Private school fees soar by eye-watering 22.6pc as impact of Labour's punishing VAT tax raid hammers parents
Average private day school fees have risen by more than a fifth in a year following Labour 's tax raid, new data suggests.
Figures from the Independent Schools Council (ISC) show the average fee in January was £7,382 a term – or £22,146 a year.
This a 22.6 per cent increase on January last year, when the average termly fee was just £6,021.
The dataset, from 1,380 schools, is the first to show the sector-wide impact of Labour's 20 per cent VAT on fees, which was introduced at the start of this year.
The large increase in 2025 compares to smaller rises of just 8.4 per cent in 2024 and a 6.4 per cent in 2023.
It suggests a portion of the value of the VAT has been passed on to parents, although the exact amount will vary by school.
Julie Robinson, ISC chief executive, said the sector had been hit by a 'triple whammy' of national insurance changes, an end to charitable business rates relief and 'the blow of 20 per cent VAT on fees'.
She said schools have 'done what they can to keep baseline fee rises to a minimum'.
However, she told the BBC: 'It seems clear to us that the Government has underestimated the effect.
'We know parents have already left the sector because of the threat of VAT coming in so we do expect the reality of this to lead to further decreases but the full effects will only become apparent over the next few years.'
VAT on private school fees was introduced across the UK on January 1, following a manifesto pledge by Labour.
They said the money was needed to pay for 6,500 teachers and other state school improvements.
In October last year, the Government said it expected fees would rise by 10 per cent as a result of the policy.
It said schools did not have to pass on the cost to parents and could absorb some of it through efficiencies.
One mother, who gave her name as Kath, told the BBC she removed her 12-year-old son from his private school in October due to a fee increase caused by VAT.
She said: 'We worked it out and it was unaffordable. Within two terms the cost was going up by 26 per cent to almost £8,000 a term.'
Her son has special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) and she originally chose the private sector due to the small class sizes and support offered.
She added: 'We are a typical middle class family, we are not rolling in it, we have one second hand car and few holidays, we watch our money.
'At the very least I believe they should have brought it in at the start of the academic year.'
'Moving him mid-year was a traumatic experience… The state system is stretched and underfunded.'
David Morton, headmaster of The King's School in Gloucester, which charges pupils between £3,725 and £9,050 a term, said the policy is 'misjudged'.
He said: 'It's low to middle income families and those children on bursaries where the impact of VAT is being felt most.'
The figures are from the ISC annual census, due to be released next week.
A Treasury spokesman said: 'This data misrepresents reality – the increases in fees are not only down to VAT.
'Average fees have risen by 75 per cent in real terms in the past 25 years and pupil numbers have remained steady.
'Ending tax breaks for private schools will raise £1.8 billion a year by 2029/30 to help deliver 6,500 new teachers and raise school standards, supporting the 94 per cent of children in state schools to achieve and thrive.'
It comes as families with children at private schools wait to find out whether their High Court challenge against the Government over the imposition of VAT on fees has been successful.
Several private schools, children who attend them and their parents brought legal action against the Treasury, as they claimed the policy of applying VAT to fees was discriminatory and incompatible with human rights law.
This includes children and families at faith schools, and families who have sent their children with special educational needs (SEN) to private school.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
21 minutes ago
- The Independent
Winter fuel payments: Am I eligible and how much can I get?
In the latest U-turn after months of backlash, the government has announced a massive expansion of who will receive winter fuel payments. After weeks of speculation over what the changes would look like, it has now been confirmed that 9 million pensions will be eligible for the payment - a huge uplift from the 1.5 million pensioners who received the payment in winter 2024-25. Here, The Independent looks at how the new system will work and who will be affected by the uplift. How many people did the winter fuel payment cut affect? The winter fuel payment is a state benefit previously given to all pensioners to help with energy costs during the coldest months of the year. The decision to means-test the previously universal payment was one of the first announcements by Rachel Reeves when she became chancellor after Labour's landslide election victory last year, and it has been widely blamed for the party's collapse in support. The government has insisted the policy was necessary to help stabilise the public finances, and meant that the payment would only go to those on low incomes who received specified benefits such as pension credit. This meant the number of pensioners receiving the payment was reduced from 11.4 million to 1.5 million. Several charities, MPs and unions criticised the decision, with some blaming it for the party's disappointing local election results. In November, it was revealed that the government's own figures indicated it would force 100,000 pensioners into poverty in 2026. How was the payment linked to pension credit? Only those who claim pension credit were able to receive the winter fuel payment in winter 2024. Those who are above state pension age and have an income of less than £218.15 a week, or less than £332.95 as a joint weekly income with your partner, are eligible for pension credit. However, despite the government's campaigns and an increase in claims after the July 2024 announcement, it is estimated that half a million eligible people fail to claim the benefit. How will the new system work? The government has increased the threshold at which people over the state pension age become eligible for the payment, meaning that anyone with an income of or below £35,000 will receive it this winter. The government estimates that the new threshold will ensure that more than three quarters of pensioners in England and Wales - around 9m people - will receive the benefit. It is estimated that around 2 million pensioners in England and Wales have taxable incomes above £35,000 and will therefore be exempt. The payment of £200 per household, or £300 per household where there is someone over 80, will be made automatically this winter, meaning no pensioner will need to take any action in order to receive the payment. Those with incomes above the threshold will see the payment automatically recovered via HMRC, or they have the option to opt out. However, details of how this will work are yet to be confirmed. Ministers estimate the change will cost the taxpayer £1.25bn in England and Wales, saving around £450m compared to when the winter fuel payment was universally available. The Treasury has not yet set out how it will pay for the uplift, but has insisted the costs will be accounted for at the autumn budget and incorporated into the next OBR forecast. They have also promised it will not lead to permanent additional borrowing.
Daily Mail
25 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Labour splashes the cash… but who's going to pick up the bill? Brits warned of looming tax hikes as Rachel Reeves lays out 'unrealistic' spending plans TODAY
Rachel Reeves will splash the cash today as fears mount that Brits will need to pick up the bill later. The Cabinet is set to sign off the spending review before the Chancellor announces the details in the Commons at lunchtime. She will allocate huge sums to departments for the coming years, after loosening the government's borrowing rules at the last Budget. But although Ms Reeves will boast that her new approach means Labour can spend a staggering £300billion more over the next five years than the Tories planned, critics have warned she does not know where the money is coming from. The generous fiscal envelope set last Autumn has been put under massive pressure by the economy slowing down and Donald Trump 's trade war. There are demands to pump far more cash into defence, while Ms Reeves has already made an humiliating U-turn on winter fuel allowance cuts and is facing a Labour revolts on other benefits curbs. That has led analysts and political rivals to argue that more tax increases are 'inevitable' - although the funding gap will not crystalise until the next fiscal package. The tax rises in the Budget last year were the biggest on record for a single fiscal event. Public sector productivity has been making almost no progress despite investment The backdrop to the decisions has been looking increasingly grim, with Labour trailing Reform in the polls. Figures yesterday showed unemployment rising, and a survey found just 12 per cent of Brits believe Ms Reeves is doing a good job. Ministers have described the spending plans – equal to an extra £8,100 for every taxpayer in Britain – as 'the end of austerity'. In her announcement later, Ms Reeves will admit voters do not feel like they have more money in their pockets as Labour prepares to mark one year in office. But she will insisting she is 'renewing Britain'. 'This Government's task – my task – and the purpose of this spending review is to change that, to ensure that renewal is felt in people's everyday lives, their jobs, their communities,' she will say. Last week, Ms Reeves refused to rule out any further tax increases. Spending will be skewed heavily towards the NHS in an attempt to cut waiting lists further. Defence is set to be another big winner after Sir Keir Starmer committed to spending 2.5 per cent of GDP by 2027. Allies of Angela Rayner were last night claiming victory in her bid to secure more cash towards meeting Labour's target of building 1.5 million new homes by the next election. The Deputy PM, who is responsible for housing policy, had a series of bust-ups with Treasury ministers and No 10 over the issue. The Treasury had proposed a modest increase in the social housing budget from £2.3 billion a year to £2.5 billion. But government sources last night said Ms Rayner had secured a £39 billion settlement over ten years. The Treasury said it was the biggest boost to social housing in a generation. But the growing cost of servicing the UK's debt mountain means other areas of spending, including the police, face a budget squeeze in future years. The Tories branded Ms Reeves the 'Spend Today, Tax Tomorrow Chancellor'. Shadow chancellor Mel Stride said: 'Labour is spending money it doesn't have, with no credible plan to pay for it. 'That means more borrowing, more debt, and, inevitably, more tax rises in the Autumn Budget. Don't be fooled. We can't afford Labour.' In recent days, the Chancellor and Prime Minister have repeatedly claimed that Labour has 'fixed the foundations' of the economy, despite rising inflation and cuts to official growth forecasts. Yesterday's stark employment figures underline the real-world impact of Labour's tax and spend approach. They revealed UK payroll numbers have shrunk by 276,000 over the past seven months. In May alone, payrolls fell by 109,000 – the worst month since the pandemic. Meanwhile the unemployment rate has climbed to 4.6 per cent, the highest in nearly four years. Experts pinned the blame on Ms Reeves's £25 billion raid on employer National Insurance, which was announced in the October Budget and took effect in April. Payroll numbers fell every month since the Budget.
Daily Mail
25 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Red Arrows 'are running out of jets': Iconic display team are forced to cannibalise old planes for parts as shows come under threat from shortages
The Red Arrows are reportedly running out of jets, forcing the team to pick apart old planes for spare parts. The iconic fleet has been slashed from 26 working aircraft earlier this year to 17 today, with a further four in so-called deep maintenance and unavailable to fly. And this number could plummet further to just six planes within three years, placing their famous 'diamond nine' display under threat. It all means engineers are hurriedly cannibalising old aircraft in a bid to keep the best planes flying. Sources told The Sun that the stunt team's popular shows, often the highlight of special occasions including Charles III's coronation, could soon be cancelled in the wake of the shortage. One said: 'There are no two ways about it — the Red Arrows are running out of planes. 'Planes can only fly so many shows before they need new parts. 'So either they get new planes or they have to cancel shows.' The huge G-forces imparted on the Hawk T1s give them a shorter shelf life than other flypast planes. MailOnline has approached the Ministry of Defence for comment. First introduced in 1974, the current crop have been on borrowed time ever since the factory that makes spare parts closed five years ago. They are due to go out of service in 2030 with the Hawk T2s, which are used to train up RAF pilots, set to retire 10 years later. RAF chief Sir Richard Knighton insisted he was looking to find a replacement for the Hawk 'as soon as possible'. But in April it was reported the stunt team could swap its iconic British-built jets for a fleet of Russian-designed aircraft in a move that's left MPs and military top brass furious. Defence chiefs have reportedly been considering swapping the ageing Hawk T1s - which have been a staple for the famed aerobatic teams - for the M-346. As revealed by MailOnline earlier this year, much of the RAF display squad's ageing fleet of jets are nearing the end of their shelf lives - with some having been in service for around 50 years. Reports suggest the RAF may have to turn to Vladimir Putin for alternative aircraft, as the Yorkshire factory that made the BAE Hawks closed in 2020 - with a UK alternative still years away. The news was branded 'outrageous' by Tories, who said it flew in the face of the Red Arrows' publicly stated role of showcasing British industry and 'reinforcing the reputation of the UK'. Mark Francois, shadow armed forces minister, was horrified the British jets could be getting side-lined in favour of ones 'endorsed' by Russian tyrant Putin. 'The Red Arrows and their domestically manufactured Hawk jets are an iconic example of British aviation achievement,' the Tory MP told MailOnline. 'When the Hawk retires, in a few years time, it needs a firmly British replacement - not a Putin-endorsed Russian one - to maintain that tradition and boost our sovereign industrial capability, into the bargain.' Speaking to The Sun, Tory shadow defence secretary James Cartlidge added: 'When the Red Arrows perform their brilliant air displays, their red, white and blue vapour trails represent the Union Jack - not the Russian tricolour. 'Taxpayers would think it extraordinary.' Former Chief Air Marshal Sir Mike Graydon also hit out and said: 'This would be an extraordinary decision. There would be a strong reaction from the public.' While retired Air Marshal Edward Stringer added the Red Arrows were meant to 'showcase British kit, training and expertise'. The Red Arrows was set up in 1954. Made up of some of the RAF's most elite pilots, members of the squad have flown in Folland Gnat and then the BAE Hawk. However, the T1 Hawk are set to be retired in 2030, while the newer T2 Hawks have been plagued by engine woes. The T2s are set to be retired in 2040. Defence chiefs have been eager for a new British-made jet to replace the outdated models - with Bristol-based Aeralis among the best options to do so. But the government said that the £19million Aermacchi M-346, jointly developed by Russia and Italy, is being considered, reported the Sun. Tyrant Vladimir Putin has previously posed for photos with the Russian version of the jet, known as the Yak-130. Former RAF fast jet instructor Tim Davies said buying the Russian-linked plane would be 'treasonous'. While Reform UK leader Nigel Farage told MailOnline: 'That would be totally unacceptable. It's a big no.' But Downing Street branded claims the Red Arrows could be replaced with Russian-designed planes made in Italy as 'pure speculation' and insisted the procurement process hasn't even started yet. The Prime Minister's official spokesman said: 'The Ministry of Defence has made clear this is pure speculation. The procurement for the replacement jets for the Red Arrows has not started. 'So it's clearly not true to say any particular company is being considered. Indeed, the Ministry of Defence and the Italian company have said there have been no discussions with the company over buying that aircraft. 'Clearly I'm not going to get ahead of any future procurement competition, but I would be very clear that we do not procure any military equipment from Russia.' In a statement, the Ministry of Defence added: 'We have not yet engaged the market on the future Red Arrows jet.' In January, ex-pilots expressed fears the high number of hours flown, uncovered by a MailOnline probe, will force them to be stood down earlier unless they are preserved. For fans, this could result in very limited displays, with little aerobatics to expand the lifespan of the jets. A former RAF fast-jet pilot told MailOnline: 'If they don't get new aircraft, the Reds are finished.' All of the 16 jets currently in operation – stationed at RAF Waddington in Lincolnshire – are approaching 50 years old. The youngest is 43. Ministers insist the Hawk T1s – engineered by BAE Systems and powered with Rolls-Royce engines – will fly until the planned out-of-service date. Reform UK leader Nigel Farage told MailOnline: 'It would be a national disgrace if we lost the Red Arrows.' A Ministry of Defence (MoD) source said 'there are plenty of hours left to get them to 2030 and, indeed, well beyond if necessary'.
