Show the Working

Bring academies and free schools into local authority control and reform private school status

Green · what the evidence says

An independent, source-checked look at Green’s policy “Bring academies and free schools into local authority control and reform private school status” — what it would actually do across the things that affect your life. Every claim below quotes the source behind it. How this works.

Tax & the money you keep — Hurts

moderate · moderate confidence

Charging VAT on private school fees directly increases the cost for households paying those fees, reducing the money they keep. The hit is real but falls only on the roughly 7% of pupils in private schools, mostly higher-income families.

The evidence

Biggest unknown: How much of the VAT burden schools absorb versus pass on to parents determines the actual household tax hit; early data suggest an average pass-through of around 14–23%, not the full 20%.

Our reading: O11 asks specifically about household tax burden and take-home pay. The central mechanism here is straightforward: VAT on private school fees is a new tax cost borne by households paying those fees. Schools are passing on roughly 14% on average (E7), with total fee rises of around 23% over a year (E8), meaning fee-paying families are materially worse off in terms of money kept. The OBR's effective rate of 15.4% (E5) and the IFS estimate of ~15% net (E6) both confirm a significant real cost. The policy does not reduce taxes for anyone — there is no offsetting household tax cut in the stated text. The revenue generated (£1.6–1.9bn per year) flows to the Exchequer; its use on state education touches O7, not O11. The removal of charitable status (business rates relief) is a tax on institutions, not directly on household income, so its O11 effect is negligible by comparison (E19 notes it generates less revenue than the VAT). The impact is concentrated on private school fee-paying households, who are disproportionately higher-income (E21 notes private school pupils are 'mostly from high-income families'). For the ~93% of families with children in state schools, this policy has no direct O11 effect. On the distributional criterion the rubric requires: this worsens the tax position of a relatively affluent minority of households. The direction is 'worsens' for those affected, with moderate magnitude given the real fee increases documented. Confidence is moderate because pass-through rates vary by school and the full steady-state effect is still emerging.

Public finances & the next generation — Little effect

minor · moderate confidence

The VAT on private school fees raises real revenue but the policy commits to spending it on new teachers, nurseries, and breakfast clubs, making the net effect on public finances close to neutral. The transition of academies to local authority control has no costed fiscal impact in the available evidence.

The evidence

Biggest unknown: Whether the total cost of absorbing displaced pupils, building SEND capacity, and funding the LA transition remains within the revenue raised, or whether implementation overruns push the package into net deficit.

Our reading: The policy has two main fiscal components: VAT on private school fees and removal of charitable status. On the revenue side, the OBR projects around £1.6 billion annually in VAT receipts, with the IFS placing the gross figure somewhat higher at ~£1.9 billion. Against this, the OBR estimates ~£270 million annually to absorb the roughly 35,000–37,000 displaced pupils into the state sector, leaving a net fiscal gain in the region of £1.3 billion per year before accounting for promised new spending. However, the policy explicitly earmarks that net revenue for new education expenditure (teachers, nurseries, breakfast clubs), meaning the improvement to the structural fiscal position is close to zero: revenue raised ≈ new spending committed. The removal of charitable status adds a smaller, unquantified increment. The academy-to-LA transition is a significant structural change but has no costed fiscal impact in the provided evidence — its implications for the debt path remain opaque. Overall, the policy is broadly self-funding rather than debt-reducing: it does not worsen public finances (no unfunded giveaway) but it also does not materially improve the debt path or reduce the interest burden. The verdict is negligible with a minor positive lean, driven by the marginal possibility that revenue slightly exceeds committed spending. Confidence is moderate because OBR projections are subject to behavioural uncertainty around enrolment shifts, and implementation costs for the LA transition are uncosted.

Inequality & fair shares — Helps

moderate · moderate confidence

Charging VAT on private school fees and removing their tax exemptions raises around £1.6 billion a year from services used almost exclusively by high-income families, with the revenue directed into state schools serving the broad majority. The main caveat is that the gain in equality of educational resource distribution depends on whether the promised state-school investment actually reaches disadvantaged pupils.

The evidence

Biggest unknown: Whether the net revenue is effectively directed to disadvantaged pupils in state schools, or is absorbed by general funding pressures including the cost of absorbing pupils who switch from the private sector.

Our reading: The core distributional logic of the VAT measure is straightforward: it taxes a service—private schooling—consumed overwhelmingly by high-income households, and directs the net proceeds (OBR projects ~£1.6bn/year) into state schools serving over 93% of pupils, including the lowest-income families. This is a textbook O14-improving mechanism: costs fall on the affluent, gains are spread across the broader population via improved state provision. The IFS confirms that private school attendance—concentrated among high earners—confers significant later-life advantages, meaning the pre-policy baseline already embeds a widening gap. Removing charitable status reinforces this effect, though the IFS notes it raises less revenue than the VAT measure. The net redistributive gain must be discounted by the £270m annual cost of absorbing pupils who switch to state schools. One study (Zeus Press, not on the institutional allowlist and therefore down-weighted) raises a concern that middle-income rather than top-income families bear the fee shock, potentially disrupting 'cultural capital inheritance' for the middle class while the wealthiest absorb the cost. Fees did rise on average substantially in the first year per available data, making this a plausible dynamic. However, it does not reverse the direction of effect on the income-wealth gap: the mechanism still taxes high-income consumption and reinvests in universally-accessed services. The academy-to-LA-control element has contested evidence on equity outcomes and an indirect link to income inequality; it does not meaningfully shift the verdict. Overall, the policy narrows the gap with moderate confidence—the channel is clear but magnitude depends on delivery of state-school investment and the degree to which middle-income rather than top-income households absorb the burden.

Education & opportunity — Mixed picture

moderate · moderate confidence

This policy aims to raise over a billion pounds for state education — funding new teachers, nurseries and breakfast clubs — but moving academies back to local authority control is contested and the revenue gains depend on forecasts that carry real uncertainty. Some children, particularly those from middle-income families in private schools, may face worse educational options.

The evidence

Biggest unknown: Whether revenue from VAT on private school fees actually materialises at forecast levels and is effectively spent to raise state school standards, or whether pupil displacement and implementation costs erode the net gain.

Our reading: This policy has two distinct components that both affect O7, pulling in different directions. On the private school VAT measure: the projected revenue — up to £1.6 billion per year — is substantial and earmarked specifically for state education improvements: teachers, nurseries, and breakfast clubs. If delivered, these investments would materially improve school standards and early years access, particularly benefiting poorer pupils. The IFS and OBR forecasts are broadly consistent on the revenue scale, lending moderate credibility to the upside. However, pupil displacement into the state sector (OBR: ~37,000; actual early data suggests the figure is tracking above initial estimates) carries a £270 million annual absorption cost, reducing the net gain. A contested study suggests the policy hits middle-income families hardest — the wealthiest maintain private schooling while middle earners switch to state schools — which could strain state provision in certain areas rather than relieve it. These distributional effects are genuine and supported by evidence, making this component 'mixed' rather than a clear improvement. On the academy/free school reversal: this is a major structural change with no existing legal mechanism to implement it. Evidence on whether LA control improves or worsens outcomes is contested — inspection data slightly favours LA schools for recovery from inadequacy, but academy supporters cite autonomy as a driver of innovation and attainment. The DfE itself has noted that direct performance comparisons are misleading because the worst-performing schools were often converted to academies. Implementation risk is high and the educational benefit is uncertain. Overall, the revenue channel could deliver real improvements in state education capacity, but the academy restructuring adds substantial implementation risk and the distributional effects of VAT on private schools are genuinely mixed. 'Mixed, moderate' reflects this honest split.