Best Of

To all those people who make farming families out to be rich: I'd like to see them get up at dawn and work until dusk, in all sorts of weathers. To have a year where the weather means all your profits are wiped out, or where government legislation floods the market with cheap meat. Where tourists routinely stray off the paths, interfere with livestock and knock down walls and fences. Where you have to go out in the snow to find ewes that are lambing. If they want us to be rich, then they should fucking well pay more for British food. Until then, I'll go work in an office and they can ****ing well starve.

Said to me, in rather stronger terms, by a farming relative.

This another strawman though. I don't think anyone thinks otherwise (particularly after Clarkson's farm). This is about a few very large and wealthy landowners, and also stopping the British countryside being bought up by billionaires as a tax dodge mechanism.

It's a relatively small amount of revenue for HMRC but a good example of them getting early before it becomes a big issue.

It isn't just about a few very large and wealthy landowners. Far from.

Incidentally, and from that conversation: how is the land valued for IHT purposes? An uphill farm might be worth relatively little from a farming perspective, which a family might want to continue doing. But it might be worth much more with the farmhouse converted into a non-farming home or B&B, and with some of the barns 'converted' into housing for townies - something that cannot be done and the farm remain as a singular farm. It'd be the highest valuation, wouldn't it? And if the inheritors are forced to sell, what happens if the land does not reach that estimate?

Tax advisers are going to be very busy.

Many farmers want to farm. From my experience they grumble and complain (including my distant relatives...), but they love farming. And that doubles when there's a many-generation familial connection with the land.

To all those people who make farming families out to be rich: I'd like to see them get up at dawn and work until dusk, in all sorts of weathers. To have a year where the weather means all your profits are wiped out, or where government legislation floods the market with cheap meat. Where tourists routinely stray off the paths, interfere with livestock and knock down walls and fences. Where you have to go out in the snow to find ewes that are lambing. If they want us to be rich, then they should fucking well pay more for British food. Until then, I'll go work in an office and they can ****ing well starve.

Said to me, in rather stronger terms, by a farming relative.

This another strawman though. I don't think anyone thinks otherwise (particularly after Clarkson's farm). This is about a few very large and wealthy landowners, and also stopping the British countryside being bought up by billionaires as a tax dodge mechanism.

It's a relatively small amount of revenue for HMRC but a good example of them getting early before it becomes a big issue.

It isn't just about a few very large and wealthy landowners. Far from.

Incidentally, and from that conversation: how is the land valued for IHT purposes? An uphill farm might be worth relatively little from a farming perspective, which a family might want to continue doing. But it might be worth much more with the farmhouse converted into a non-farming home or B&B, and with some of the barns 'converted' into housing for townies - something that cannot be done and the farm remain as a singular farm. It'd be the highest valuation, wouldn't it? And if the inheritors are forced to sell, what happens if the land does not reach that estimate?

Tax advisers are going to be very busy.

Many farmers want to farm. From my experience they grumble and complain (including my distant relatives...), but they love farming. And that doubles when there's a many-generation familial connection with the land.

It'll be valued purely on agricultural purposes by a land agent, even if planning permission has been outlined unless there are houses there, or started being built. You can, if you don't like one valuers results, ask for another opinion, but likelihood is any competent agent would come up with a figure not too far out

Interesting question about a forced sale, plenty of land has been sitting on the market here (SW Scotland) for more than a year, some sales fallen through too, and not all poorer land. Spot on about tax advisers, agri lawyers, agents and accountants will be in huge demand

I inherited a farm,. well, a small field, about 15 years back (ultimately from an ancestor, as it happens). It was tiny but still had to be valued by a specialist from a major Lothian surveying firm. The rent took some years just to pay the survey fee!

And no I'm not selling, and yes, I do buy my food from farmers, or with minimum middleman, where possible, rather than supermarkets. Especially milk, cheese, meat, game and some cereals.

Mr. HYUFD, Starmer should give the green light for missiles to be used in Russia. Failure to do so would be pathetic.

He won't, he is too wary of Putin's response.

Macron has more balls and probably will follow Biden's lead and allow Ukraine to send French as well as US missiles to Russian territory. Though even then I suspect Trump will cancel that permission after his inaugration in January (albeit if the Russians do anything against US bases in Europe Trump would be aggressive in his response)

Reportedly Starmer has been pushing for US approval to allow Storm Shadow strikes into Russia, and it is also being suggested that supplies of the missiles were being held back so that they would be available when that approval was granted.

I don't think the preemptive criticism of Starmer on this point is warranted. I hope to see Storm Shadow strikes in Kursk within the week.

We should not fear Russia. It has proved itself weak, rather than strong.

Putin would not be seeking aid from North Korea, if he had sufficient manpower.

To all those people who make farming families out to be rich: I'd like to see them get up at dawn and work until dusk, in all sorts of weathers. To have a year where the weather means all your profits are wiped out, or where government legislation floods the market with cheap meat. Where tourists routinely stray off the paths, interfere with livestock and knock down walls and fences. Where you have to go out in the snow to find ewes that are lambing. If they want us to be rich, then they should fucking well pay more for British food. Until then, I'll go work in an office and they can ****ing well starve.

Said to me, in rather stronger terms, by a farming relative.

Anyone who has watched Clarkson's farm ought to be aware that while the asset might by very great, the profits are often marginal. I'm afraid in this instance, as in others, its Labour revealing its prejudices. I knew a phd student at UEA who hated, literally hated farmers because his ancesters had been farm workers. I can see him bringing in policies such as this.

The odd thing is that, up until the 1950s, there was a strong rural farming vote for Labour, particularly in East Anglia.

There's also an issue that farmers have always faced: farms are not infinitely divisible. If a farmer has a large family (and they often do...) then splitting up the farm doesn't work, as one marginal farm becomes two unproductive ones. This means that some kids often get left with very little. This can cause their kids some (ahem) rivalry if the parents are not very careful. The wise ones ensure that only one or two of their kids like farming. The one who doesn't get the farm can just move onto another farm or marry a lass who has a farm... In theory...

Having to sell some parcels of land to pay IHT might cause a marginal farm to become unproductive, so the whole has to be sold. And as has been pointed out many times, the purchaser will be either a large agribusiness who does not pay IHT, or to people who will not farm the land.

Though it isn't always a problem. Many moons ago, I was walking in the unfashionable western side of the Peak District. I came across an elderly couple in a farmyard, and we chatted. They were working the land alone, with a bit of help from neighbouring farmers, as none of their kids wanted to go into farming. They seemed quite sad about that.

Isn't this a problem for most parents? My Mum owned a house. She had two kids. I now own a maisonette.

Yes but with farmers the asset is the livelihood, parental housing is not their children's career.

Presumably, if one's dad owns a big factory (toolmaker, say ) then one pays inheritance tax (if above standard thresholds) on the machinery, buildings and the land?

The difference is, that for family-owned concerns, it's probably not normally millions in land value (although maybe it is, some old city-centre factory ripe for conversion into flats).

As far as I can see shares in family businesses which are trading limited companies are exempt from IHT provided they have been held for two years.

Currently yes, but that is also being changed: the 100% relief from IHT on businesses is being reduced to 50% from April 2026: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/agricultural-property-relief-and-business-property-relief-reforms/summary-of-reforms-to-agricultural-property-relief-and-business-property-relief

You still get a £1million tax free threshold (spread over the claims for agricultural & business property relief) though.

I guess the remaining loophole is that foreign entities can own UK farmland through an offshore holding company & pass that on tax free to their heirs. It does seem un-equal that non-UK residents get to do this, but UK residents don’t? Maybe something similar to the 6% / decade charge that is applied to trusts ought to be applied to all UK property held in this way. (Sounds an awful lot like a 0.5% land value tax! How very Georgist...)

Take out Jeremy Clarkson, who has become a national treasure following Clarkson's Farm, and I'm not sure the traction that this protest would get today. But plenty more people understand how a farm works than did before he appeared with his Prime series.

Now of course for him it's a plaything and I think people realise that he is the exception. Because what the prog did very well was illustrate how thin farming margins can be and how many if not most are living on the edge.

You only have to look at rates of suicide for farmers to understand this.

Actually I don't think it is a play thing now. He originally bought it for IHT reasons and had others farm the land. I think he probably thought great I will also make a Top Gear tv show out of this as well with minimal effort, money in the bank.

However, COVID, he was stuck there and I think that changed his focus. Since then he has spun out all these other businesses, he launched the beer, since when he has bought out the brewery and that is expanding, he has opened the pub (which I bet he rolls out multiple locations on the same model), the farm shop, the restaurant....for a play thing that's taking on a lot of responsibility, even if others run them day to day.

I can't stand the man, but I've got to admit he certainly seems to have some business acumen.

Stewart Lee on Top Gear

Clarkson, with his outrageous politically incorrect opinions, which has every week to a deadline in the Sunday Times, almost as if they weren't real....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7CnMQ4L9Pc&

To all those people who make farming families out to be rich: I'd like to see them get up at dawn and work until dusk, in all sorts of weathers. To have a year where the weather means all your profits are wiped out, or where government legislation floods the market with cheap meat. Where tourists routinely stray off the paths, interfere with livestock and knock down walls and fences. Where you have to go out in the snow to find ewes that are lambing. If they want us to be rich, then they should fucking well pay more for British food. Until then, I'll go work in an office and they can ****ing well starve.

Said to me, in rather stronger terms, by a farming relative.

This another strawman though. I don't think anyone thinks otherwise (particularly after Clarkson's farm). This is about a few very large and wealthy landowners, and also stopping the British countryside being bought up by billionaires as a tax dodge mechanism.

It's a relatively small amount of revenue for HMRC but a good example of them getting early before it becomes a big issue.

It isn't just about a few very large and wealthy landowners. Far from.

Incidentally, and from that conversation: how is the land valued for IHT purposes? An uphill farm might be worth relatively little from a farming perspective, which a family might want to continue doing. But it might be worth much more with the farmhouse converted into a non-farming home or B&B, and with some of the barns 'converted' into housing for townies - something that cannot be done and the farm remain as a singular farm. It'd be the highest valuation, wouldn't it? And if the inheritors are forced to sell, what happens if the land does not reach that estimate?

Tax advisers are going to be very busy.

Many farmers want to farm. From my experience they grumble and complain (including my distant relatives...), but they love farming. And that doubles when there's a many-generation familial connection with the land.

Farmland is valued for inheritance tax purposes as if it was under a perpetual covenant that only permits it to be used for agricultural purposes and nothing else: https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/shares-and-assets-valuation-manual/svm112050

But it seems that the vast majority of people weighing into this discussion (including those interviewed in the press claiming to be representing farmers) are simply unaware of this, or chose not to mention it because it undermines their case.

Similarly, there was someone on the Today program this morning complaining that the big estates will just put their land into trust and avoid the tax, which smaller farms can’t afford to do. In reality, trusts pay a 6% tax every 10 years on the value of the property in the trust - a number that just happens to compound to a very similar rate to the IHT rate of 20% being applied to farmland if you consider an estate attracting inheritance tax every thirty years or so - so there’s no real tax benefit to doing this.

(There is an unfortunate caveat that this 6% tax doesn’t apply to trusts created before 2006, so the large estates which were astute enough to transfer their wealth into a trust decades ago do escape this tax: if the Treasurty’s intent is to make trusts tax-equivalent to not having a trust then leaving these older trusts untouched just entrenches the extant landed genry class further & they ought to be taxed at the same rates as everyone else.)

nb. The above is based on my fairly quick perusal of the HMRC advice & a few articles by property lawyers - there may be other tax loopholes that people are keeping quiet about of course!

The 2006 trust issue is an important point. Some of the bigger estates already have this set up and have had it for decades, so should be able to see a way out of this. If the policy is about clobbering all large landowners fair enough, there should be no exemptions. I think Reeves (if still in a a job) and Starmer can close some loopholes in this in future, but have been poorly advised or unaware of the situation

Eg the Blenheim estate was (IIRC) put into trust back in the 90s in order to avoid it passing to the control of the eldest son whom the Duke regarded as wildly unsuited to own or run the estate. (It was extremely difficult for the Duke to disinhereit him as this would apparently have required an Act of Parliament to be passed.) It seems that this has turned out to be quite astute financially as the income and benefits of the estate will continue to acrue to the Duke’s heirs whilst being free of inheritance tax in perpetuity or until the government changes the tax laws on such trusts.