Skip to main content

Tertiary Education Student Finance - Ministerial Response Treasury - 02 June 2017

The official version of this document can be found via the PDF button.

The below content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost, therefore it should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments.

STATES OF JERSEY

TERTIARY EDUCATION: STUDENT FINANCE (S.R.2/2017) – RESPONSE OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES

Presented to the States on 2nd June 2017 by the Minister for Treasury and Resources

STATES GREFFE

2017  S.R.2 Res.

TERTIARY EDUCATION: STUDENT FINANCE (S.R.2/2017) – RESPONSE OF THE MINISTER FOR TREASURY AND RESOURCES

Ministerial Response to:  S.R.2/2017

Review title:  Tertiary Education: Student Finance Scrutiny Panel:  Education and Home Affairs

INTRODUCTION

The Panel undertook the review into student finance because Jersey families were suffering varying degrees of financial hardship in sending students to university. The following Key Findings and Recommendations are made within the report S.R.2/2017 and  are directed to the  Chief Minister,  Minister for Treasury and Resources  and Minister for Education.

This document presents the responses of the Minister for Treasury and Resources to those Findings and Recommendations addressed to him.

FINDINGS

 

 

Findings

Comments

6

56. The provision within the Jersey  Tax  system  of Higher Child Allowance is an indirect and poorly targeted  method  of assistance.

The Treasury recognises the limitations of using the tax system in order to support parents and students with the costs of higher education. In particular it is recognised that the availability of the higher child allowance only helps those who actually pay income tax and that, because it is available to all taxpayers with children in higher education,  it  provides  assistance  to  those taxpayers with the very highest income who do not require any form of financial assistance from the States in order to send their children on to higher education.

In the 2016 Budget, the Minister for Treasury and Resources considered phasing out the higher child  allowance  from  the  standard  rate calculation (at the same time as phasing out the other child-related allowances from the standard rate  calculation),  reducing  the  assistance provided within the tax system for those higher income  taxpayers  who  have  their  income  tax calculated  by  reference  to  the  standard  rate calculation.  The  Minister  concluded  that  the availability of the higher child allowance in the standard rate  calculation should  be  maintained until such time as a broader solution for assisting with the costs  of higher education was found,

 

 

Findings

Comments

 

 

whereupon  it  would  be  phased  out  over  an appropriate period.

Despite  its  limitations,  the  Treasury  highlights that the availability of the higher child allowance does provide  significant financial assistance to those  who  do  pay  income  tax,  and  were  the allowance to be restricted such that it were only available in the marginal rate calculation, those with the highest incomes would not be able to benefit from its availability. The availability of the higher child allowance in the marginal rate calculation means that the majority of parents of children studying a 3-year degree course benefit from a cumulative reduction of their income tax of £9,360 over the relevant period.

RECOMMENDATIONS

 

 

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

1

59. The Minister for Treasury and Resources should phase out Higher Child Allowance from standard rate (20%) taxpayers as soon as possible.

Min. for T&R

Accept in principle

In  the  2016  Budget,  the  Minister  for Treasury  and  Resources  considered phasing out the higher child allowance from the standard rate calculation (at the same time as phasing out the other child related allowances from the standard rate calculation)  reducing  the  assistance provided within the tax system for those higher income taxpayers who have their income tax calculated by reference to the standard  rate  calculation.  The  Minister concluded  that  the  availability  of  the higher  child  allowance  in  the  standard rate  calculation  should  be  maintained until such time as a broader solution for assisting  with  the  costs  of  higher education  was  found,  whereupon  it would be phased out over an appropriate period.  The  Minister  for  Treasury  and Resources maintains that this is correct approach;  agreeing  that  the  allowance should be phased out, but only when a broader solution has been identified.

N/A

Page - 3

S.R.2/2017 Res.

 

 

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

2

60. The Minister for Treasury and Resources should phase out Higher Child Allowance from marginal rate tax payers and redirect money to direct assistance for students once a suitable solution is found.

Min. for T&R

Accept in principle

The  availability  of  the  higher  child allowance  in  the  marginal  rate calculation  means  that  the  majority  of parents  of  children  studying  a  3-year degree course benefit from a cumulative reduction of their income tax of £9,360 over  the  relevant  period  (£2,340  per annum for 4 tax years). Removal of this allowance  and  the  corresponding increase  in  tax  payable  would  have  a significant impact on parents, unless they were  receiving  compensating  support through  other  measures.  This  process would have to be carefully co-ordinated.

It is noted that restricting the availability of  the  allowance  to  the  marginal  rate calculation  limits  the  scope  for  the deadweight  loss  identified  in  the adviser's report (which appears to be the key  argument  for  the  removal  of  the allowance),  because  those  with  the highest  incomes  (who  have  their  tax calculated  by reference to the  standard rate  calculation)  would  not  be  able  to benefit from its availability. The Minister for  Treasury  and  Resources  maintains that  this  is  correct  approach;  agreeing that the allowance should be phased out, but  only  when  a  broader  solution  has been identified.

N/A