The Ministry of Defence (MOD) has received multiple representations regarding the decision to charge VAT on private school fees, according to Lord Coaker, Minister of State for Defence, in response to a question from Baroness Goldie, Conservative life peer.
Coaker revealed that the MOD had logged 53 letters or emails on the matter, many from Members of Parliament acting on behalf of constituents or members of the public. However, he clarified:
“It is not possible to positively identify which of these are from members of the Armed Forces. In addition, there have been other informal approaches which have not been logged centrally.”
Acknowledging the potential impact of the VAT decision on service families, Coaker emphasised the MOD’s continued commitment to the Continuity of Education Allowance (CEA), which supports service personnel by mitigating the educational disruption caused by frequent relocations. He stated:
“We continue to support Continuity of Education Allowance (CEA) as the means of mitigating the disruption to Service children’s education caused by Service commitments involving frequent moves of the family home and recognise its importance for the Service personnel who utilise it.”
In anticipation of rising school fees when VAT is introduced in January 2025, the Secretary of State for Defence has acted to protect the allowance’s effectiveness. Coaker explained:
“To protect the integrity of the allowance, the Secretary of State for Defence directed that the cap on the current rates be lifted, and CEA rates recalculated, in recognition of the likely increase in school fees.”
The MOD has completed this re-rating exercise, and eligible service personnel have been informed of the revised rates, which took effect from 1 December 2024, ahead of the spring term.
Reading on Twitter, this is making many serving personnel consider leaving.
Still sorting out recruitment and retention Mr Healey?
You think if they leave the military they won’t have to pay VAT on school fees?
I’m not sure I want anyone that stupid serving in the military.
Who in this day and age gets an employer to pay school fees, it’s un heard off anywhere outside in the military. Even expats moving to new countries get a maximum of 2 years covered as part of relocation expenses and pay for it through tax equalisation.
The government funded gravy train of private school fees for officers children needs to end. When people like Boris Johnson get to go to Eton and all the fees are paid for by the British government it’s easy to see when we went wrong.
I’m posting what I read, that this issue will make the retention situation worse. I have no strong opinion otherwise. We have no kids and I’d certainly not want have wanted to bring any more humans into this world, we are too numerous as it is.
I’m posting what I read, that this issue will make the retention situation worse. I have no strong opinion otherwise. We have no kids and I’d certainly not want have wanted to bring any more humans into this world, we are too numerous as it is.
Double post, apologies.
I read about this from Deborah Haynes, the Sky News Defence and Security Editor.
The problem Jim is that it will be yet another straw on the camels back, this one may tip the balance and break that back. And you use the term stupid for those that consider leaving because of it, that’s way off Jim as many of the families who use boarding schools and subsequent fees are generally SNCOs in the “more educated” CSS arms as they can be moved around every 2 years and would want stability for their kids!
Well said Airborne. I was one of those CSS SNCOs who chose to send my two to prep school due to my continuous movement.
Not sure if Jim is ex military, but yes whilst there was a time when it was predominately Officers who sent their children to boarding school, it had certainly changed in the mid 90’s when I sent my two to school. I then used my “gratuity” to fund their final terms at prep school before one when to DYRMS and the other into a local school as they weren’t successful in the entrance exam. Both certainly benefited immensely from their time at Prep school in a stable environment.
I believe it applies across the Civil Service too. You either provide private boarding education at home or education in private English language schools in country or you have no overseas presence in Embassies and the like.
No if they leave the military they are no longer moving all the time so they go to a local school. Howerver we as taxpayers pay either by inefficient MoD or multiple of market rate to get the same. Your potential tax take by government will get eclipsed but the additional costs the government will get all over the place.
Never been to a private school but a stupid Labour policy.
Did you read the article as to why they use private schools? It’s because of frequent relocation. Continuity Of Education Allowance should’ve explained it to you; it would seem you wouldn’t meet your own criteria for entry into the forces.
Never used it or wanted to but one of the factors for leaving was my kids got to an age of junior/primary school so they wouldn’t have disruption and could start forming friendships in the local area.
Yes of course if they leave the forces fhey would have to pay VAT if the decide on privete education. Thats not the point, they would be the free to locate to an area where they can get good state education at no cost to them self. The reason they get help with school fee is to give their children a stable education uneffected by parents having to move a lot to meet service needs.
That’s not the case. By the time I was 9 years I had already moved all over 4 times. Then my Dad was posted to Germany to help protect people like you and People like Boris, I was then sent to a private school. At least half of the people I knew there were not officers, they were from all the lower ranks too. Maybe 8n the hope too of helping thier kids get a better education. So it wasn’t just for officers, it’s for all personnel. No not all employers pay school fees, which is a big shame, but no other employer expects you to be in war zones and be shot at., and you can’t have your family with you in a war zone. Especially when personnel are always moving all over the globe. Boris Johnson is different, it’s his family’s money that looked after him, that’s the system that is wrong.
I think mostly many families go without in order to send thier kids to private schools, and they are still paying thier taxes which go towards normal schools. These normal schools are getting better, but we’re abysmal when I was younger. We are still producing people that can’t read and write. I guess it us a little unfair, and these days teachers work very very hard no matter what school you go to, and teachers in state schools should be paid far more than what they get at the moment.
Daniele, it sounds as if Healey has achieved uplift of CEA to cover the VAT charge payable from January. So why give him a hard time?
Hi Graham.
If that is so, fair enough. I posted regards what I had read when the Sky News editor ran a story on it and its implications with retention.
On giving Healey a hard time, one, I doubt he reads these pages, and if he does, there are plenty of things I can give him a hard time for.
1) Saying one thing in opposition about hollowing out yet continuing that when in power with new cuts.
2) Allowing the RFA to effectively fall apart on his watch.
3) I read that protections for NI Vets have been watered down or removed, leaving them open to more witch hunts. I have heard or read nothing from him on this.
4) When he defends his department from cuts, I’ll support him. He has so far failed to do so, and I’m fully expecting more to come.
5) He was in HMT around 2009 when the forces were at the end of 13 years of cuts and neglect under that Labour government, he is not getting away with that from me, neither is Labour full stop.
Hi Daniele, I fully agree that Healey should be called out for the 5 reasons you cite.
As regards point 3 – I heard that on last Friday that a NI Vet will face a murder trial 52 years from the alleged incidents.
http://www.jurist.org: “A judge in Belfast ruled on Friday that the murder trial of a former British soldier will go ahead. The defendant, Soldier F, pleaded not guilty to the murder of two Irish men and attempted murder of five others during the disturbances known as “Bloody Sunday” that took place in Northern Ireland in 1972.
Soldier F’s lawyers sought to argue that there was insufficient evidence to try Soldier F for the murders. The prosecution insisted that Soldier F was one of the British soldiers in Bogside, Derry, on the day of the disturbance and that he opened fire against Irish civilians. Justice Stephen Fowler held that the defence had failed to establish that the evidence against Soldier F was tenuous, allowing the trial to commence within the next year.
One concession made by Justice Fowler to Soldier F was to allow him to sit behind a floor-to-ceiling thick blue curtain, as described by reporters. This curtain is used in order to conceal the identity of Soldier F, who Justice Fowler held would be a “prized target” for Irish Republicans to attack was his identity revealed”.
Yet another example of the Labour Government not thinking through the results of their actions. Apart from we are right you know nothing about the subject, until it puts them in bad light. Then they blame the previous government.
Did you read the article, are you serious? It’s 53 unconfirmed letters. The UK armed forces employs 200,000 people. What are these consequences you fear from 53 unconfirmed source letters? I love to know.
Mass resignation of senior civil servants and generals perhaps?
Jim, why do you think that CEA is a perk only for officers and their children? It is available to all ranks. Perhaps you should have done a little research. Service personnel have to make the very difficult decision as to whether to allow their children continuity of education or to drag them around the world every 2 or 3 years and have education constantly disrupted, reducing their childrens prospects for getting good exam results and pursuing higher or further education.
CEA is capped to 90% of school fees so all those in receipt of CEA have to pay 10% of boarding school fees from their own pocket.
A LCpl with 2 kids aged 8-9 wishing to receive CEA is on starting salary of £32k salary per year. The average annual Preparatory boarding school fees for 2 kids is £54k.
A Sgt with 2 kids aged 13-14 opting for CEA is on starting salary of £42k. Average annual Senior boarding school fees for his 2 kids would be £66k.
MoD has had CEA (called Boarding School Allowance in my day) for as long as I can remember. It helps ameliorate a significant disadvantage of service life for those with children.
Service personnel who leave the army would not have the money to keep children in independent school of course, irrespective of the VAT issue, and they know that. You are right. They are not stupid.
By the way, I am struggling to think of any allowance or perk paid only to officers. You have a funny view of the life of a regular officer.
Perks? MoD used to provide a sort of “Grace and Favour” type residences to senior officers in certain roles. Assume that is still the case.
For example, CGS are given the use of a place close to Bulford, which I won’t name.
COS ( Ops ) in the RN uses a place near to Northwood with a apt name, again I won’t name it.
The CDS make use of apartments in Kensington Palace.
I have no issue with any of this. Senior officers have other roles, including entertaining senior officers from allied nations, and I have no problem with them being provided with accommodation that befits their rank.
Critics no doubt involved in class war would prefer the CDS to entertain senior officers in a 3 bed semi in Surbiton, or a council house.
I am not one of those.
Correction, thinking back, the CGS place I referenced may have been for use for the C in C Land, which is defunct. Still the same arrangements though.
Hi Daniele,
My reference to perks was based on my own experience (serving up to and including the rank of Major). Your example is rather stratospheric to me. Very senior officers in command (Brig and above) got a ‘residence’, a term used to distinguish it from a nomal Married Quarter. Certainly it was somewhat larger than a bog standard Quarter. This was not just for ‘prestige’ reasons or a reward for acheiving both very high rank and being granted acommand appointment – the Service required the occupant to frequently host social occasions (which were rather irksome and an intrusion on family time, if truth be told). Of course they were not ‘grace and favour’ in the sense that they would be rent-free. The officer would have to pay rent for the house and additional rent for the garage as everyone else did who lived in service-provided accomodation, and of course to pay all utility bills and Council Tax etc.
I have only recently heard that CDS had use of an apartment in KP – I believe that this has since been discontinued.
Hi Graham. Yes, I used a poor term for it “Grace and Favour” is more on the Royal side of things. I forget the name for these MoD provided homes.
I also noted you were only considering payments in your reply to Jim, but thought the homes thing to be of interest anyway.
Hi Daniele, thanks. Yes, the term is (or at least was) ‘residence’ and is probably not a perk if you have to pay for it!
There is a superb network of state boarding schools who are exempt from VAT which forces families should be encouraged to choose before private boarding schools.
And they have plenty of places do they?
The schools in my area have waiting lists of over 100 pupils per year! And they are large schools. I imagine the state boarding schools are relatively small.(At least for boarding places).
We had to send our child to private school as there are no places in state schools and the one we did get we had to pull them out due to being attacked 3 times and not having maths and English teachers….