• 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

  • Sarah Higgins, Sarah Jane Boon, Miranda Fisher and Charlotte Posnansky write for Family Law Journal on how the 2024 budget is impacting family law

    Sarah Higgins

    In the Press

  • Family Offices and Succession Planning – handing over the reins

    Graeme Kleiner

    Quick Reads

  • DIFC Court – A New Vision - Insights from the BarMENA discussion with the Chief Justice of the DIFC Courts H.E. Wayne Martin

    Abdul Azeem Abdul Samad

    Quick Reads

  • eprivateclient quotes Nicola Saccardo and Daniele Mologni on why Italy is an increasingly popular destination for high-net-worth individuals looking to relocate

    Nicola Saccardo

    In the Press

  • Helliwell v Entwistle Live

    Sarah Jane Boon

    Quick Reads

  • Charles Russell Speechlys is shortlisted in six categories in the Law.com International European Legal Innovation & Tech Awards 2025

    News

  • Sarah Wray writes for Professional Adviser on the inheritance tax consultation on agricultural and business property relief

    Sarah Wray

    In the Press

  • Carris Peacey and Sylwia Jatczak write for R3 RECOVERY Magazine on the Building Safety Act 2022 and the obligations on IPs

    Carris Peacey

    In the Press

  • The EU Omnibus: resetting the rules on sustainability reporting

    Kerry Stares

    Insights

  • The Lawyer covers our Russell Up scheme and the number of trainee innovation projects it is delivering

    Joe Cohen

    In the Press

  • Insights for companies from recent ISSB publications on materiality and voluntary application of the ISSB Standards

    Kerry Stares

    Insights

  • Findings of fact are stubborn things: A Taxpayer v HMRC

    Dominic Lawrance

    Insights

  • ESG litigation risk for UK-headquartered companies in respect of human rights, environmental impact and labour conditions overseas: An update on case law

    Kerry Stares

    Insights

  • Data Protection and Privacy: Continuing Trends and Developments

    Janine Regan

    Insights

  • iNews quotes Sadie Pitman on Manchester United's new stadium plans and the environmental aspects of major projects

    Sadie Pitman

    In the Press

  • FT Adviser reports on our Gen Z survey and quotes William Marriott and Sally Ashford on the financial behaviours of this cohort

    William Marriott

    In the Press

  • Building Liability Orders: New Guidance from the Courts

    Melanie Hardingham

    Insights

  • Arbitrating shareholders’ disputes

    Thomas R. Snider

    Insights

Back to top