Presence

Greg,
Be aware that "nothing" is going on in Lawrence. Isler (of Woodmere by the way)ha sa very very small following and he even he has admitted that these are only preliminary steps. No one in any leadership position has advocated pulling Jewish kids from yeshiva to send to PS. I agree in full that something must be done to curb this outrageous tuition situation in the community but please be aware that this situation in the 5 Towns (District 15) has hardly gotten off the ground.
JK

Good luck with this issue. I think it will be tough to get the community as a whole energized here, because relatively few people are actually feeling much pain. Assuming your 75/25 split is accurate, for 3 out of 4 people, this is NOT a problem, carpool-line complaints notwithstanding.

My bill for the coming year will be $30k for three kids, 4th, 2nd and pre-k.

If you are not paying full tuition how is your bill $12,000, I assume that is before any reduction. That is irrelevant to the issue. Your opinions are correct but your facts do need a little tweaking. The typical school in Baltimore has over 1/3 paying full. In the main all boys school almost all (well over 90%) pay at least $4,000 per child. I have a hard time understanding the financials since I was told by one of the principal lay leaders of that school that the entire budget divided by the number of students would come out to $4,400 per student. If almost everyone is paying $4,000 why is the fulltuition so high. some blame it on the reductions given to Rebbeim, teachers and others working in th eschool which may or may not be true. Bais Yaakov is trying a new route. They are having a fundraiser in the fall with the proceeds not going into the general fund but going into an endowment fund. Over time as that endowment fund grows it is hoped to defray costs of escelating tuition. We will have to see how it will actually work but at least they are trying. this approach will take some time to have any impact at all. Another fellow who wrote an article in the WWW is trying to get the IRS to give a deduction for the religious part of the tuition which will be of some help if it ever suceeds. The best way would be to get state funding for non-direct costs (rather then vouchers) for expenses such as bussing, books, etc.. We are all struggling with these issues and would love to hear new approaches.

Greg's right - this is an extremely serious issue. My wife and I have no kids, yet we've oriented our finances and basically life planning around the fact that we're going to get hit _very hard_ by dayschool tuition when we do have them. My wife and I are both engineers (yes, I actually do real software engineering!), and we're doing quite well, yet having two kids at full tuition would eat at least 1/3 of our post-tax income.

What's sadder is that what you're getting for your money is just terrible. If full tuition is $12k, you've gotta consider that _Gilman_, probably the most prestigious prep school for rich kids in the area, is only $16k for lower school. If TA et al were amazing schools, $12k isn't a whole lot. But they're mediocre at best (and this is on both the secular and Hebrew ends). For those of us who care, there is a very real sense that this is money badly spent.

The idea that, somehow, the schools won't just jack up tuition to cover the previous cost + voucher is absolutely foolish, however. There is a very strong entitlement culture running at the tuition offices.

The schools need to be more transparent about where the money is going, and the community needs to seriously rethink how and when we give tuition reduction/exemption. If a teacher at the school is getting $40k a year plus tuition exemption for his three boys, he's making the equivalent of $100k a year. Sorry to say, but that's overpaid for non-collegiate teaching positions.

Start a new school, Greg. If it didn't suck like all the other ones, I'd send my kids there, hour commute be damned.

Jeff- Greg is paying full tuition.

Jeff - you misread what I wrote; we do pay full tuition (plus over-30 membership dues to Shomrei, despite my youthfullness). I was trying to be inclusive in how I phrased it; although we can thankfully pay tuition now, we might not always be able to, and I'd like to think that I would still be concerened with how those that were paying full tuition are faring.

Interesting ideas at BY, I wasn't aware of that. It wont be a near-term solution as you said. I did see that WWW article, I'm not sure how that is much better than the synagogue fees thing the schools do now. It doesn't make up for the kind of jumps we had this year.

I think you are probably right reg: Rabbeim. It's a difficult issue, especially since many can afford to pay their way.

There are questions like how come staffing wasnt reduced when we switched to FACTS...that should at the least eliminate one salary per school.

DMZ: good point about the intangibles of teaching, it certainly can make a big difference. Is a free tuition for a teachers kid a taxable item? Shouldn't it be if it isnt? Starting a new school is only for the wealthy and the brave, neither of which I am.

I assumed that's what he meant regarding full tuition, but I didn't want people to think $12,000 is not full tuition for two kids. How is DMZ coming up with a figure of $12,000 for TA? My reading of Greg's post was that the $12,000 was for both kids (which makes sense). I believe it ranges from $6,500 - $8,000 for 1st through 8th at Ta and a little less in BY). Let me know if I am wrong. DMZ is saying that $40,000 plus three tuitions is $100,000 equivilant where are you getting your figures from. Three tuitions are approximately $20,000. Factor in the tax savings and maybe we are talking about $30,000 at most (they are not likely in the highest tax bracket after deductions). Now we are talking about paying a full time teacher $70,000 which may be a little high but not necessarily exccessive. If it was excessive we would have a lot more supply of teachers. I am the most vigilant proponent as far doing something about the problem but we have to stay realistic. It is oversimplified to say start a new school with only full paying students because as a community we do have resposibility to those that honestly can't afford full tuition. TA's problem which has beeen dramatically improved is that the current parents are paying for the sins of prior fiscal mismanagement. That refers to direct and indirect costs. The past chairman of the board desrves alot of credit for getting a lot of expenses and shaping up the books, but there is a long way to go. I honestly feel the pressure of tuition having two tuitions (TA & BY) and a babysitter for the baby as well. My wife's income basically goes entirely for that expense. I am very interested in solutions. When we got together with other couples the frustration over tuitions got to the point where we recommended not discussing it as some people got very worked up (which is understandable). I have spoken with people in The Associated and they are looking for answers as well. One interesting solution that has been mentioned in the midwest is to ask people to leave 10% of their estate to loacal day schools and go into an endowment fund. Nice idea but easier said then done. A friend proposed requiring parents to pay tuition long after their kids graduate to help pay back some of the reductions given, not sure if I like the idea as people in that situation areusually strappped to begin with. OU is organizing a task force made up of lay leaders to deal with the tuition epidemic. Please feel free to voice an alternatives you can think up, but I have yet to hear a great solution.

I have only seen one school budget in my life and a slew of 990's. The budget showed that the highest cost is salaries and the next highest cost is administration. Having seen the IRS 990 forms, it is quite obvious to me that the schools are top heavy and that the administrators are not only paid extremely well, but they are paid well above administratos in the public schools because they get a tuition benefit that is equal to another full time salary, in many cases. In addition, the administrators are often able to provide jobs and advancement opportunities for their wives/husbands, which is something that those in the public sectors have very little abilitiy to do (especially if their spouse is not certified for the job).

If I was in charge, I would start by cutting administration. After that I would look at the salaries of the rest of the teachers and institute a pay scale that is dictated by experience and achievement, not the number of children that the teacher has or the lack of salary for the husband, in some cases.

While everyone bemons the plight of those who work in our schools, I say that it is good they didn't take their talents to the private sector where they would have to use their vacation for the holidays and would have to work summers. I don't see that they have such a bad thing going. And, remember that many of them also work at the camps and get free tuition too.

Tuition to schools where you teach is not taxable. One problem that some schopols have is dead weight. It is not easy to fire the secretary who has been there for 15 years but doesn't serve much purpose. By making p[art of the fee synagogue fees it supposedly makes that part tax deductible. I am not convinced that it would stand up if audited, but it gives us a reasonable basis and likely will succeed in circumventing tax penalities and criminal charges. BY has resisited doing the same structure based in part to TA pushing the envelope so hard. Rebbeim is hard situation as you want the best toi be teaching your kids and they should be fairly compensated, but should my wife or yours have to work so that we can pay the Rebbe enough so his wife doesn't have to? all around a difficult situation.

Two notes:
The tuition benefit is taxable. Obviously the amount that is taxable is dependent on the marginal rate. A teacher whose husband does not work and make money, will have a non-taxed tuition benefit. A teacher whose husband is making a $200,000 salary probably falls in the 36% tax bracket and will be paying $3,600 in tax for every $10,000.

Re: Jeff Zuckerman's article in the WWW, the Agudah will never win the court battle and most likely result is that the Church of Scientology will end up loosing their small deduction for their initiation classes.

If pigs start flying or hell freezes over, and the Agudah does win the court battle, the deduction amount of whatever percent will be helpful for people, but then the parents better start making sure that the schools are 100% honest, because it is possible that when thousands of taxpayers across the nation start itemizing deductions of extremely high amounts, that the IRS will want to open up the yeshiva's books. So, if you want this plan to pass, start demanding independent audits at your local yeshiva.

I tried to look at TA and BY 990's but TA is a "chorch or Synagogue and doesn't have to file and BY reports less then $25,000 in income so they don't have to file. If you want to see an org that is making a boatload of money check out the Star-k. Actually I would like to see the Star-k utilize its revenues to defray tuition costs. they money must go somewhere and can't go to private individuals (that would be private inurement whihch is illegal). The teacher's salaries is a difficult issue for me as good teachers should be paid fairly, but you also hav eto remember they get off 2-2.5 months in the summer and a nice amount for yomim tovim. Not sure what fair compensation would be.

I meant to add that I do think the administrrtions need to be carefullly reviewed and determined who is an asset and who is a liability.

You can check out the Yeshiva of Greater Washington's and the Melvin J. Berman Hebrew Academy's 990s on Guidestar.org. It certainly will not give you an idea of TA or BY, but it will give you an idea of the costs of overhead at some local schools.

BTW--I like the idea of using proceeds from Kosher agencies to start an endowment fund for local schools. The Star-K should save that $2000 gift for shadchanim and use it to help pay for tuitions. Chances are the 22 years olders will find their bashert without a $2000 incentive. Incidently, Queens has instituted a similiar program. It seems like there is money for every cause, but the one that is causing so much heartache and taking parents out of the home (and then the schools organize seminairs about "at-risk" children to let us know that we are not giving them the attention they need--well, duh! We are trying to pay tuition!!!).

Maybe I will start my own blog.

One other data point: secretaries at TA get 90% tuition reduction. They also get paid less, than, for exmaple, Helen H., but there is a lot of that going around.

Star-K is maybe one of the better ideas I have heard in a long time. When you look at the Catholic system, the ONLY way that they are able to provide quality education at affordable price is by the entire community subsidizing through charity. Since, for various reasons, that is not practical in the frum community, you could view Star-K as a community organization that everyone supports (by EATING) and that could work very well. Sounds promising.

Nearby: despite the fact that I prefer non-anonymous and non-proxied comments (it took me all of 2 minutes to figure out who Jeff Allen was), please drop me a line if you start a blog with your address.

Special exclusion for employees of educational institutions and their dependents. Since 1984, § 117(d) has excluded from gross income a "qualified tuition reduction" allowed to an employee of an educational institution for the benefit of the employee or a spouse or dependent.

The point of not using your name is that those who know you well enough to recognize you will know its you and others will not. Have no fear I will not be startibng my own blog wouldn't know uop from down. I'leave that the the computer savvy guys like yourself. Nothing I have said in this blog has not been said by me in public before. Please confirm you facts about TA secretarties. I would be shocked if it was a 90% reduction not a 50% reduction (which is also quite high.

Is the tuition situation any worse now than it was 15 or 20 years ago? What's changed?

"Now we are talking about paying a full time teacher $70,000 which may be a little high but not necessarily exccessive."

It is _most certainly_ excessive. Just compare the salaries to public school teachers' salaries. If these were Ph.Ds we were talking about, sure, 70k would be fine. But, generally, the quality of these teachers is nowhere near that.

As for the administration costing too much, it's almost certainly true, especially considering how tight-lipped they are about finances.

Five years ago, the salary at TA was $4200 per "period" for secular studies, and there were five periods total that they could teach. I can guarantee that with great confidence, seeing as I yanked the same figure out of multiple teachers for a newspaper article. I also got the figure of $30-$40k for rebbeim salaries - again, confirmed multiple times. That should put this all in perspective - the rebbeim were being paid the equivalent of $60k, which is mind-blowingly above market rate for a teacher with a MA ($40k in Montgomery County - considerably less in Baltimore City, I should think).

The 90% reduction for being a secretary is eminently believable, and I wouldn't doubt Greg for a minute on it.

$12k is not TA's tuition, indeed - but seeing as Hebrew Academy is > $14k, I took a guess. I live in Silver Spring, TA's not too high on the list of choices.

"Is the tuition situation any worse now than it was 15 or 20 years ago? What's changed?"

Ask yourself this: have there been any tuition reductions? No? How about tuition increases? Ergo, the situation is worse.

-DMZ (TA Grad)

Pay rebbeim $30,000 without discounted tuition and see what kind of quality you get. It is easy to put down the rebbeim and say they wouldn't be successfukl in the "real" world but I think that is a cheap shot. Most (not all) are well qualified and do a good job of educating our children. Of course tuition has gone up so has everyones salary and the cost of living (its called inflation). DMZ you don't seem to hae a problem with paying the english teacher $21,000 for a half day why do you have an issue with paying the rebbeim who are usually more specialized and often tech more hours comensurate with such experience and hours taught? the school is not giving the teacher th evalue of th epre tax earnings require to pay the $25,000 tuition it should more accurately be valued at the actual tuition th erebbe woudl have paid on a need based assessment. Even if the rebbe would pay full tuition the school is giving the amount equal to the tuition which is apporximately $20,000, since the fact that he doesn't have to pay tax on it should not be included. If your employer gives you health insurance for $6,000 per year do you consider that he is actually giving you $10,000? No you view it as $6,000. I am still waiting for proposed solutions to the issue.

"Pay rebbeim $30,000 without discounted tuition and see what kind of quality you get."

Try doing it, and seeing what kind of quality you get. Most of them can't teach at all. Seriously - most of these kids get out of high school, and they can't open a Talmud and learn on their own. If I spent four years and three hours a day on something, and I don't know it cold by the end, there's something seriously wrong with the system. I am immensely surprised no one brings this up more.

Most rebbeim ain't worth $70k, or even $50k. Sorry if that bothers you. Maybe the quality of teaching would go up if we actually held them to the standards that their salaries would seem to demand. _Five or six years of yeshiva is no qualification to teach_.

And, certainly, I do think secular studies teachers are underpaid, and that it's a serious problem that leads to quality of education problems. They get the same free tuition benefit, certainly, but the difference is that most of them _don't_ take advantage of it (and, indeed, cannot, since they aren't usually Jewish or frum).

"Even if the rebbe would pay full tuition the school is giving the amount equal to the tuition which is apporximately $20,000, since the fact that he doesn't have to pay tax on it should not be included."

Let's quantify this:
1. The nominal full tuition for the 3 boys is about $25k, assuming TA really is $8k a year.
2. The rebbe would only really pay $12k, because he's poor or something (theoretically).
3. The cost to the school is $25k. The benefit to the rebbe is $12k. This is an extremely inefficient way for the school to operate.

This, of course, assumes it really costs $8k a pupil to educate them. The reality is, I suspect that it's far less, which raises some serious ethical questions.

"I am still waiting for proposed solutions to the issue."

Easy. Make them pay tuition the same as everybody else, and raise their salaries by the average tuition x 3 (or whatever the average number of kids they have in school is). When the rebbeim start suffering, something will happen. The community, in general, has an appalingly poor track record of actually caring about the baal habatim propping the system up.

Does that sound tough, and almost cruel? Yes. But the current system is stunningly unfair, and ends up creating a two tiered system: those who were responsible with their career and family decisions, and those who were not.

Sorry if that's offensive. Then again, for a guy with an email address of _BLOWRESH_, I doubt you care too much.

-DMZ

Let the schools institute a pay scale just like practically every other job in the universe has.

For example:
A teacher with a high school diploma and some college starts at $XX,XXX and can advance to $YY,YYY (better yet, higher teachers with degrees!).
A teacher with a B.A. starts at $XX,XXX and can advance to $XX,XXX.

And, if the teachers or administrators need a tuition benefit, I see no reason why they can't go through the same (embarassing) scholarship process that the rest of the neighborhood children have to go through.

If the suffering is not spread throughout the community, nothing will be done! While I think the Lawrence plan stinks when it comes to providing a comprehensive Jewish education, I say kol hakavod to the parents that are looking for alternatives. We can't continue to push families into more and more debt, even when they live modestly.

I dont think skimping on paying teachers is a good first step; people should be compensated, and we should highly value educators (Rambam's thoughts aside). That being said, there probably should be better standards for rebbeims, but we're moving away from the crux of this discussion.

Just as a data point, my father in law told me that in his day, TA was $25 a week (or month, I don't recall which, and yes, I realize it's significant). So tuition has gone up quite a bit.

Just to kind of steer the conversation a bit, the original point of this post was not so much to address the inner problems of the schools; as I said, or at least intimated, I don't place a large amount of hope in the current system reforming itself. It's just not the nature of how things work.

What is interesting to me about the Lawrence proposal is that they are seeking was of utilizing the infrastructure of the public school system to their benefit, looking at the legal aspects of church/state separation and how that might be pushed in a sensible fashion that is both legal and helpful to families who want to give a rigorous education to their children in both religious and secular subjects. Integration with a public school system was impossible in our parents generation, due to anti-semitisim and Protestantism, etc. That's not to say that things are better now on all fronts, but it is at least more approachable. I think that whatever solution comes of this, it will have to, in some way, push the current interpretation of the establishment clause back to a sensible level. Once we have an alleviation of burden on secular studies, reforming the entire system will be easier.

I think.

In reading your e-mails it is apparent people want to complain but don't have a realistic idea of school budgets. Do you think that the non-paid execitives of a school are looking to squeeze the tuition paying parents to make the rebbeim wealthy. Maybe you think that you can do a better job of teaching then the rebbeim. Nice arm chair quarterbacking. I can tell you I have the benefit of being a little less biased as I pay full tuition and my wife works in a day school (without any reducions). TA happens to have some high quality rebbeim and your animoity towards day schools is coming through. It is amazing that you believe that the secular teachers are underpaid while the judaic teachers are overpaid. Supply and demand unless you feel that the Board likes getting flak when they raise tuition or are just there to hand money to judaic teachers. The biggest source of dead weight is the administrative side.
1) How many hours a day does a rebbe work?
2) How much does a starting rebbe make versus a 20 year experienced rebbe?
3) Are there better qualified rebbeim available? If so where are they (off somewhere being engineers)?
Answer these questions without stabbing in the dar and then you can have a more informed argument.
FYI here are some facts about the Star K
1) They had over $4,600,000 in revenues in 2003.
2) they listed expenses at $4,300,000.
3) they listed assets held at $2,600,000.
4) accounts receivable of $900,000.
5) they pay salaries over six figures.
Just some figures to munch on.
My two cents - harping on rebbeim pay is not the solution nor is it the major problem with the system.

the pint of getting the government to ante up to pay for services especially in the city where property taxes are quite high is a good approach. I am worried about geting direct money from the government as it may come to having them dictate the school's discretion. Paying for specific needs (i.e. bussing, books, hot lunches, or other non-direct expenses is a good thought). Various other communities recieve these benefits and I don't see why it shouldn't happen here.

Jeff Allen--I agree that the frum community should look to get bussing, books, etc from the government just like public school students. Free bussing alone would reduce a lot of stress (and expense) for many, many parents. Imagine if not every family of 4 had to own a minivan and every family of 7 had to own a full van?

However, the frum community is not at all pragmatic and can never seem to get organized to do anything. If we could, would we be sitting here discussing if there was anyway to endow schools? No, the Orthodox education system would have been designed with a future plan in mind.

Anyways, if we ever want to get any benefits, we need to team up with the Catholics and other private schoolers. New York Jewish schools get textbooks and bussing, not thanks to the frum community, but thanks to the Catholics.

As someone who is part of the district, I can tell you this much. The whole idea of public schools not doing their job isn't a new one. The budget has failed the past 3 years, and has been audited by the state of New York. The big problem is with the people who oppose the budget. They send out misinformation to the public and try to influence the public with anonymous mailings. The fact is that most yeshivas in the area charge an exorbinant amount of money for sub-par education.

I have a question about the legality of some of the fees. How come the TA charges me $400 in book fees for my 3 kids, when they get the secular books through the State and I have to buy the Gemara every year?

" Maybe you think that you can do a better job of teaching then the rebbeim. Nice arm chair quarterbacking."

Focus on vocabulary, and only learn mishnah until you've completed it. Oh, wait - that's the Zilbermann method, which, BTW, is utterly unpracticed at TA's high school and middle school. So, yes, I do know of a better way, and, given the education, I would most certainly do it differently. My path didn't lead me down that road, despite some people's urgings otherwise.

The current teaching methodology is "oh, they learned some Tanach and a little Mishnah - time to toss them into Talmud". It's the English equivalent of "they finished Dr. Seuss, time for Shakespeare". It is utterly inappropriate, and not at all effective. It's the same method they used in Europe, where, by the way, it wasn't all that effective either.

I bear some animosity to incomptent teaching, because I had to succeed in spite of it, not because of it. Anyone who knows me can tell you that I didn't exactly slack off much in high school...

"Supply and demand"

Definitely - that's why TA has traditionally been saddled with lousy secular studies teachers! How many times do I have to say this? If you paid more and looked harder, you'd get better ones. It's _that simple_.

"1) How many hours a day does a rebbe work?
2) How much does a starting rebbe make versus a 20 year experienced rebbe?
3) Are there better qualified rebbeim available? If so where are they (off somewhere being engineers)?"

1. Trick question - most of them have second jobs, IIRC. But that would be 4 or 5, maybe 6 after tests.
2. $30k, vs ~$45k
3. Not really. But overpaying underqualified ones doesn't make this situation any better.

Your ad hominem attacks are kind of pathetic. If you don't like what I'm saying, have the good graces to not get personal. If you think the rebbeim there are amazing, good for you. But you're going to have to do more than you have ("they're amazing!" Right.) to convince me of your viewpoint.

I don't bear any specific animosity to TA on this subject - I wince at the idea of sending my (theoretical) kids to Yeshiva of GW, Rambam, or MJBHA, too.

-DMZ

Anne: that's a good question. Text book costs should be amortized across the expeceted life of the book, I would think. Perhaps the Artscroll history/english books arent approved? The other possibility is that you are paying for a Shulchan Aruch or R. Akiva Eiger for the Bais Medresh, which is probably unnecessary.

Re: some of the above discussion.
I believe that you can keep good secular studies teachers in schools without paying though the nose if you could increase _job satisfaction_. Almost every Yeshiva that I know of has a large problem with teacher turnover. In fact, I know of some schools that have had more than one teacher get up and quit mid-school year. I know many people who will _not_ teach in Jewish schools, and some of these people are more than happy to teach in some of the worst public schools.

The biggest problem that yeshivas has is the pure lack of respect for secular studies teachers and it makes the yeshivas unable to retain good teachers and it holds those who want to learn back. In addition, it makes it impossible to implement some of the money saving solutions that columnists in the Jewish Press have suggested, namely hiring frum professionals who have retired for pennies.

People who are satisfied with their work are more willing to stick around if they like the job. People who feel demoralized and unrespected head for the door.

My guess is that by charging a seperate fee for books they can get more from those paying reduced tuition.
They also likely believe that by chargin a several fees and not just lumping it into tuition it gives the appearance of a lower tuition.
DMZ- if rebbeim are starting with a salary of $30,000 what would you like to see them make? Let's assume the typical rebbe has three boys and three girls. He is making $30,000 ($25,000 after taxes) plus another $15,000 from th esummer and/or side job. He is paying BY $12,000 (reduced tuition). If TA would pay him an extra $12,000 and not give off any tuition he would make a total of $57,000 ($45,000 after taxes). TA would charge him $12,000 for the three boys and would be in a slightly worse position then the free tuition (employment taxes etc.) Now we are saying that he should live on the remiaining $21,000 after tax dollars, not exactly the lap of luxury. Please let me kow where you see the numbes differently ( as I am sure you will)

Jeff-I want to address your comments above because some of your assumptions are incorrect.

Number 1: Unless one is self-employed, a family of 8, without itemized deductions, must make a minimum of $34,800 ($9700 standard deduction plus $3100*8 exemptions) before one owes a single penny of taxes.

If the person owns a home, chances are that they will need to make much more than $34,800 before they have to pay a penny in taxes, as they will now be able to deduct many more things.

Number 2: State taxes follows the above format for the most part, so a person that doesn't owe federal taxes will not owe much in the way of state taxes.

Number 3: My understanding is that a tuition benefit IS taxable, while a tuition reduction is NOT taxable. A big tuition reduction is probably preferable most cases to a tuition benefit.

E.g. If tuition is $10,000 and a person gets a 90% reduction, they pay $1,000. On the other hand, if an employee receives a tuition benefit of $10,000, they can be taxed anywhere from 0% to 35% on each dollar of the benefit, depending on their marginal tax bracket.

Number 4: Anyone who needs financial assistance must submit to an often embarrassing process. A Rebbe whose wife does not work, or makes only small sums of money, will still qualify for a scholarship and probably won't be any worse off. A Rebbe whose wife is pulling in a good sum of money, will loose much of their benefit (and hopefully will start looking for ideas on how to help other parents in the same boat!).

"Now we are saying that he should live on the remiaining $21,000 after tax dollars, not exactly the lap of luxury."

Nowhere did I ever claim that rebbeim were living better - only that they were overpaid when including benefits, and that was driving up the cost of tuition. I know this seems like a paradox, but it's certainly not.

When you get down to it, people paying full tuition are subsidizing those who are not. This is hardly fair, and the community would be much better served by setting up a scholarship fund, so that at least part of the tuition for those parents paying _over_ the actualy $5000 it takes to actually educate a kid, or whatever that sum might be, can be taken as a tax break.

(Interestingly, scholarships aren't tax-free, according to the IRS, unless they're for a degree. Coincidence?)

"People who are satisfied with their work are more willing to stick around if they like the job. People who feel demoralized and unrespected head for the door. "

Couldn't agree more. It's a massive chillul Hashem to see how teachers in our supposedly learning-oriented community are treated. This would at least help the problem a little (the intangible of respect - gotta love it!).

-DMZ

Number 3: My understanding is that a tuition benefit IS taxable, while a tuition reduction is NOT taxable. A big tuition reduction is probably preferable most cases to a tuition benefit.

That is incorrect I will try to give you the IRS Code Section and case law but due to tim econstraints can't right now. (I have jury duty today.) Tuition reduction rather then reimbursement is not taxable. Yes, I am a tax attorney.

The issue with chutzpah is a tragic problem. Unfortunately the more religious the school often the more issue of chutzpah there is. I agree that it is a terrible chillul hashem and it is the parents in my opinion who are most at fault. The school's are also to blame but ultimately a parent must train and educate a child in proper and acceptable behavior. My chilren are still young but I hope that I will always protect the teacher's right to respect irrespective if it is judaic or secular.

Jeff--Get me the section and I will check it against the IRS code I have sitting right here. I am an accountant and I consulted with a tax lawyer. The tuition benefit is taxable. A tuition discount is not. In many cases, a tuition discount would be preferable to a benefit.

Please see Sec. 117(d) for details on non-taxability of tuition reductions for employees' children. It refers to employees but also includes tuition of their children.

I actually would like to see schools set up a plan where the teachers could accept a reduced salary in exchange for payments to other schools for their other kids' tuitions. That is a story for another day and may raise red flags. It should be allowed but when asking for a salary deduction to make such payments there is an issue of assignment of income.

Here are quotes from a law review article and treatise:
"The Tax Reform Act of 1984 amended § 117 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 to exclude from income any qualified tuition reduction given by universities to their employees. The exclusion applies to employees and their children who attend the university where the employee works or any other university the child attends." 96 Dick. L. Rev. 281

Special exclusion for employees of educational institutions and their dependents. Since 1984, § 117(d) has excluded from gross income a "qualified tuition reduction" allowed to an employee of an educational institution for the benefit of the employee or a spouse or dependent. [FN39] A tuition reduction can only qualify if the plan under which it is provided does not discriminate in favor of highly compensated employees. [FN40] If this requirement is met, the "reduction" can apparently consist of a true reduction or a cash payment. [FN41] Assume an employee at X College has a child in school. The exclusion under § 117(d) can apply if (1) the child is enrolled in X College and the college reduces tuition for the child under a nondiscriminatory plan for employees of the college or (2) the child is enrolled in some other school and X College pays a portion of the child's tuition under a nondiscriminatory employee benefit plan. 1997 WL 439536 (W.G.&.L.)

For more info you can see WESTERN RESERVE ACADEMY v. US 619 F.Supp. 394

Would like to hear your thoughts

Nearby, have you prepared tax returns for any teachers receing a tuition reduction? Have you included the reduction in their gross income?

"A tuition reduction can only qualify if the plan under which it is provided does not discriminate in favor of highly compensated employees."

Jeff-A tuition reduction is _different_ than a tuition benefit. Many schools do not provide their teachers with a tuition reduction, but only provide administrators with a tuition BENEFIT, not reduction. A tuition benefit (i.e. full paid tuition) is not a tuition reduction (i.e. a percentage or dollar discount).

The tuition benefit that many schools provide is only for their higher paid employees (e.g. the Rosh Yeshiva) and does not trickle down to the secretary.

The tuition benefit (i.e. full tuition valued at X amount) is not something that the accountant has to value at tax time, it is something that should be valued by the school and included in the W-2.

P.S. I was at a school board meeting where the school board told the community that administrators have it rough because they have deductions from their income for dollars not earned in cash, but earned in benefit. Well, that does sound rough, but I still think it beats paying tuition on the 1st of the month, every month whether or not the cash is available.

"nondiscriminatory plan"

I think that these are the key words. Certain Jewish schools are non-discriminatory (possibly BY, possibly TA). Other schools do discriminate!

As for behavior, I agree with you that there is an inverse relationship between the religiousity level of the school and the behavior. It is sad, despite how ironic it is. While the parents bear the ultimate responsibility, so long as the administration does not use common sense, there is little parents can during most of their children's waking hours.

A Rabbi we are friends with once told us about a student in a certain Yeshiva that he taught in who pulled a knife on a non-Jewish teacher. He called 911. Guess who got reprimanded? Guess who was back in class the next day without even a suspension because he was just having a bad day? This is why we have problems!!!

Highly compensated is defined in a later section of the IRS code. I'm trying to figure out if there is a religious exemption. But, basically highly compensated means that the salary of the previous year is below a certain threshold.

Jeff-It seems that we are looking at things a bit different and there is a different interpretation of semantics, basically because we are familiar with different schools I believe and I don't want to bore the rest of the readers with an arguement of the facts.

However, I do want to point out that it would be very pragmatic for the Jewish community to establish a "school district" with shared functions and transparent accounting and expectations regarding who is available for what benefit to lower costs via economies of scale and to create greater trust, as it is obvious that many are diallusioned by what they perceive as either poor payment of teachers or excessive payment of teachers.

My guess is that there are certain teachers that are not being paid their worth, and other teachers that are getting benefits that the next is not getting, which leads to discussions like these.

Assuming we're trying to find ways to save the people money, whether or not a tuition benefit/reduction is taxable shouldn't make a differnce, as this will not affect the bottom line for individuals, it would only affect those getting those breaks (i.e. rabbis).

Greg, I think that many people believe that if the administrators/teachers/Rebbes/secretaries that could afford to pay more (due to their spouses income or other assets) paid more, it would bring down tuition for everyone else. I believe that it might bring in more money to the schools, but I have a hard time imagining yeshivot cutting tuition ever.

If tuition continues to increase at the same rate it has been, I will need something like $50,000 a year by the time my baby gets to high school. Fat chance we will have that type of money.

What we really should be concentrating on is how to work together as a community to bring tuition under control. I think you are correct that we are loosing the forest for the trees (or whatever the statement is). If there is not a crisis now, there will be soon.