• Sectors we work in banner(2)

    Quick Reads

How the forewarned ‘hike’ on private school fees is going to bite – a family law and Private Office perspective

From 1 January 2025, VAT at the standard rate of 20% will be added to private school fees. Depending on which lens it is viewed through, it can be seen as one of the more gloomy forewarnings of the Labour manifesto, or as a fair way of attempting to raise the funding for 6,500 more state school teachers.

Understandably, given the financial impact this will have in the private school sector, many families have been bracing themselves for this news, but given it was a key part of the Labour manifesto and key campaign line, it is not unexpected. That said, the news of this ‘tax hike’ being implemented from 1 January 2025 which is in the middle of the school academic year and indeed before the next tax and financial year, is somewhat more unexpected and does not leave a lot of time for planning.  

The government has taken a neutral response to the date announcement essentially saying that they believe state schools can cope with any children that may now need to enter the state school system and that private schools do not need to pass on the full 20% fee increase to parents – that said, it is something that requires serious consideration and planning both in terms of finances and also from the perspective of the welfare of children. 

When children are well settled and established at a school, a move could be seen as detrimental to them, for health or special educational needs reasons, as well as if they have had a turbulent few years, (for example if parents have separated) and their school and routine has been a comfort and safety net for them. It is likely that many parents would be extremely reluctant to change their child’s school unless absolutely required.

This is also in parallel with the financial considerations and consequences should families find themselves in a situation where fees are no longer affordable, as highlighted in our colleague Sarah Jane Boon’s article Potential parental disputes about school fees should a Labour government add VAT to fees (charlesrussellspeechlys.com)

Some families may find themselves unable to meet school fees or, more worryingly, potentially breaching a court order if they have been ordered to pay school fees pursuant to an order on the breakdown of a marriage or relationship and cannot afford to continue to do so. Given schooling and choice of school is highly emotive, if an agreement on schooling or agreement to vary an order cannot be reached, then an application would need to be made to court. However, non-court dispute resolution must be considered seriously prior to making any application.

One important point to make is that the family court is hugely overburdened and prioritises the most serious child welfare cases to be dealt with urgently. 1 January 2025 is only (perhaps shockingly!) some 16 weeks away, so it is highly unlikely that the court would have the capacity to deal with an influx of applications, let alone see cases to conclusion within this timeframe. If families require certainty and a quicker outcome, mediation and/or arbitration can be more swift and flexible options when considering this issue.

January feels like an arbitrary date, attractive merely due to its proximity to the present. Large numbers [of families] will be forced, now at very short notice, to move their children elsewhere.

Our thinking

  • Building Safety and the challenges for UK construction - where are we now?

    David Savage

    Events

  • Women in Leadership: Resilience in Entrepreneurship

    Events

  • Dominic Lawrance and Catrin Harrison write for Tax Journal on the implications of the Court of Appeal judgment in the case of ‘A Taxpayer v HMRC’

    Dominic Lawrance

    In the Press

  • The Telegraph quotes Sarah Jane Boon on Labour’s plans for cohabitation reform

    Sarah Jane Boon

    In the Press

  • Something Changed – Landlord recovers possession of iconic music venue

    Samuel Lear

    Quick Reads

  • Implications of Johnson v FirstRand – will secret commissions pave the way for claims from Auto ABS noteholders?

    Caroline Greenwell

    Insights

  • When is 20% not 20%? The real impact of the proposed changes to business property relief on trading companies

    Sarah Wray

    Quick Reads

  • Joseph Evans, Cassidy Fan and Jessica Boxford write for New Law Journal on the future of insolvency: a digital asset revolution

    Joseph Evans

    In the Press

  • Cohabitation law reform

    Hannah Owen

    Quick Reads

  • Relocating to Switzerland: trusts

    Alexia Egger Castillo

    Insights

  • Property Patter - Lifetime achievements: Katie Kopec of JLL

    Emma Humphreys

    Podcasts

  • Charles Russell Speechlys finds that Gen Z prioritises financial planning and saving amidst growing economic challenges

    Sally Ashford

    News

  • Law 360 quotes Stewart Hey on the potential integration of the PSR into the FCA and the impact on APP fraud reimbursement

    Stewart Hey

    In the Press

  • Kevin Gibbs and Sadie Pitman write for CoStar on the need for investment in power infrastructure to support new data centres

    Kevin Gibbs

    In the Press

  • New code of practice for the cyber security of AI development

    Rebecca Steer

    Quick Reads

  • Drapers quotes Kerry Stares on the potential for a review of the Modern Slavery Act 2015

    Kerry Stares

    In the Press

  • EU Design Legislation Updates

    Matthew Clark

    Insights

  • The EU Omnibus: resetting the rules on sustainability due diligence

    Kerry Stares

    Insights

  • The Times and Daily Mail quote Dan Pollard on new changes to the Employment Rights Bill

    Dan Pollard

    In the Press

  • Extra Time: The business of women’s football in Africa

    Sarah Johnson

    Podcasts

Back to top