Hello there,

I would be so grateful for your response.


Families who send their children to private schools should not be required to pay taxes that support the state education system. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement.

Some individuals argue that parents of children who attend private schools should not need to contribute to the state education systems by paying taxes. This idea seems to be refuted on account of unequal tax payments as well as an unfair distribution of educational facilities in society.

One major derives the impracticality of such a notion would be the unbalanced received taxes from citizens. Residents commonly give assessment fees to the government for various free public services, such as having police calls and fire brigade benefits, even though enormous people are fortunate enough to take advantage of them. Although those pupils, engaging in private academic centers, have expended a great amount of money for their studies and they do not exploit the state schools, they should not expect the tax reduction. This could lead to the situation where poorer people pay higher taxes than the rich. This being the case, the rate of destitution would be increased. The indigent people, thus, in the long run, would riddle with lots of financial inefficiencies.

A second rationale behind the failure of the theory of parents of students who are signed in an independent school being exempt from paying taxes would be inequivalent allocation of acquisition. It appears that those students, attending an exclusive teaching institute, are normally from opulent families. These privately-funded schools mostly offer higher academic standards with an effective curriculum, which would cost prohibitive expenses for the students ' parents, this might be unaffordable for citizens in the deprived areas. The poor students, thereby, could not have access to the best education systems, do not those affluent parents support the governmental schools by paying taxes.

In the light of the above-mentioned analysis, if the families were given a tax discount for sending their children to non-state schools, this would act as a stumbling block on the path of having more prosperous educated people in the society, due to the unfair education services and immoral tax payments.

Much of your phrasing is ridiculously unnatural. When the examiner sees that, they will give you a very low score, because they will realize that you are trying to impress them with complicated phrasing. They do not appreciate that, especially if your sentences turn out ungrammatical.

Simplify your phrasing, and focus on presenting persuasive ideas to convince the reader. Revise your essay and repost it below.

thank you


Some individuals argue that parents of children who attend private schools should not need to contribute to the state education systems by paying taxes. This idea seems to be refuted on account of unjust tax payments and an unequal distribution of educational facilities in the society.

One major derives the impracticality of such a notion would be the unfair received taxes from citizens. Residents commonly give taxes to the government for various free public services, such as having police calls and fire brigade benefits, even many people are fortunate enough to take advantage of them during their life. Although those pupils, engaging in private academic centers, have spent a great amount of money for their studies and they do not use the state schools, they should not expect the tax reduction for that. This tax reduction could lead to the situation where poorer people pay higher taxes than the rich and poverty would be increased. Therefore, it would have harmful effect on society.

A second rationale behind the failure of this theory would be unbalanced allocation of education facilities in the country. It appears that those students, attending an exclusive teaching institute, are normally from opulent families. These privately-funded schools mostly offer higher academic standards with an effective curriculum, which would cost prohibitive expenses for the parents, this might be unaffordable for the destitution families. If the affluent parents do not support governmental schools by paying taxes, government could not establish the schools with better quality in the deprived areas. In this society, thus, many students might be excluded from the best education systems.

In the light of the above-mentioned analysis, if the families were given a tax discount for sending their children to non-state schools, this would act as a stumbling block on the path of having more prosperous and educated people in the society, due to the lack of education services in the poor areas and immoral tax payments.

Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
ssssssssssssssss This idea seems to be refuted on account of unjust tax payments and an unequal distribution of educational facilities in the society.
ssssssssssssssssOne major derives the impracticality of such a notion would be the unfair received taxes from citizens.

If I was the examiner, I would, after reading those parts above, skim over the rest of the text and look for parts to justify giving you more than 4.0 or 4.5 (at most)!

What is your target score in IELTS (writing and overall)?

Is this better now.

sorry I can not understand where is the problem


Some individuals argue that parents of children who attend private schools should not need to contribute to the state education systems by paying taxes. This claim seems to be Unacceptable, according to unfair tax payments and unequal distribution of educational facilities in the society.

Firstly, Residents commonly give taxes to the government for various free public services, such as having police calls and fire brigade benefits, even many people are fortunate enough to take advantage of them during their life. Although those pupils, engaging in private academic centers, have spent a great amount of money for their studies and they do not use the state schools, they should not expect the tax reduction for that. This tax reduction could lead to the situation where poorer people pay higher taxes than the rich and poverty would be increased. Therefore, the unfair received taxes from citizens could have harmful effect on society.

Moreover, it seems that those students, attending an exclusive teaching institute, are normally from opulent families. These privately-funded schools mostly offer higher academic standards with an effective curriculum, which would cost prohibitive expenses for the parents, this might be unaffordable for the destitution families. If the affluent parents do not support governmental schools by paying taxes, government could not establish the schools with better quality in the deprived areas. In this society, thus, many students might be excluded from the best education systems.

In the light of the above-mentioned analysis, if the families were given a tax discount for sending their children to non-state schools, this would act as a stumbling block on the path of having more prosperous and educated people in the society, due to the lack of education services in the poor areas and immoral tax payments.

ssssssssssssssss

Is this better now?

Sorry, I can not understand where is the problem is.

It is somewhat better, but you still wrote text that is unnatural/unintelligible (see parts marked with *).

------------------------------

Some individuals argue that parents of children who attend private schools should not need to contribute to the state education systems by paying taxes. [ 1] I do not agree with this view for several reasons. [ *] This claim seems to be Unacceptable, according to unfair tax payments and unequal distribution of educational facilities in the society.

Firstly, [ 2] Residents commonly give people pay taxes to the government for because they receive various free public services, such as having the police, the army, calls and fire brigade. benefits [ *] , even many people are fortunate enough to take advantage of them during their life. Although those [ 3] pupils, engaging students in private academic centers [ 4] have spent spend a great amount of money for their studies and they do not use the state schools, they should not expect the a tax exemption or even reduction for that. This tax reduction could lead to the Any such preferential treatment would lead to situation where poorer people pay higher taxes than the rich in order to make up for the shortfall in tax revenues, and poverty would be increased. Therefore, the such unfair received taxes from citizens taxation could have a harmful effect on society.

Moreover, [ 5] it seems that those students, attending an exclusive teaching institute, are normally from opulent families. These privately-funded schools mostly offer higher academic standards with an effective curriculum, which would cost prohibitive expenses for the parents, this might be unaffordable for the destitution families. if the affluent parents do not support governmental schools by paying taxes, the government could not establish the schools with better quality of schools and the standard of education in the deprived areas would decline. In this such a divided and unfair society, thus, many students, even ones who are talented and could potentially become successful professionals in the future, might be excluded from the best receiving a decent education just because of their poor economic background. systems. This means the poverty cycle remains intact as well as all its associated social ills such as the high crime rate and widespread unemployment.

In the light of the above-mentioned analysis, In conclusion, if the rich families were given a tax discount for sending their children to non-state schools, this would act as a stumbling block on the path of having more prosperous and educated people in the society, due to the lack of education services in the poor areas and immoral unfair tax payments.

------------------------------------------------------------

[ 1]: The introduction should be general. Do not mention any specific points in it. Those go in the conclusion.

[ 2]: We use “residents” when we are focusing on a particular area.

[ 3]: “pupils” refers to primary school only.

[ 4]: Do not separate (with a comma) the subject and the verb.

[ 5]: That is irrelevant to the discussion here.

Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?

Much obliged for your assistance.