why do our tax dollars subsidize private schools?

[Anonymous]

Some recent threads about fairness/equity in terms of school offerings got me thinking...why don't private schools have to pay their fair share of taxes?

These local private schools, some costing almost $40k per year, (complete with multi-million dollar fundraising drives, capital campaigns, sports complexes, performing arts facilities, fields, beautiful facilities, and on and on) are exempt from paying a single dime in property taxes on their lavish campuses. WHY???

They are not some sort philanthropic organizations working for the greater good or something similar. They are exclusive private schools who are able to charge obscene amounts of money for tuition and ALSO collect additional multi-millions for fundraising efforts. Why, then, do the taxpayers (most of whom could not come close to paying even one of these tuition amounts) have to subsidize these schools (I say subsidize b/c every $ not collected from these schools in terms of property taxes must come from the rest of us).

If these schools had to pay the appropriate amount of property taxes then I would feel that they can provide whatever over-the-top offerings the parents are willing to pay for (a private transaction and all). But when we are subsidizing their lavish facilities, I find it obscene and vulgar.

I sometimes think that, as public school parents, we quibble with each other (or look at some additional thing that one school has that another doesn't have) but we completely MISS the larger point: private schools are there the gulf between the haves and the have-nots occur and WE are the ones subsidizing them. These schools should pay their fair share of taxes and, frankly, that money should be earmarked for use in supplementing the public school enrichment activities in the same jurisdiction. Why do we allow this type of inequity to continue?

[Anonymous]

Don't forget that those private school parents are still paying the taxes that fund public schools.

[Anonymous]

Interesting perspective. My son is at a very small private school. So small there is no gym, for example. I view their tax status favorably because they are contributing to educating children. I didn't think about the lavish schools. But I think I'd just vote with where I chose to pay tuition. I like and respect the overall culture of my son's school and feel they are contributing to society. We do a lot of fundraisers for other charitable causes, for example. Might be why we don't have a gym.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Don't forget that those private school parents are still paying the taxes that fund public schools.

Right, but not entirely relevant. The schools are NOT paying their fair share of taxes on the property. I, for example, pay all of my taxes (as I'm sure you do) and ALSO pay property taxes on my land (as I'm sure you do). Why should a school (especially one who is so able to raise funds through tuition and other fundraisers) not pay it's property taxes? It makes no sense. And, to go specifically to your point: you paying taxes that go to the public schools makes sense (the schools ate available to ALL, whether or not you chose to send your child). But to have taxpayers subsidizing private schools seems obscene b/c they are NOT for all, not for the "greater good.". They serve a small, exclusive sub- set of people who are more than willing to pay lots of money for the privilege. Public school is a right (and must be supported by tax dollars), private school is a privilege. (Again, if my tax money didn't subsidize it, I wouldn't have a complaint.)

[Anonymous]

OMG OP, you sound like a person who is jealous of private school kids.I can barely afford to send my kids to private and sacrifice a lot to do so. Each kid in private saves the taxpayers 15k to 20k per year per student depending on where you live.

[Anonymous]

There are lots of organizations that are tax exempt that are not "some philanthropic organization working for the greater good".

I spent part of the weekend working the concession stand at my son's public school football game so that they can buy an HD endzone video camera. Tax exempt, but I can guarantee there's no "greater good" in making sure that a group of mostly middle class and wealthy teenage boys don't have to squint when they watch game film.

There are plenty of other organizations that exist to serve specific groups, including groups that are predominantly affluent that get tax exempt status.

The reality is that private schools are non-profit (for the most part, organizations like the British School of Washington do pay taxes), which is enough for them to qualify.

[Anonymous]

I'd go after churches first.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OMG OP, you sound like a person who is jealous of private school kids.I can barely afford to send my kids to private and sacrifice a lot to do so. Each kid in private saves the taxpayers 15k to 20k per year per student depending on where you live.

It isn't about jealousy, it is about right and wrong. You sound unbelievably entitled! You are required to pay your taxes LIKE EVERYONE ELSE! You should not be entitled to have hardworking taxpayers subsidize your child's private school! P.S. I'd like to know how much money the taxpayers are foregoing per year so that your private school can get out of paying its property taxes!

There is a public policy reason for homeowners to pay taxes -- it is for the PUBLIC good (surely you know that!). What, exactly, is the public policy reasoning behind private schools being exempted from paying their property taxes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are lots of organizations that are tax exempt that are not "some philanthropic organization working for the greater good".

I spent part of the weekend working the concession stand at my son's public school football game so that they can buy an HD endzone video camera. Tax exempt, but I can guarantee there's no "greater good" in making sure that a group of mostly middle class and wealthy teenage boys don't have to squint when they watch game film.

There are plenty of other organizations that exist to serve specific groups, including groups that are predominantly affluent that get tax exempt status.

The reality is that private schools are non-profit (for the most part, organizations like the British School of Washington do pay taxes), which is enough for them to qualify.

It is entirely legitimate for taxpayers to question subsidizing private schools. Surely you aren't advocating that private schools, charging $35+ per year, and able to raise many more millions SHOULD continue to be allowed to avoid paying their property taxes, are you? Just because it has been done before doesn't make it right. Please, go visit Sidwell and walk around that campus. Look at the fields. Look at the gigantic athletic facility. Look at the performing arts building. Then tell me that it is a good use of taxpayer dollars to keep this institution from paying it's fair share of taxes. It is vulgar to ask taxpayers to subsidize these things, just vulgar.

[Anonymous]

I call sour grapes...my kid doesn't benefit so therefore let's stick it them.

[Anonymous]

Argue with Congress over the IRC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OMG OP, you sound like a person who is jealous of private school kids.I can barely afford to send my kids to private and sacrifice a lot to do so. Each kid in private saves the taxpayers 15k to 20k per year per student depending on where you live.

It isn't about jealousy, it is about right and wrong. You sound unbelievably entitled! You are required to pay your taxes LIKE EVERYONE ELSE! You should not be entitled to have hardworking taxpayers subsidize your child's private school! P.S. I'd like to know how much money the taxpayers are foregoing per year so that your private school can get out of paying its property taxes!

There is a public policy reason for homeowners to pay taxes -- it is for the PUBLIC good (surely you know that!). What, exactly, is the public policy reasoning behind private schools being exempted from paying their property taxes?

I pay 6k in property taxes on my house.(lets say it is similiar amount per child for a private school)..the net savings to the tax payers is 15-6 equals 9k. So as a taxpayer, I would think school choice would be a great thing both financially for the county. Also, education is vital to the future of this country and if people think their kids would get a better educatuon outside a state sponsored school then what is your beef?

[Anonymous]

Look, same could be said for churches, or Lions clubs, or any number of nonprofit entities.

The entire tax exempt sector is messed up. At the federal level it's basicallya $3 trillion untaxed economy. We could close our budget deficit in a hurry by going after credit unions, tax-exempt hospitals, private education institutions that pay their executives well into 7 figures, and big business charities that serve more to support the lavish lifestyles of executives than serve any real cause.

[Anonymous]

You should be happy these parents are ponying up the money for private school or your property taxes would go way up trying to accommodate everyone in public school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'd go after churches first.

Both should pay taxes.