latest: Second, the fig leaf that she and Treasury ministers are using is an improvement in economic conditions. If you were being polite, you'd say this is contested. The OBR halved growth this year and the OECD downgraded UK forecasts, albeit only by a little, last week. The claim that interest rates are coming down ignores that their descent is slower because of government decisions of the last six months. Third, the question immediately becomes, what next? Why not personal independent payments (PIP) and the two-child benefit cap? At this stage, it would feel like a climbdown if they did not back down over those. But then, what will the markets - already policing this closely - make of it, and could they punish the government? Fourth, this is aggravating divisions in the Parliamentary Labour Party: the soft left Compass group and ministers like Torsten Bell pushing bigger spending arguments. Those MPs in Tory-facing seats who rely on arguments that Labour can be trusted with the public finances are this has created a firm division between No 10 (the PM) and No 11 (the Chancellor). No 10 is now conscious that it does not have enough independent advice about the market reaction to economic policies and is seeking to correct. Others, I am told, are just critical of the chancellor's U-turn - for she wobbled first. Read more: Given the litany of arguments against, why has it happened? Because the hope is this maxi U-turn lances the boil, removes a significant source of pensioners' anger and brings back Labour voters, a price they calculate worth paying, whatever the fiscal cost. We wait to see who is right.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store