On June 14th 2025, I appeared on LBC’s Matthew Wright show to discuss the new policy of applying VAT to private school fees—a policy recently upheld in the courts despite pushback from the private sector. This issue cuts to the heart of what kind of education system we want in the UK. Here are four reasons I believe this policy is fair, progressive, and beneficial to the majority.
1. It Removes an Unfair Subsidy
As I said on LBC:
“Until the policy came in, the private schools were effectively subsidised by the taxpayer through VAT exemption, despite only serving 7% of the population… This policy has removed that regressive tax break and redirected resources into the state sector, where the majority of children are educated.“
Private schools have long benefitted from tax breaks that ordinary people don’t receive. It’s not about punishing the wealthy—it’s about removing a structural privilege that deepens inequality. As I told Matthew Wright:
“This is about removing a privilege that entrenches inequality.“
2. It Reinvests in the State Sector
The policy is expected to raise around £1.6 billion—enough to fund an estimated 69,000 new teachers, more SEND provision, and wider educational support.
Sarah Connelly from the Independent Schools Council argued:
“If more children move from the independent sector into the state sector, that is going to increase pressure… The SEND provision within the state is in crisis.“
I acknowledged the SEND crisis but argued that this tax should be used to address it:
“Greater investment in state schools helps everyone. The revenue raised from the VAT will be reinvested in state schools, improving teacher recruitment, infrastructure, pupil support… More funding equals better outcomes for everyone.“
Matthew Wright pressed the issue:
“Are we confident that the money raised in the tax will benefit children in the state sector?“
To which I replied:
“We need to hold the government to account… Like the pupil premium and reading catch-up programmes under Ed Balls, money needs to be clearly earmarked.“
3. It Encourages Social Integration
As I told LBC:
“We need children learning from all backgrounds together, not living in parallel worlds from age five… Private schools by design separate children by wealth.“
Sending affluent families back into the state sector can enhance not just resources, but empathy and community. I shared the example of my own son:
“He went to the local comprehensive in Bethnal Green, did extremely well, and is now on the civil service fast track. He mixed with children from all local backgrounds—and that experience was invaluable.“
Sarah countered:
“There’s a lot of diversity in independent schools.“
To which Matthew responded dryly:
“6.8% of the population go to private school. That is a statistical few by any definition.“
4. It Holds Government to Account
Critics rightly ask whether the government will actually use the money to improve state education. This is a valid concern—but the answer isn’t to scrap the tax, it’s to monitor spending closely.
I argued:
“We do need to hold the government to account here… Taxpayers need to see where the money’s gone. That’s how successful policies like the pupil premium earned trust.“
Sarah Connelly expressed frustration:
“We feel it’s very important to hold the government to account… They’ve made claims about how much this policy will raise, how many children would leave the sector, and the improvements they plan to make.“
Even critics and supporters agree: transparency and delivery are essential.
Final Thoughts
Matthew Wright concluded:
“Curious but not altogether surprising… the weighting of the arguments has been [heavy] in the right-wing press.“
There’s no doubt this is a contentious issue. But as someone who’s taught in state schools for decades, sent my son to one, and seen the transformative power of public education, I believe this policy is a step in the right direction.
For more discussion, look elsewhere on this website, and listen to What’s the Best Education for your Child?.