Apprenticeship levy is ‘just another tax’ on employers

The government has been selling the apprenticeship levy to employers for over a year now.

They will have “ownership” and be “in the driving seat”, negotiating the cash level of their digital vouchers with providers of choice.

It turns out employers will need a contract with the government, because in fact it’s no longer the employers cash.

The revelation that there will be contracts proves once and for all that the levy is just another tax, and how employers spend government funding they get in return will have to be carefully regulated.

This is of course entirely understandable, as clear rules supported by a robust audit regime will be required to prevent fraud.

Providers already in receipt of apprenticeship funding understand this, but private sector employers who are naturally wary of signing new government contracts may not be so compliant.

This unwelcome surprise for employers needn’t affect the timetable for next April’s levy launch.

But it will strengthen calls for a delay to the ‘negotiated’ way in which the cash will be spent from 1 May.

Your thoughts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

4 Comments

  1. The government have got this all wrong. The introduction of the levy will not increase the number of apprenticeships, in fact it will lead to employers just using the levy to train existing employees and will not be used to create new employment opportunities for school leavers. I look forward to this collapsing due to huge fraud issues similar to ILAs

  2. Chris Hewlett

    I support the #SaveOurApprenticeships campaign. The proposed huge cuts in funding (up to 50% for some apprenticeships) are unsustainable and it will be the 16-18 year old age group who will suffer the most. Currently, only two apprenticeship frameworks, out of more than 200, receive government support below £3000, meaning it will be impossible to meet the three million target, improve the quality and meet the needs of businesses to thrive in the future. Due to the reduced funding many quality training providers will be unable to sustain the delivery of Apprenticeships and will cease their delivery.
    Apprenticeship providers also act as recruitment services to place potential apprentices into employment, develop their interview skills, and give ongoing pastoral support, all of which are essential to the applicants making a successful transition into the workplace and be of use in the commercial world. The proposed funding cuts will jeopardise all of these services and reduce the opportunities for young people to find and sustain work and training especially in rural areas. This will result in many becoming unemployed, lack currency with their skills, become disengaged and unable to contribute to UK plc.

  3. Atif Khan

    I believe the levy is (brace yourselves)… a good thing. Apprentices are young people who want to get into work. By forcing cash rich corporations to get involved it’ll drive them to create real Apprenticeship strategies rather than hiring the odd Apprentice as part of a CSR initiative. Young people are our future and talent in coporations is becoming increasingly older, who’ll take over the reigns in 10, 20, 30 years time? Apprenticeships provide an alternative route to industry for many young, bright people who don’t wish to start their careers £40k in debt and no work experience.
    Yes, it will be painful, but most change at this level is. It’s a fundamental shift in the corporate world that is preparing the UK economy for the future, and I for one welcome it. I would like to think that when my children grow up they can get into an Apprenticeship with a large company like Cisco, IBM, or Microsoft and have a solid career without spending years in university with huge debt, no experience and fighting for a spot in a graduate scheme.

  4. Jeremy Rabinovitch

    I believe the levy is a good thing if done properly and everybody is fully aware of what it involves and how it will affect them. In the construction sector we need joined up thinking as we have local boroughs all having different rules in the 106 agreements which already hinder some of the potential opportunities. If this is to truly work we need providers and employers to work together to give young people the chances they need and give the country a chance to fill the skills gaps that have developed over the years.
    Jeremy Tolent Construction