In response to @NickPalmer questioning if the conservatives will cancel the farmers IHT, Kemi is to join Jeremy Clarkson on stage to address and support the farmer's demonstration outside no 10
Also Scottish Labour are announcing they will reinstate the WFP
She may well be appearing but I bet decent money that unless Labour backs down (and it won't) the policy won't be changed by 2032...
If the policy is implemented we will see the actual effects.
If those are negative then the policy will be changed by someone at some point.
Are you sure......governments have a habit of sticking to their guns for both ideological and political reasons. They aren't run like a business...the cliff edge at £50-60k and £100-120k make no sense on a number of fronts if you want to maximise growth / productivity and not clear they maximise tax take either, yet here we are still with them 15 years later. We also have cliff edges in how many hours people can work per week.
If we see the whole farming sector steadily shutting down then that will lead to higher prices and outbreaks of panic buying.
Not a good image for governments.
It ill behoves the Tories to whine about farmers (as opposed to landowners, which is what IHT actually applies to) given how little they've done to promote fiid security and stop the supermarkets grinding the farmers down, as opposed to demanding more cheap food imports from Australia etc.
Putting farmers on a sounder economic footing would have been a better way toi approach the whole issue, including a rebalancing of agricultural land from its currently bloated values. But I have yet to read about Labour dealing with things like supermarket milk wholesale prices.
They also expanded UK exports to Australia and NZ
For what? Model London Routemaster buses?
Probably, but I would think the AUKUS submarine contract would be bigger.
But that doesn't do UK farmers any good, which is the point here.
You introduced Routmaster buses, are you saying farmers drive them ?
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.
The real problem is, say the asset is bought by a man - lets call him Bates, Mr G Bates. But he doesn't buy it, a company where he is a major shareholder buys it, lets call it SicroMoft. Or it could be Mr Zebos and Mazazon - anyway point is if the land is held in perpetuity it doesn't generate any tax compared to the farmer who cops IHT - or not depending on how good his tax accountant, marital situation and ticker are... So UK land plc just gets sold up to whever global capital (The US) resides over time :E
In response to @NickPalmer questioning if the conservatives will cancel the farmers IHT, Kemi is to join Jeremy Clarkson on stage to address and support the farmer's demonstration outside no 10
Also Scottish Labour are announcing they will reinstate the WFP
She may well be appearing but I bet decent money that unless Labour backs down (and it won't) the policy won't be changed by 2032...
If the policy is implemented we will see the actual effects.
If those are negative then the policy will be changed by someone at some point.
Are you sure......governments have a habit of sticking to their guns for both ideological and political reasons. They aren't run like a business...the cliff edge at £50-60k and £100-120k make no sense on a number of fronts if you want to maximise growth / productivity and not clear they maximise tax take either, yet here we are still with them 15 years later. We also have cliff edges in how many hours people can work per week.
If we see the whole farming sector steadily shutting down then that will lead to higher prices and outbreaks of panic buying.
Not a good image for governments.
It ill behoves the Tories to whine about farmers (as opposed to landowners, which is what IHT actually applies to) given how little they've done to promote fiid security and stop the supermarkets grinding the farmers down, as opposed to demanding more cheap food imports from Australia etc.
Putting farmers on a sounder economic footing would have been a better way toi approach the whole issue, including a rebalancing of agricultural land from its currently bloated values. But I have yet to read about Labour dealing with things like supermarket milk wholesale prices.
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.
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.
Putin still has the largest nuclear missile arsenal in the world, that is far more of a concern than his manpower. I certainly wouldn't approve of missile strikes into Russian occupied territory beyond Kursk where the North Koreans are
"Extreme weather, competition from industrial farms and supermarkets denying them a fair price for their food - all this is putting farmers’ livelihoods under huge strain. They have reasons to be angry."
Starmer has even lost the self righteous urbanites.
F1: after contemplating it for a week, backed Sainz to win each way at Ladbrokes, boosted to 7.5.
He went from 17th to 6th in the race last year and has been on good form lately. He did have a DNF in the treacherous conditions of Brazil but before then his most recent results were both top 2.
Leclerc's probably favourite but the odds are less appealing.
"Extreme weather, competition from industrial farms and supermarkets denying them a fair price for their food - all this is putting farmers’ livelihoods under huge strain. They have reasons to be angry."
Starmer has even lost the self righteous urbanites.
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.
Ex-farming relative, presumably, and now working in an office? Or was that all piss and wind?
Why do you assume that? I'm from South Derbyshire originally, and have near and distant relatives involved with farming in South Derbyshire, East Staffs and touristy areas a little further north. One uncle in particular is quite elderly and infirm at the moment. A couple more relatives if you include farming-related activities.
A lot of my family were in farming and building, and quite a few remain. Thankfully we haven't descended so low as to become lawyers yet.
"Extreme weather, competition from industrial farms and supermarkets denying them a fair price for their food - all this is putting farmers’ livelihoods under huge strain. They have reasons to be angry."
Starmer has even lost the self righteous urbanites.
"Extreme weather, competition from industrial farms and supermarkets denying them a fair price for their food - all this is putting farmers’ livelihoods under huge strain. They have reasons to be angry."
Starmer has even lost the self righteous urbanites.
The tractor tax is already Starmer's dementia tax
In 5 months Starmer has managed to get his government to a place it took the Tories 12 years to reach,
F1: after contemplating it for a week, backed Sainz to win each way at Ladbrokes, boosted to 7.5.
He went from 17th to 6th in the race last year and has been on good form lately. He did have a DNF in the treacherous conditions of Brazil but before then his most recent results were both top 2.
Leclerc's probably favourite but the odds are less appealing.
Going to set up a hedge on Betfair at 3.
I think I would back Sainz for the win - he only started 17th last year due to the drain cover wrecking his car.
"Extreme weather, competition from industrial farms and supermarkets denying them a fair price for their food - all this is putting farmers’ livelihoods under huge strain. They have reasons to be angry."
Starmer has even lost the self righteous urbanites.
I notice that IHT isn't listed as one of the reasons.
'Farmers must pay up for the NHS, says Rachel Reeves..The proposals are at the heart of a growing row over Ms Reeves’s Budget, and on Monday a Labour peer became the first to publicly criticise the Government over the plan. Baroness Mallalieu, a Labour peer since 1991, said her party had become too “urban” to understand the impact of the tax raid.
But Ms Reeves defended the policy on Monday, repeating that the Government had “taken difficult decisions” to fill funding gaps.
“The reforms to agricultural property relief ensure that wealthier estates and the most valuable farms pay their fair share to invest in our schools and health services that farmers and families in rural communities rely on,” she said in a joint statement with Steve Reed, the environment secretary.
Kemi Badenoch, who is expected to speak at the protest on Tuesday, vowed that the Tories would reverse the “cruel tax hike” if they came to power.
Jeremy Clarkson and Nigel Farage are also expected to attend the rally.
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.
Putin still has the largest nuclear missile arsenal in the world, that is far more of a concern than his manpower. I certainly wouldn't approve of missile strikes into Russian occupied territory beyond Kursk where the North Koreans are
You do realise that makes MAD an offensive, not defensive, weapon?
Previously, MAD has generally been: "If you attack me, then I'll attack you back." (*) At various times, that has included chemical and biological weapons as well as nukes: if the USA was attacked with those weapons, the response would be nuclear (as the USA had got rid of its chemical and biological weapons). Hence nukes are a defensive weapon.
Russia (and your...) view turns MAD into: "If you try to stop me attacking this smaller neighbour, I will use nukes." It becomes an offensive weapon.
If Russia is using long-range weapons into Ukraine, especially when they are obtained from NK and Iran, then Ukraine should be perfectly free to use similar weapons against Russia.
(*) With some outliers such as France, with their 'warning shot' doctrine.
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.
If they've converted parts of their farm into B&Bs, homes etc, then they should be paying IHT on them like the rest of us.* I would guess those developments would be put in the standard IHT basket, and the agricultural property in the other.
It's not like I can claim an agricultural allowance on my home because I've got a raised bed with some carrots in it.
"Extreme weather, competition from industrial farms and supermarkets denying them a fair price for their food - all this is putting farmers’ livelihoods under huge strain. They have reasons to be angry."
Starmer has even lost the self righteous urbanites.
I notice that IHT isn't listed as one of the reasons.
Lack of empathy there.
But I suspect the fact they are at an anti IHT rally might be a clue.
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.
Ex-farming relative, presumably, and now working in an office? Or was that all piss and wind?
Why do you assume that? I'm from South Derbyshire originally, and have near and distant relatives involved with farming in South Derbyshire, East Staffs and touristy areas a little further north. One uncle in particular is quite elderly and infirm at the moment. A couple more relatives if you include farming-related activities.
A lot of my family were in farming and building, and quite a few remain. Thankfully we haven't descended so low as to become lawyers yet.
The chap i know who is going solar farming (with some sheep grazing around the panels) said that he really enjoyed the conversations with the supermarket(s) he’d been supplying.
He made sure to leave as little notice as was in the contract, didn’t warn them in advance etc.
As he put it, decades of nasty behaviour deserved a return.
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.
Ex-farming relative, presumably, and now working in an office? Or was that all piss and wind?
Why do you assume that? I'm from South Derbyshire originally, and have near and distant relatives involved with farming in South Derbyshire, East Staffs and touristy areas a little further north. One uncle in particular is quite elderly and infirm at the moment. A couple more relatives if you include farming-related activities.
A lot of my family were in farming and building, and quite a few remain. Thankfully we haven't descended so low as to become lawyers yet.
My family are from Willington, but they all worked in the mills, rather than farming. I grew up in Risley, and one of my best friends at the time farmed in the area. None of us became lawyers, to my knowledge.
"Extreme weather, competition from industrial farms and supermarkets denying them a fair price for their food - all this is putting farmers’ livelihoods under huge strain. They have reasons to be angry."
Starmer has even lost the self righteous urbanites.
The tractor tax is already Starmer's dementia tax
In 5 months Starmer has managed to get his government to a place it took the Tories 12 years to reach,
The thing is though, if pressure causes Reeves to u turn on some Budget measures their bias towards the public sector is so ingrained ideologically that they will come after the private sector in some other way.
The problem at root is their belief that the balance between the size of the public versus private sectors needs rebalancing even more in favour of the former.
"Extreme weather, competition from industrial farms and supermarkets denying them a fair price for their food - all this is putting farmers’ livelihoods under huge strain. They have reasons to be angry."
Starmer has even lost the self righteous urbanites.
The tractor tax is already Starmer's dementia tax
In 5 months Starmer has managed to get his government to a place it took the Tories 12 years to reach,
Starmer taking on the landowners is like Thatcher taking on the miners. Desperately unpopular with many, but it has to be done and is best done quickly.
"Extreme weather, competition from industrial farms and supermarkets denying them a fair price for their food - all this is putting farmers’ livelihoods under huge strain. They have reasons to be angry."
Starmer has even lost the self righteous urbanites.
The tractor tax is already Starmer's dementia tax
In 5 months Starmer has managed to get his government to a place it took the Tories 12 years to reach,
The key f*ck ups have all been Reeves.
I doubt she'll make it as CoE past the rumoured May reshuffle.
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.
Ex-farming relative, presumably, and now working in an office? Or was that all piss and wind?
Why do you assume that? I'm from South Derbyshire originally, and have near and distant relatives involved with farming in South Derbyshire, East Staffs and touristy areas a little further north. One uncle in particular is quite elderly and infirm at the moment. A couple more relatives if you include farming-related activities.
A lot of my family were in farming and building, and quite a few remain. Thankfully we haven't descended so low as to become lawyers yet.
My family are from Willington, but they all worked in the mills, rather than farming. I grew up in Risley, and one of my best friends at the time farmed in the area. None of us became lawyers, to my knowledge.
One of the farms is a stones' throw from Willington. I still have family in the area.
I was actually born at Stenson; my dad built (extended?) the marina where the Stenson Bubble is. We were good friends with the owners and their family.
I am sorry but farmers have been mollycoddled for long enough.
100% tax relief which is effectively dodges inheritance tax, no wonder Clarkson became a farmer.
What are the changes?
Agricultural property relief (APR) allows eligible farmland to be inherited with 100pc tax relief, and business property relief can be claimed on qualifying assets (such as farmland or equipment) not covered by APR.
From 6 April 2026, the full 100pc relief will be restricted to the first £1m of combined agricultural and business property. After that, the relief drops to 50pc. Assets above the threshold will be subject to an effective 20pc inheritance tax charge, meaning thousands of farmers will have to start paying death duties.
However, the Government says that the actual threshold before paying inheritance tax could be up to £3m, taking into account exemptions for each partner in a couple and for the farm property.
"Extreme weather, competition from industrial farms and supermarkets denying them a fair price for their food - all this is putting farmers’ livelihoods under huge strain. They have reasons to be angry."
Starmer has even lost the self righteous urbanites.
The tractor tax is already Starmer's dementia tax
In 5 months Starmer has managed to get his government to a place it took the Tories 12 years to reach,
Starmer taking on the landowners is like Thatcher taking on the miners. Desperately unpopular with many, but it has to be done and is best done quickly.
To be fair to Thatcher Wilson closed more mines than her. She was really taking on the NUM and Scargill's militant trade union not hard working miners who did not strike.
Indeed Ed Miliband has just scrapped plans for a new coal mine in Cumbria Boris had proposed.
The Tories are now more pro miners than Labour are as well as more pro farmer than Labour
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.
What a nasty person.
They should have the same tax treatment as the rest of us.
Fuck off. Seriously, fuck off. He's a relative. Some farmers out there are in despair over this. Calling them 'nasty' is beneath you.
Let's stick an extra 10% nasty bastards income tax on lawyers.
"Extreme weather, competition from industrial farms and supermarkets denying them a fair price for their food - all this is putting farmers’ livelihoods under huge strain. They have reasons to be angry."
Starmer has even lost the self righteous urbanites.
I notice that IHT isn't listed as one of the reasons.
Lack of empathy there.
But I suspect the fact they are at an anti IHT rally might be a clue.
Or you could just carry on reading the press release: "So whilst it is right that the richest landowners pay their fair share of tax.."
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.
What a nasty person.
They should have the same tax treatment as the rest of us.
Fuck off. Seriously, fuck off. He's a relative. Some farmers out there are in despair over this. Calling them 'nasty' is beneath you.
Let's stick an extra 10% nasty bastards income tax on lawyers.
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.
Ex-farming relative, presumably, and now working in an office? Or was that all piss and wind?
Why do you assume that? I'm from South Derbyshire originally, and have near and distant relatives involved with farming in South Derbyshire, East Staffs and touristy areas a little further north. One uncle in particular is quite elderly and infirm at the moment. A couple more relatives if you include farming-related activities.
A lot of my family were in farming and building, and quite a few remain. Thankfully we haven't descended so low as to become lawyers yet.
It seemed strongly implied from, "Until then, I'll go work in an office and they can ****ing well starve."
That kind of thing pisses me off when people are whining (not farmers specifically, academics like myself, too - although in our case it's the 'I could earn a lot more in industry' line). Well, do it then!
As you and others note, there's a draw to farming (for some) despite all the downsides. Much as there is with academia, or teaching or other 'vocations'. Government policy should deal with shortages - if this will actually displace farmers then it's a bad thing (and it may do, I'd assess it differently, make it not actually payable until sale for example and not index-linked, so generational farming families never pay and the real charge decreases the longer that land is held, assuming land values increase in notional terms).
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.
If they've converted parts of their farm into B&Bs, homes etc, then they should be paying IHT on them like the rest of us.* I would guess those developments would be put in the standard IHT basket, and the agricultural property in the other.
It's not like I can claim an agricultural allowance on my home because I've got a raised bed with some carrots in it.
*Well, about 4% if us.if we're so lucky.
You misread my point. Say a farm is a going concern, and the kids want to keep on farming. But the farm and buildings are worth far more if someone else converted them to other non-farming uses. What is the valuation? I assume it's the higher value.
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.
What a nasty person.
They should have the same tax treatment as the rest of us.
Fuck off. Seriously, fuck off. He's a relative. Some farmers out there are in despair over this. Calling them 'nasty' is beneath you.
Let's stick an extra 10% nasty bastards income tax on lawyers.
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.
What a nasty person.
They should have the same tax treatment as the rest of us.
Fuck off. Seriously, fuck off. He's a relative. Some farmers out there are in despair over this. Calling them 'nasty' is beneath you.
Let's stick an extra 10% nasty bastards income tax on lawyers.
Its that, or we kill them all...
No.
8000% tax on the 10th pair of shoes, and up from there.
"Extreme weather, competition from industrial farms and supermarkets denying them a fair price for their food - all this is putting farmers’ livelihoods under huge strain. They have reasons to be angry."
Starmer has even lost the self righteous urbanites.
I would guess it's those "industrial farms" that are most likely to be whacked by IHT, and therefore this helps suppress the competition that Greenpeace is complaining about.
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.
Putin still has the largest nuclear missile arsenal in the world, that is far more of a concern than his manpower. I certainly wouldn't approve of missile strikes into Russian occupied territory beyond Kursk where the North Koreans are
You do realise that makes MAD an offensive, not defensive, weapon?
Previously, MAD has generally been: "If you attack me, then I'll attack you back." (*) At various times, that has included chemical and biological weapons as well as nukes: if the USA was attacked with those weapons, the response would be nuclear (as the USA had got rid of its chemical and biological weapons). Hence nukes are a defensive weapon.
Russia (and your...) view turns MAD into: "If you try to stop me attacking this smaller neighbour, I will use nukes." It becomes an offensive weapon.
If Russia is using long-range weapons into Ukraine, especially when they are obtained from NK and Iran, then Ukraine should be perfectly free to use similar weapons against Russia.
(*) With some outliers such as France, with their 'warning shot' doctrine.
Perhaps, though at least the French have their own independent nuclear deterrent and the US control theirs so Russia knows if they hit them they will hit Russia back.
Are we sure Trident is fully under our control or US control? Once Trump gets in we certainly can't do anything without his agreement in terms of missile attacks on Russian territory
"Extreme weather, competition from industrial farms and supermarkets denying them a fair price for their food - all this is putting farmers’ livelihoods under huge strain. They have reasons to be angry."
Starmer has even lost the self righteous urbanites.
The tractor tax is already Starmer's dementia tax
In 5 months Starmer has managed to get his government to a place it took the Tories 12 years to reach,
Or indeed the 1997-2010 Labour government, even post Iraq War in 2003 New Labour was polling higher than Starmer Labour is now
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.
If they've converted parts of their farm into B&Bs, homes etc, then they should be paying IHT on them like the rest of us.* I would guess those developments would be put in the standard IHT basket, and the agricultural property in the other.
It's not like I can claim an agricultural allowance on my home because I've got a raised bed with some carrots in it.
*Well, about 4% if us.if we're so lucky.
You misread my point. Say a farm is a going concern, and the kids want to keep on farming. But the farm and buildings are worth far more if someone else converted them to other non-farming uses. What is the valuation? I assume it's the higher value.
Market value of the land - it hasn't got permission so would be less than it otherwise would be.
Now if you were devilish you could apply for planning permission so increasing the value of the land - as it's perfectly legal to apply for planning permission on land you don't own...
"Extreme weather, competition from industrial farms and supermarkets denying them a fair price for their food - all this is putting farmers’ livelihoods under huge strain. They have reasons to be angry."
Starmer has even lost the self righteous urbanites.
The tractor tax is already Starmer's dementia tax
In 5 months Starmer has managed to get his government to a place it took the Tories 12 years to reach,
Starmer taking on the landowners is like Thatcher taking on the miners. Desperately unpopular with many, but it has to be done and is best done quickly.
Starmer isnt taking on to the Landowners he's takin on small farmers and trying to put them out of business. He could have set the threshold at £10 million which would have taken most of grief away as it would leave family largely untouched. The big landowners will in any case employ tax accountants because they can afford it. This is simply an ill thought through tax which wont raise what the government says and will piss off a lot of people in the process.
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.
What a nasty person.
They should have the same tax treatment as the rest of us.
Fuck off. Seriously, fuck off. He's a relative. Some farmers out there are in despair over this. Calling them 'nasty' is beneath you.
Let's stick an extra 10% nasty bastards income tax on lawyers.
Its that, or we kill them all...
On my deathbed I am becoming a farmer so my family will not have to pay inheritance tax.
'Good luck to everyone protesting today against Labour’s demented family farm tax. Farmers work all hours and all year round to feed this country. We should be doing more to champion British food and keep our farmers on the land. Instead Reeves is clobbering British agriculture with a tax that is spiteful and punitive and economically disastrous. End it now.'https://x.com/BorisJohnson/status/1858783436833493303
Scottish Labour has pledged to bring back the winter fuel payment for all pensioners north of the border if the party wins the 2026 Holyrood election.
Anas Sarwar, the Scottish Labour leader, promised to “reinstate” the payment to all Scots after control over the benefit was recently devolved to Holyrood.
However, he said that Labour would “taper the level of support given to wealthiest households” to make the system fairer, meaning they would not receive as much as the poor.
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.
Putin still has the largest nuclear missile arsenal in the world, that is far more of a concern than his manpower. I certainly wouldn't approve of missile strikes into Russian occupied territory beyond Kursk where the North Koreans are
Nuclear deterrence depends upon *not* giving way to threats by other nuclear powers.
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.
What a nasty person.
They should have the same tax treatment as the rest of us.
Fuck off. Seriously, fuck off. He's a relative. Some farmers out there are in despair over this. Calling them 'nasty' is beneath you.
Let's stick an extra 10% nasty bastards income tax on lawyers.
Its that, or we kill them all...
On my deathbed I am becoming a farmer so my family will not have to pay inheritance tax.
Which is why we will have special tax on lawyers who become landowners.
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.
Ex-farming relative, presumably, and now working in an office? Or was that all piss and wind?
Why do you assume that? I'm from South Derbyshire originally, and have near and distant relatives involved with farming in South Derbyshire, East Staffs and touristy areas a little further north. One uncle in particular is quite elderly and infirm at the moment. A couple more relatives if you include farming-related activities.
A lot of my family were in farming and building, and quite a few remain. Thankfully we haven't descended so low as to become lawyers yet.
It seemed strongly implied from, "Until then, I'll go work in an office and they can ****ing well starve."
That kind of thing pisses me off when people are whining (not farmers specifically, academics like myself, too - although in our case it's the 'I could earn a lot more in industry' line). Well, do it then!
As you and others note, there's a draw to farming (for some) despite all the downsides. Much as there is with academia, or teaching or other 'vocations'. Government policy should deal with shortages - if this will actually displace farmers then it's a bad thing (and it may do, I'd assess it differently, make it not actually payable until sale for example and not index-linked, so generational farming families never pay and the real charge decreases the longer that land is held, assuming land values increase in notional terms).
Apols. I meant that if they want to screw farmers over, then he might as well go and work in an office and let them starve.
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.
What a nasty person.
They should have the same tax treatment as the rest of us.
Fuck off. Seriously, fuck off. He's a relative. Some farmers out there are in despair over this. Calling them 'nasty' is beneath you.
Let's stick an extra 10% nasty bastards income tax on lawyers.
Its that, or we kill them all...
On my deathbed I am becoming a farmer so my family will not have to pay inheritance tax.
Sewage farmer ? ( youre a lawyer so you have the background for it )
Scottish Labour has pledged to bring back the winter fuel payment for all pensioners north of the border if the party wins the 2026 Holyrood election.
Anas Sarwar, the Scottish Labour leader, promised to “reinstate” the payment to all Scots after control over the benefit was recently devolved to Holyrood.
However, he said that Labour would “taper the level of support given to wealthiest households” to make the system fairer, meaning they would not receive as much as the poor.
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.
What a nasty person.
They should have the same tax treatment as the rest of us.
Fuck off. Seriously, fuck off. He's a relative. Some farmers out there are in despair over this. Calling them 'nasty' is beneath you.
Let's stick an extra 10% nasty bastards income tax on lawyers.
Its that, or we kill them all...
On my deathbed I am becoming a farmer so my family will not have to pay inheritance tax.
So is your *beef* with people pretending to be farmers or actual long-standing farmers or both?
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.
What a nasty person.
They should have the same tax treatment as the rest of us.
Fuck off. Seriously, fuck off. He's a relative. Some farmers out there are in despair over this. Calling them 'nasty' is beneath you.
Let's stick an extra 10% nasty bastards income tax on lawyers.
Its that, or we kill them all...
On my deathbed I am becoming a farmer so my family will not have to pay inheritance tax.
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.
What a nasty person.
They should have the same tax treatment as the rest of us.
Fuck off. Seriously, fuck off. He's a relative. Some farmers out there are in despair over this. Calling them 'nasty' is beneath you.
Let's stick an extra 10% nasty bastards income tax on lawyers.
Its that, or we kill them all...
On my deathbed I am becoming a farmer so my family will not have to pay inheritance tax.
Don't worry, you don't have to actually do any farming. You just buy the land and get someone else to pay you to farm it.
I am sorry but farmers have been mollycoddled for long enough.
100% tax relief which is effectively dodges inheritance tax, no wonder Clarkson became a farmer.
What are the changes?
Agricultural property relief (APR) allows eligible farmland to be inherited with 100pc tax relief, and business property relief can be claimed on qualifying assets (such as farmland or equipment) not covered by APR.
From 6 April 2026, the full 100pc relief will be restricted to the first £1m of combined agricultural and business property. After that, the relief drops to 50pc. Assets above the threshold will be subject to an effective 20pc inheritance tax charge, meaning thousands of farmers will have to start paying death duties.
However, the Government says that the actual threshold before paying inheritance tax could be up to £3m, taking into account exemptions for each partner in a couple and for the farm property.
More accurately, it's landowners that have been mollycoddled. Not all farmers are landowners, and not all landowners are farmers.
Like many people, I come from a farming family. My father's first job was as a farm labourer, working for the local landowner. Two of my uncles were farmers. And I can tell you that there are quite a few tenant farmers who are actually pleased about the introduction of IHT for landowners because it means they or their kids wil have more of a chance of being able to buy theit own 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.
What a nasty person.
They should have the same tax treatment as the rest of us.
Fuck off. Seriously, fuck off. He's a relative. Some farmers out there are in despair over this. Calling them 'nasty' is beneath you.
Let's stick an extra 10% nasty bastards income tax on lawyers.
Its that, or we kill them all...
On my deathbed I am becoming a farmer so my family will not have to pay inheritance tax.
Sewage farmer ? ( youre a lawyer so you have the background for it )
No, so long as it doesn’t involve sewage, animals, or manure I will make an excellent farmer.
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.
What a nasty person.
They should have the same tax treatment as the rest of us.
Fuck off. Seriously, fuck off. He's a relative. Some farmers out there are in despair over this. Calling them 'nasty' is beneath you.
Let's stick an extra 10% nasty bastards income tax on lawyers.
Its that, or we kill them all...
On my deathbed I am becoming a farmer so my family will not have to pay inheritance tax.
So is your *beef* with people pretending to be farmers or actual long-standing farmers or both?
Long-standing ones, surely, the lazy feckers.
(Hard working farmers don't have the time to be long-standing, they're too busy for anything but very short standing).
I am sorry but farmers have been mollycoddled for long enough.
100% tax relief which is effectively dodges inheritance tax, no wonder Clarkson became a farmer.
What are the changes?
Agricultural property relief (APR) allows eligible farmland to be inherited with 100pc tax relief, and business property relief can be claimed on qualifying assets (such as farmland or equipment) not covered by APR.
From 6 April 2026, the full 100pc relief will be restricted to the first £1m of combined agricultural and business property. After that, the relief drops to 50pc. Assets above the threshold will be subject to an effective 20pc inheritance tax charge, meaning thousands of farmers will have to start paying death duties.
However, the Government says that the actual threshold before paying inheritance tax could be up to £3m, taking into account exemptions for each partner in a couple and for the farm property.
More accurately, it's landowners that have been mollycoddled. Not all farmers are landowners, and not all landowners are farmers.
Like many people, I come from a farming family. My father's first job was as a farm labourer, working for the local landowner. Two of my uncles were farmers. And I can tell you that there are quite a few tenant farmers who are actually pleased about the introduction of IHT for landowners because it means they or their kids wil have more of a chance of being able to buy theit own land.
I bet the average tractor driving into Westminister today is less than 5 years old and cost over £200 grand..
I am sorry but farmers have been mollycoddled for long enough.
100% tax relief which is effectively dodges inheritance tax, no wonder Clarkson became a farmer.
What are the changes?
Agricultural property relief (APR) allows eligible farmland to be inherited with 100pc tax relief, and business property relief can be claimed on qualifying assets (such as farmland or equipment) not covered by APR.
From 6 April 2026, the full 100pc relief will be restricted to the first £1m of combined agricultural and business property. After that, the relief drops to 50pc. Assets above the threshold will be subject to an effective 20pc inheritance tax charge, meaning thousands of farmers will have to start paying death duties.
However, the Government says that the actual threshold before paying inheritance tax could be up to £3m, taking into account exemptions for each partner in a couple and for the farm property.
More accurately, it's landowners that have been mollycoddled. Not all farmers are landowners, and not all landowners are farmers.
Like many people, I come from a farming family. My father's first job was as a farm labourer, working for the local landowner. Two of my uncles were farmers. And I can tell you that there are quite a few tenant farmers who are actually pleased about the introduction of IHT for landowners because it means they or their kids wil have more of a chance of being able to buy theit own land.
A lot of them won't. The farmers will sell out to the big businesses who don't have to pay the inheritence tax and who won't need the tenant farmers.
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.
Ex-farming relative, presumably, and now working in an office? Or was that all piss and wind?
Why do you assume that? I'm from South Derbyshire originally, and have near and distant relatives involved with farming in South Derbyshire, East Staffs and touristy areas a little further north. One uncle in particular is quite elderly and infirm at the moment. A couple more relatives if you include farming-related activities.
A lot of my family were in farming and building, and quite a few remain. Thankfully we haven't descended so low as to become lawyers yet.
It seemed strongly implied from, "Until then, I'll go work in an office and they can ****ing well starve."
That kind of thing pisses me off when people are whining (not farmers specifically, academics like myself, too - although in our case it's the 'I could earn a lot more in industry' line). Well, do it then!
As you and others note, there's a draw to farming (for some) despite all the downsides. Much as there is with academia, or teaching or other 'vocations'. Government policy should deal with shortages - if this will actually displace farmers then it's a bad thing (and it may do, I'd assess it differently, make it not actually payable until sale for example and not index-linked, so generational farming families never pay and the real charge decreases the longer that land is held, assuming land values increase in notional terms).
Apols. I meant that if they want to screw farmers over, then he might as well go and work in an office and let them starve.
Nobody is forcing him to be a farmer, and there is no shortage of folk who'd be happy to buy his land.
How hard would it be for the likes of the BBC to put a 2-3 line bio at the bottom for people who have political connections, so people can make their own judgment. Lots of other people do this, including the Guardian.
The reality is that this tax is hitting multimillionaires and closing an important loophole. We should expect opposition to be well funded and organised. Labour must not back down.
I am sorry but farmers have been mollycoddled for long enough.
100% tax relief which is effectively dodges inheritance tax, no wonder Clarkson became a farmer.
What are the changes?
Agricultural property relief (APR) allows eligible farmland to be inherited with 100pc tax relief, and business property relief can be claimed on qualifying assets (such as farmland or equipment) not covered by APR.
From 6 April 2026, the full 100pc relief will be restricted to the first £1m of combined agricultural and business property. After that, the relief drops to 50pc. Assets above the threshold will be subject to an effective 20pc inheritance tax charge, meaning thousands of farmers will have to start paying death duties.
However, the Government says that the actual threshold before paying inheritance tax could be up to £3m, taking into account exemptions for each partner in a couple and for the farm property.
More accurately, it's landowners that have been mollycoddled. Not all farmers are landowners, and not all landowners are farmers.
Like many people, I come from a farming family. My father's first job was as a farm labourer, working for the local landowner. Two of my uncles were farmers. And I can tell you that there are quite a few tenant farmers who are actually pleased about the introduction of IHT for landowners because it means they or their kids wil have more of a chance of being able to buy theit own land.
I bet the average tractor driving into Westminister today is less than 5 years old and cost over £200 grand..
Yep - The assets needed to run a farm don't come cheap.
In response to @NickPalmer questioning if the conservatives will cancel the farmers IHT, Kemi is to join Jeremy Clarkson on stage to address and support the farmer's demonstration outside no 10
Also Scottish Labour are announcing they will reinstate the WFP
She may well be appearing but I bet decent money that unless Labour backs down (and it won't) the policy won't be changed by 2032...
She has committed to reversing it and it's hardly a lot of money
Hmmm. I could write a very long list of things Oppositions commit to reverse and then never do. In fact they often extend them.
We had a similar discussion a few weeks ago where someone (@Luckyguy1983 I think) was referring to incoming governments reversing out previous Governments stuff and both myself and @Richard_Tyndall pointed out it rarely happened. Just a minority of stuff gets reversed. A new Government has its own agenda for moving forward. Reversing out the old Government stuff is low down on the list normally. It does seem like a good way of moving forward particularly with social changes.
This applies in spades to regulation. It's boring, and politicians don't much care about it, as they're not the ones who have to wade through the thickets they and their predecessors planted
So just have less of it.
Great idea. But we've just had a decade and a half of Conservative government, which in theory is ideologically opposed to unnecessary regulation. And it got worse, not better.
Which illustrates the problem.
I'm amazed you think the last 14 years were conservative government. They were centrist and they have failed, it was one of the reasons the Tories got their ass handed to them on a plate and why Farage is breathing down their necks.
Comments like that make you sound like BJO. Except you probably voted for them.
The point is that excessive regulation isn't a party political issue (or shouldn't be). There's no good ideological reason for any government to introduce costly and unnecessary regulation. Framing it as a question of "not being conservative enough" is part of the problem.
Imagine if, instead of raising employers' NI, Reeves had done as many are suggesting and broken their manifesto promise by raising income tax and/or employees' NI. What would businesses and other government critics now be saying?
At a guess: reducing people's disposable income will be hugely damaging to the economy - even lower growth due to less spending, and this will lead to redundancies and businesses having to close. The Chancellor must go!
To govern is to chose.
Starmer and Reeves chose to raise taxes on workers and business.
And then exempted the public sector.
They would have been better off spreading the tax increase and saying "we're all in this together".
The fuel duty increase should have been implemented as well.
“We’re all in this together” would have at least led to general groans but an accepting of the need to raise funds in the short term. With some skillful economic management, they could een have reversed an income tax increase before the next election, to say “thank you” to everyone.
Instead, they’ve picked on a few specific groups of people, who can organise against the government. Today it’s the turn of the farmers, and the news tonight is going to be of Jeremy Clarkson and hundreds of tractors on TV with opposition politicians.
Jeremy Clarkson wrote:
I’m becoming more and more convinced that Starmer and Reeves have a sinister plan.
They want to carpet bomb our farmland with new towns for immigrants and net zero windfarms.
But before they can do that, they have to ethnically cleanse the countryside of farmers.
That’s why they had a Budget which makes farming nigh on impossible.
That feels a teensy little bit over-the-top and possibly rather insulting to people who are being carpet bombed and ethnically cleansed. It's also kinda moving towards Great Replacement Theory nonsense when there is zero evidence that the new Labour government are going to increase immigration compared to the last administration.
Is Jeremy Clarkson going full MAGA going to be attractive to British voters?
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.
What a nasty person.
They should have the same tax treatment as the rest of us.
Fuck off. Seriously, fuck off. He's a relative. Some farmers out there are in despair over this. Calling them 'nasty' is beneath you.
Let's stick an extra 10% nasty bastards income tax on lawyers.
Its that, or we kill them all...
On my deathbed I am becoming a farmer so my family will not have to pay inheritance tax.
Don't worry, you don't have to actually do any farming. You just buy the land and get someone else to pay you to farm it.
That accounts for a whole 14% of farmed land in the UK.
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.
Are we sure Trident is fully under our control or US control? Once Trump gets in we certainly can't do anything without his agreement in terms of missile attacks on Russian territory
The US cannot stop the UK firing Trident. They can refuse to assist with maintaining the missiles, which would degrade the deterrent long-term, but they can't stop us using what we have.
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.
What a nasty person.
They should have the same tax treatment as the rest of us.
Fuck off. Seriously, fuck off. He's a relative. Some farmers out there are in despair over this. Calling them 'nasty' is beneath you.
Let's stick an extra 10% nasty bastards income tax on lawyers.
Its that, or we kill them all...
On my deathbed I am becoming a farmer so my family will not have to pay inheritance tax.
Don't worry, you don't have to actually do any farming. You just buy the land and get someone else to pay you to farm it.
That accounts for a whole 14% of farmed land in the UK.
Are we sure Trident is fully under our control or US control? Once Trump gets in we certainly can't do anything without his agreement in terms of missile attacks on Russian territory
The US cannot stop the UK firing Trident. They can refuse to assist with maintaining the missiles, which would degrade the deterrent long-term, but they can't stop us using what we have.
Hopefully if we need to use it in anger it'll work better than the recent test.. !
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.
Ex-farming relative, presumably, and now working in an office? Or was that all piss and wind?
Why do you assume that? I'm from South Derbyshire originally, and have near and distant relatives involved with farming in South Derbyshire, East Staffs and touristy areas a little further north. One uncle in particular is quite elderly and infirm at the moment. A couple more relatives if you include farming-related activities.
A lot of my family were in farming and building, and quite a few remain. Thankfully we haven't descended so low as to become lawyers yet.
My family are from Willington, but they all worked in the mills, rather than farming. I grew up in Risley, and one of my best friends at the time farmed in the area. None of us became lawyers, to my knowledge.
One of the farms is a stones' throw from Willington. I still have family in the area.
I was actually born at Stenson; my dad built (extended?) the marina where the Stenson Bubble is. We were good friends with the owners and their family.
I was born in Chertsey in Surrey as a result of unfortunate timing, but moved up to Derbyshire the following day. Don't hold it against me.
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.
Or the one who doesn't get the farm can become a lawyer, doctor or accountant
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.
It is another example how our governing class never seem to fully grasp how business works and how economic mix is important. Its the same with other businesses, there are huge barriers and disincentives to growth businesses from micro status. And the focus, such as today, with the massive businesses like Greggs lobbying government.
So we have ended up with top and bottom heavy in terms of business size and a all the incentives to sell your company ASAP if you do grow it to a reasonable size (normally to an overseas competitor or private equity and just gets sucked into mega-corp PLC).
The problem with this is we don't grow enough businesses to become genuine world leading ones, instead its all about hacking out a niche then sell to a global market leader. Long term this is rubbish for the country.
"Extreme weather, competition from industrial farms and supermarkets denying them a fair price for their food - all this is putting farmers’ livelihoods under huge strain. They have reasons to be angry."
Starmer has even lost the self righteous urbanites.
I would guess it's those "industrial farms" that are most likely to be whacked by IHT, and therefore this helps suppress the competition that Greenpeace is complaining about.
Good to see you take Greenpeace seriously tho
Industrial farms are not usually family owned.
Individual shareholders may or may not have to pay IHT but the corporation that owns the farm won't be.
I am sorry but farmers have been mollycoddled for long enough.
100% tax relief which is effectively dodges inheritance tax, no wonder Clarkson became a farmer.
What are the changes?
Agricultural property relief (APR) allows eligible farmland to be inherited with 100pc tax relief, and business property relief can be claimed on qualifying assets (such as farmland or equipment) not covered by APR.
From 6 April 2026, the full 100pc relief will be restricted to the first £1m of combined agricultural and business property. After that, the relief drops to 50pc. Assets above the threshold will be subject to an effective 20pc inheritance tax charge, meaning thousands of farmers will have to start paying death duties.
However, the Government says that the actual threshold before paying inheritance tax could be up to £3m, taking into account exemptions for each partner in a couple and for the farm property.
More accurately, it's landowners that have been mollycoddled. Not all farmers are landowners, and not all landowners are farmers.
Like many people, I come from a farming family. My father's first job was as a farm labourer, working for the local landowner. Two of my uncles were farmers. And I can tell you that there are quite a few tenant farmers who are actually pleased about the introduction of IHT for landowners because it means they or their kids wil have more of a chance of being able to buy theit own land.
I bet the average tractor driving into Westminister today is less than 5 years old and cost over £200 grand..
Yep - The assets needed to run a farm don't come cheap.
The real problem is, say the asset is bought by a man - lets call him Bates, Mr G Bates. But he doesn't buy it, a company where he is a major shareholder buys it, lets call it SicroMoft. Or it could be Mr Zebos and Mazazon - anyway point is if the land is held in perpetuity it doesn't generate any tax compared to the farmer who cops IHT - or not depending on how good his tax accountant, marital situation and ticker are... So UK land plc just gets sold up to whever global capital (The US) resides over time :E
Taxing assets is subject to diminishing returns, if you have an economy open to international investment, as we do, and don't tax the overseas owners, as we don't (and as you describe). It's the old selling off the family silver, going on since Mrs T's government, rearing its head again.
We've been hollowing out out economy in this manner for forty years.
The reality is that this tax is hitting multimillionaires and closing an important loophole. We should expect opposition to be well funded and organised. Labour must not back down.
No it is socialist class warfare against family farms. To close the loophole they could have exempted family farms going back generations and just removed the IHT exemption for investors but they didn't
Imagine if, instead of raising employers' NI, Reeves had done as many are suggesting and broken their manifesto promise by raising income tax and/or employees' NI. What would businesses and other government critics now be saying?
At a guess: reducing people's disposable income will be hugely damaging to the economy - even lower growth due to less spending, and this will lead to redundancies and businesses having to close. The Chancellor must go!
To govern is to chose.
Starmer and Reeves chose to raise taxes on workers and business.
And then exempted the public sector.
They would have been better off spreading the tax increase and saying "we're all in this together".
The fuel duty increase should have been implemented as well.
“We’re all in this together” would have at least led to general groans but an accepting of the need to raise funds in the short term. With some skillful economic management, they could een have reversed an income tax increase before the next election, to say “thank you” to everyone.
Instead, they’ve picked on a few specific groups of people, who can organise against the government. Today it’s the turn of the farmers, and the news tonight is going to be of Jeremy Clarkson and hundreds of tractors on TV with opposition politicians.
Jeremy Clarkson wrote:
I’m becoming more and more convinced that Starmer and Reeves have a sinister plan.
They want to carpet bomb our farmland with new towns for immigrants and net zero windfarms.
But before they can do that, they have to ethnically cleanse the countryside of farmers.
That’s why they had a Budget which makes farming nigh on impossible.
That feels a teensy little bit over-the-top and possibly rather insulting to people who are being carpet bombed and ethnically cleansed. It's also kinda moving towards Great Replacement Theory nonsense when there is zero evidence that the new Labour government are going to increase immigration compared to the last administration.
Is Jeremy Clarkson going full MAGA going to be attractive to British voters?
Imagine if, instead of raising employers' NI, Reeves had done as many are suggesting and broken their manifesto promise by raising income tax and/or employees' NI. What would businesses and other government critics now be saying?
At a guess: reducing people's disposable income will be hugely damaging to the economy - even lower growth due to less spending, and this will lead to redundancies and businesses having to close. The Chancellor must go!
To govern is to chose.
Starmer and Reeves chose to raise taxes on workers and business.
And then exempted the public sector.
They would have been better off spreading the tax increase and saying "we're all in this together".
The fuel duty increase should have been implemented as well.
“We’re all in this together” would have at least led to general groans but an accepting of the need to raise funds in the short term. With some skillful economic management, they could een have reversed an income tax increase before the next election, to say “thank you” to everyone.
Instead, they’ve picked on a few specific groups of people, who can organise against the government. Today it’s the turn of the farmers, and the news tonight is going to be of Jeremy Clarkson and hundreds of tractors on TV with opposition politicians.
Jeremy Clarkson wrote:
I’m becoming more and more convinced that Starmer and Reeves have a sinister plan.
They want to carpet bomb our farmland with new towns for immigrants and net zero windfarms.
But before they can do that, they have to ethnically cleanse the countryside of farmers.
That’s why they had a Budget which makes farming nigh on impossible.
That feels a teensy little bit over-the-top and possibly rather insulting to people who are being carpet bombed and ethnically cleansed. It's also kinda moving towards Great Replacement Theory nonsense when there is zero evidence that the new Labour government are going to increase immigration compared to the last administration.
Is Jeremy Clarkson going full MAGA going to be attractive to British voters?
Is it possible to be anti-racist and not support policies that result in ethnic replacement? Why should the global majority be a minority in the British countryside?
The reality is that this tax is hitting multimillionaires and closing an important loophole. We should expect opposition to be well funded and organised. Labour must not back down.
The reality is it isn't because the multi millionaires are the ones who can do the clever tax planning and will end up paying none of the tax. It is the farmers who can't simply move their money into another form of asset who will be hit.
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.
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!
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.
What a nasty person.
They should have the same tax treatment as the rest of us.
Fuck off. Seriously, fuck off. He's a relative. Some farmers out there are in despair over this. Calling them 'nasty' is beneath you.
Let's stick an extra 10% nasty bastards income tax on lawyers.
Its that, or we kill them all...
On my deathbed I am becoming a farmer so my family will not have to pay inheritance tax.
Don't worry, you don't have to actually do any farming. You just buy the land and get someone else to pay you to farm it.
That accounts for a whole 14% of farmed land in the UK.
Mixed tenant is another ~30%. Regardless should we wait until we are losing more ££ before we close loopholes or close them now?
I am sorry but farmers have been mollycoddled for long enough.
100% tax relief which is effectively dodges inheritance tax, no wonder Clarkson became a farmer.
What are the changes?
Agricultural property relief (APR) allows eligible farmland to be inherited with 100pc tax relief, and business property relief can be claimed on qualifying assets (such as farmland or equipment) not covered by APR.
From 6 April 2026, the full 100pc relief will be restricted to the first £1m of combined agricultural and business property. After that, the relief drops to 50pc. Assets above the threshold will be subject to an effective 20pc inheritance tax charge, meaning thousands of farmers will have to start paying death duties.
However, the Government says that the actual threshold before paying inheritance tax could be up to £3m, taking into account exemptions for each partner in a couple and for the farm property.
Imagine if, instead of raising employers' NI, Reeves had done as many are suggesting and broken their manifesto promise by raising income tax and/or employees' NI. What would businesses and other government critics now be saying?
At a guess: reducing people's disposable income will be hugely damaging to the economy - even lower growth due to less spending, and this will lead to redundancies and businesses having to close. The Chancellor must go!
To govern is to chose.
Starmer and Reeves chose to raise taxes on workers and business.
And then exempted the public sector.
They would have been better off spreading the tax increase and saying "we're all in this together".
The fuel duty increase should have been implemented as well.
“We’re all in this together” would have at least led to general groans but an accepting of the need to raise funds in the short term. With some skillful economic management, they could een have reversed an income tax increase before the next election, to say “thank you” to everyone.
Instead, they’ve picked on a few specific groups of people, who can organise against the government. Today it’s the turn of the farmers, and the news tonight is going to be of Jeremy Clarkson and hundreds of tractors on TV with opposition politicians.
Jeremy Clarkson wrote:
I’m becoming more and more convinced that Starmer and Reeves have a sinister plan.
They want to carpet bomb our farmland with new towns for immigrants and net zero windfarms.
But before they can do that, they have to ethnically cleanse the countryside of farmers.
That’s why they had a Budget which makes farming nigh on impossible.
That feels a teensy little bit over-the-top and possibly rather insulting to people who are being carpet bombed and ethnically cleansed. It's also kinda moving towards Great Replacement Theory nonsense when there is zero evidence that the new Labour government are going to increase immigration compared to the last administration.
Is Jeremy Clarkson going full MAGA going to be attractive to British voters?
Is it possible to be anti-racist and not support policies that result in ethnic replacement? Why should the global majority be a minority in the British countryside?
You confuse me William. Who are you saying are the global majority and who the countryside minority? And where exactly is this evidence for ethnic replacement in the countryside?
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.
Ex-farming relative, presumably, and now working in an office? Or was that all piss and wind?
Why do you assume that? I'm from South Derbyshire originally, and have near and distant relatives involved with farming in South Derbyshire, East Staffs and touristy areas a little further north. One uncle in particular is quite elderly and infirm at the moment. A couple more relatives if you include farming-related activities.
A lot of my family were in farming and building, and quite a few remain. Thankfully we haven't descended so low as to become lawyers yet.
It seemed strongly implied from, "Until then, I'll go work in an office and they can ****ing well starve."
That kind of thing pisses me off when people are whining (not farmers specifically, academics like myself, too - although in our case it's the 'I could earn a lot more in industry' line). Well, do it then!
As you and others note, there's a draw to farming (for some) despite all the downsides. Much as there is with academia, or teaching or other 'vocations'. Government policy should deal with shortages - if this will actually displace farmers then it's a bad thing (and it may do, I'd assess it differently, make it not actually payable until sale for example and not index-linked, so generational farming families never pay and the real charge decreases the longer that land is held, assuming land values increase in notional terms).
Apols. I meant that if they want to screw farmers over, then he might as well go and work in an office and let them starve.
Nobody is forcing him to be a farmer, and there is no shortage of folk who'd be happy to buy his land.
There is no shortage of *businesses* who'd be happy to buy his land.
As an aside, I'm firmly of the view that agribusinesses manage the land in a far worse manner than small farmers.
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.
What a nasty person.
They should have the same tax treatment as the rest of us.
Fuck off. Seriously, fuck off. He's a relative. Some farmers out there are in despair over this. Calling them 'nasty' is beneath you.
Let's stick an extra 10% nasty bastards income tax on lawyers.
Its that, or we kill them all...
On my deathbed I am becoming a farmer so my family will not have to pay inheritance tax.
Sewage farmer ? ( youre a lawyer so you have the background for it )
No, so long as it doesn’t involve sewage, animals, or manure I will make an excellent farmer.
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.
Putin still has the largest nuclear missile arsenal in the world, that is far more of a concern than his manpower. I certainly wouldn't approve of missile strikes into Russian occupied territory beyond Kursk where the North Koreans are
You do realise that makes MAD an offensive, not defensive, weapon?
Previously, MAD has generally been: "If you attack me, then I'll attack you back." (*) At various times, that has included chemical and biological weapons as well as nukes: if the USA was attacked with those weapons, the response would be nuclear (as the USA had got rid of its chemical and biological weapons). Hence nukes are a defensive weapon.
Russia (and your...) view turns MAD into: "If you try to stop me attacking this smaller neighbour, I will use nukes." It becomes an offensive weapon.
If Russia is using long-range weapons into Ukraine, especially when they are obtained from NK and Iran, then Ukraine should be perfectly free to use similar weapons against Russia.
(*) With some outliers such as France, with their 'warning shot' doctrine.
Perhaps, though at least the French have their own independent nuclear deterrent and the US control theirs so Russia knows if they hit them they will hit Russia back.
Are we sure Trident is fully under our control or US control? Once Trump gets in we certainly can't do anything without his agreement in terms of missile attacks on Russian territory
Of course it isn't under our control. When he was having his Putin love-in period, Obama gave Vlad the serial numbers (or whatever they are) of Britain's nukes as part of US inventory, against our protests. We pay them handsomely for a fig leaf, they control the weapons.
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.
What a nasty person.
They should have the same tax treatment as the rest of us.
Fuck off. Seriously, fuck off. He's a relative. Some farmers out there are in despair over this. Calling them 'nasty' is beneath you.
Let's stick an extra 10% nasty bastards income tax on lawyers.
Its that, or we kill them all...
On my deathbed I am becoming a farmer so my family will not have to pay inheritance tax.
Sewage farmer ? ( youre a lawyer so you have the background for it )
No, so long as it doesn’t involve sewage, animals, or manure I will make an excellent farmer.
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.
If they've converted parts of their farm into B&Bs, homes etc, then they should be paying IHT on them like the rest of us.* I would guess those developments would be put in the standard IHT basket, and the agricultural property in the other.
It's not like I can claim an agricultural allowance on my home because I've got a raised bed with some carrots in it.
*Well, about 4% if us.if we're so lucky.
You misread my point. Say a farm is a going concern, and the kids want to keep on farming. But the farm and buildings are worth far more if someone else converted them to other non-farming uses. What is the valuation? I assume it's the higher value.
Market value of the land - it hasn't got permission so would be less than it otherwise would be.
Now if you were devilish you could apply for planning permission so increasing the value of the land - as it's perfectly legal to apply for planning permission on land you don't own...
But you wouldn't need planning permission for changing a farmhouse into a house with none of that mucky farming involved. And barns can always be converted in the future.
In response to @NickPalmer questioning if the conservatives will cancel the farmers IHT, Kemi is to join Jeremy Clarkson on stage to address and support the farmer's demonstration outside no 10
Also Scottish Labour are announcing they will reinstate the WFP
She may well be appearing but I bet decent money that unless Labour backs down (and it won't) the policy won't be changed by 2032...
She has committed to reversing it and it's hardly a lot of money
Hmmm. I could write a very long list of things Oppositions commit to reverse and then never do. In fact they often extend them.
We had a similar discussion a few weeks ago where someone (@Luckyguy1983 I think) was referring to incoming governments reversing out previous Governments stuff and both myself and @Richard_Tyndall pointed out it rarely happened. Just a minority of stuff gets reversed. A new Government has its own agenda for moving forward. Reversing out the old Government stuff is low down on the list normally. It does seem like a good way of moving forward particularly with social changes.
I would just reiterate it is not a lot of money [ circa 700 million ] and lots of rural seats with Labour mps will be vulnerable and maybe it is why they Lib Dems are also very opposed to the policy
Yep I am not arguing the pros and cons, just pointing out that politicians promise to reverse of things that they don't carry through. It is the norm.
I am sorry but farmers have been mollycoddled for long enough.
100% tax relief which is effectively dodges inheritance tax, no wonder Clarkson became a farmer.
What are the changes?
Agricultural property relief (APR) allows eligible farmland to be inherited with 100pc tax relief, and business property relief can be claimed on qualifying assets (such as farmland or equipment) not covered by APR.
From 6 April 2026, the full 100pc relief will be restricted to the first £1m of combined agricultural and business property. After that, the relief drops to 50pc. Assets above the threshold will be subject to an effective 20pc inheritance tax charge, meaning thousands of farmers will have to start paying death duties.
However, the Government says that the actual threshold before paying inheritance tax could be up to £3m, taking into account exemptions for each partner in a couple and for the farm property.
'Good luck to everyone protesting today against Labour’s demented family farm tax. Farmers work all hours and all year round to feed this country. We should be doing more to champion British food and keep our farmers on the land. Instead Reeves is clobbering British agriculture with a tax that is spiteful and punitive and economically disastrous. End it now.'https://x.com/BorisJohnson/status/1858783436833493303
Don't most of us work "all year round"? Is there some job category where you get 6 months off?
I am sorry but farmers have been mollycoddled for long enough.
100% tax relief which is effectively dodges inheritance tax, no wonder Clarkson became a farmer.
What are the changes?
Agricultural property relief (APR) allows eligible farmland to be inherited with 100pc tax relief, and business property relief can be claimed on qualifying assets (such as farmland or equipment) not covered by APR.
From 6 April 2026, the full 100pc relief will be restricted to the first £1m of combined agricultural and business property. After that, the relief drops to 50pc. Assets above the threshold will be subject to an effective 20pc inheritance tax charge, meaning thousands of farmers will have to start paying death duties.
However, the Government says that the actual threshold before paying inheritance tax could be up to £3m, taking into account exemptions for each partner in a couple and for the farm property.
More accurately, it's landowners that have been mollycoddled. Not all farmers are landowners, and not all landowners are farmers.
Like many people, I come from a farming family. My father's first job was as a farm labourer, working for the local landowner. Two of my uncles were farmers. And I can tell you that there are quite a few tenant farmers who are actually pleased about the introduction of IHT for landowners because it means they or their kids wil have more of a chance of being able to buy theit own land.
I bet the average tractor driving into Westminister today is less than 5 years old and cost over £200 grand..
Yep - The assets needed to run a farm don't come cheap.
And mostly will be bought with loans or HP.
Not necessarily - Mrs Eek has an awkward planning application because a farm doesn't look profitable, they replaced their tractors a couple of years back paying cash for the super-deduction allowance...
'Good luck to everyone protesting today against Labour’s demented family farm tax. Farmers work all hours and all year round to feed this country. We should be doing more to champion British food and keep our farmers on the land. Instead Reeves is clobbering British agriculture with a tax that is spiteful and punitive and economically disastrous. End it now.'https://x.com/BorisJohnson/status/1858783436833493303
Don't most of us work "all year round"? Is there some job category where you get 6 months off?
Well most people get Christmas, 25 - 35 days holiday and weekends off.
In response to @NickPalmer questioning if the conservatives will cancel the farmers IHT, Kemi is to join Jeremy Clarkson on stage to address and support the farmer's demonstration outside no 10
Also Scottish Labour are announcing they will reinstate the WFP
She may well be appearing but I bet decent money that unless Labour backs down (and it won't) the policy won't be changed by 2032...
She has committed to reversing it and it's hardly a lot of money
Hmmm. I could write a very long list of things Oppositions commit to reverse and then never do. In fact they often extend them.
We had a similar discussion a few weeks ago where someone (@Luckyguy1983 I think) was referring to incoming governments reversing out previous Governments stuff and both myself and @Richard_Tyndall pointed out it rarely happened. Just a minority of stuff gets reversed. A new Government has its own agenda for moving forward. Reversing out the old Government stuff is low down on the list normally. It does seem like a good way of moving forward particularly with social changes.
The new Boris government in 2019 reversed Cameron's policies of 0.7% GDP for overseas aid and the FTPA.
Yep, but I said a minority of stuff, not all, and if we had a competition of listing out the stuff they did reverse and the stuff various governments didn't reverse I know who would win by a very large majority.
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.
What a nasty person.
They should have the same tax treatment as the rest of us.
Fuck off. Seriously, fuck off. He's a relative. Some farmers out there are in despair over this. Calling them 'nasty' is beneath you.
Let's stick an extra 10% nasty bastards income tax on lawyers.
Its that, or we kill them all...
On my deathbed I am becoming a farmer so my family will not have to pay inheritance tax.
Sewage farmer ? ( youre a lawyer so you have the background for it )
No, so long as it doesn’t involve sewage, animals, or manure I will make an excellent farmer.
I am sorry but farmers have been mollycoddled for long enough.
100% tax relief which is effectively dodges inheritance tax, no wonder Clarkson became a farmer.
What are the changes?
Agricultural property relief (APR) allows eligible farmland to be inherited with 100pc tax relief, and business property relief can be claimed on qualifying assets (such as farmland or equipment) not covered by APR.
From 6 April 2026, the full 100pc relief will be restricted to the first £1m of combined agricultural and business property. After that, the relief drops to 50pc. Assets above the threshold will be subject to an effective 20pc inheritance tax charge, meaning thousands of farmers will have to start paying death duties.
However, the Government says that the actual threshold before paying inheritance tax could be up to £3m, taking into account exemptions for each partner in a couple and for the farm property.
There's a very good argument for looking at the problem of agricultural land (whether its use is economically efficient and environmentally beneficial; whether it's being abused by the very rich as a tax dodge, etc). But bringing in an ill thought out measure like this, with virtually no consultation, which overturns the arrangements of the last half century, and is quite likely to have negative unintended consequences, is not the way to go about it.
Comments
So UK land plc just gets sold up to whever global capital (The US) resides over time :E
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.
Greenpeace speaks
"Extreme weather, competition from industrial farms and supermarkets denying them a fair price for their food - all this is putting farmers’ livelihoods under huge strain. They have reasons to be angry."
Starmer has even lost the self righteous urbanites.
Betting PostF1: after contemplating it for a week, backed Sainz to win each way at Ladbrokes, boosted to 7.5.
He went from 17th to 6th in the race last year and has been on good form lately. He did have a DNF in the treacherous conditions of Brazil but before then his most recent results were both top 2.
Leclerc's probably favourite but the odds are less appealing.
Going to set up a hedge on Betfair at 3.
A lot of my family were in farming and building, and quite a few remain. Thankfully we haven't descended so low as to become lawyers yet.
Labour's tractor tax !
But Ms Reeves defended the policy on Monday, repeating that the Government had “taken difficult decisions” to fill funding gaps.
“The reforms to agricultural property relief ensure that wealthier estates and the most valuable farms pay their fair share to invest in our schools and health services that farmers and families in rural communities rely on,” she said in a joint statement with Steve Reed, the environment secretary.
Kemi Badenoch, who is expected to speak at the protest on Tuesday, vowed that the Tories would reverse the “cruel tax hike” if they came to power.
Jeremy Clarkson and Nigel Farage are also expected to attend the rally.
Rural Labour MPs, many at risk of losing their seats over the policy, will be lobbied by hundreds of farmers at a separate event organised by the National Farmers’ Union (NFU) in Parliament on Tuesday.'
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/11/18/farmers-must-pay-up-for-the-nhs-says-rachel-reeves/
Previously, MAD has generally been: "If you attack me, then I'll attack you back." (*) At various times, that has included chemical and biological weapons as well as nukes: if the USA was attacked with those weapons, the response would be nuclear (as the USA had got rid of its chemical and biological weapons). Hence nukes are a defensive weapon.
Russia (and your...) view turns MAD into: "If you try to stop me attacking this smaller neighbour, I will use nukes." It becomes an offensive weapon.
If Russia is using long-range weapons into Ukraine, especially when they are obtained from NK and Iran, then Ukraine should be perfectly free to use similar weapons against Russia.
(*) With some outliers such as France, with their 'warning shot' doctrine.
It's not like I can claim an agricultural allowance on my home because I've got a raised bed with some carrots in it.
*Well, about 4% if us.if we're so lucky.
But I suspect the fact they are at an anti IHT rally might be a clue.
He made sure to leave as little notice as was in the contract, didn’t warn them in advance etc.
As he put it, decades of nasty behaviour deserved a return.
https://order-order.com/2024/11/19/bbc-verify-confuses-acres-for-hectares-in-farm-tax-fact-check/
LOL. F##king useless.
The problem at root is their belief that the balance between the size of the public versus private sectors needs rebalancing even more in favour of the former.
I doubt she'll make it as CoE past the rumoured May reshuffle.
I was actually born at Stenson; my dad built (extended?) the marina where the Stenson Bubble is. We were good friends with the owners and their family.
100% tax relief which is effectively dodges inheritance tax, no wonder Clarkson became a farmer.
What are the changes?
Agricultural property relief (APR) allows eligible farmland to be inherited with 100pc tax relief, and business property relief can be claimed on qualifying assets (such as farmland or equipment) not covered by APR.
From 6 April 2026, the full 100pc relief will be restricted to the first £1m of combined agricultural and business property. After that, the relief drops to 50pc. Assets above the threshold will be subject to an effective 20pc inheritance tax charge, meaning thousands of farmers will have to start paying death duties.
However, the Government says that the actual threshold before paying inheritance tax could be up to £3m, taking into account exemptions for each partner in a couple and for the farm property.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/inheritance/why-farmers-protesting-over-inheritance-tax/
Indeed Ed Miliband has just scrapped plans for a new coal mine in Cumbria Boris had proposed.
The Tories are now more pro miners than Labour are as well as more pro farmer than Labour
Its that, or we kill them all...
That kind of thing pisses me off when people are whining (not farmers specifically, academics like myself, too - although in our case it's the 'I could earn a lot more in industry' line). Well, do it then!
As you and others note, there's a draw to farming (for some) despite all the downsides. Much as there is with academia, or teaching or other 'vocations'. Government policy should deal with shortages - if this will actually displace farmers then it's a bad thing (and it may do, I'd assess it differently, make it not actually payable until sale for example and not index-linked, so generational farming families never pay and the real charge decreases the longer that land is held, assuming land values increase in notional terms).
8000% tax on the 10th pair of shoes, and up from there.
#ShoeCrisis
Good to see you take Greenpeace seriously tho
Are we sure Trident is fully under our control or US control? Once Trump gets in we certainly can't do anything without his agreement in terms of missile attacks on Russian territory
Now if you were devilish you could apply for planning permission so increasing the value of the land - as it's perfectly legal to apply for planning permission on land you don't own...
Pain without gain.
Anas Sarwar, the Scottish Labour leader, promised to “reinstate” the payment to all Scots after control over the benefit was recently devolved to Holyrood.
However, he said that Labour would “taper the level of support given to wealthiest households” to make the system fairer, meaning they would not receive as much as the poor.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/11/19/scottish-labour-pledge-bring-back-winter-fuel-payments/
He really isn't that bright is he...
Edit:: I see the excellent MarqueeMark has already made the same suggestion.
Like many people, I come from a farming family. My father's first job was as a farm labourer, working for the local landowner. Two of my uncles were farmers. And I can tell you that there are quite a few tenant farmers who are actually pleased about the introduction of IHT for landowners because it means they or their kids wil have more of a chance of being able to buy theit own land.
(Hard working farmers don't have the time to be long-standing, they're too busy for anything but very short standing).
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8rlk0d2vk2o
He isn't independent though.
While he is a member of the Labour party and serves on its national constitutional committee
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jun/25/im-embarrassed-about-how-horribly-overpaid-i-was-tax-campaigner-dan-neidle
How hard would it be for the likes of the BBC to put a 2-3 line bio at the bottom for people who have political connections, so people can make their own judgment. Lots of other people do this, including the Guardian.
LAB: 27% (-2)
CON: 26% (+1)
RFM: 20% (+1)
LDM: 12% (-2)
GRN: 9% (+2)
SNP: 3% (+1)
Via
@JLPartnersPolls
13-14 Nov.
Changes w/ 11-13 Oct.
https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1858816840933183989
Except you probably voted for them.
The point is that excessive regulation isn't a party political issue (or shouldn't be).
There's no good ideological reason for any government to introduce costly and unnecessary regulation. Framing it as a question of "not being conservative enough" is part of the problem.
I’m becoming more and more convinced that Starmer and Reeves have a sinister plan.
They want to carpet bomb our farmland with new towns for immigrants and net zero windfarms.
But before they can do that, they have to ethnically cleanse the countryside of farmers.
That’s why they had a Budget which makes farming nigh on impossible.
That feels a teensy little bit over-the-top and possibly rather insulting to people who are being carpet bombed and ethnically cleansed. It's also kinda moving towards Great Replacement Theory nonsense when there is zero evidence that the new Labour government are going to increase immigration compared to the last administration.
Is Jeremy Clarkson going full MAGA going to be attractive to British voters?
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.
My mum is still in Littleover.
So we have ended up with top and bottom heavy in terms of business size and a all the incentives to sell your company ASAP if you do grow it to a reasonable size (normally to an overseas competitor or private equity and just gets sucked into mega-corp PLC).
The problem with this is we don't grow enough businesses to become genuine world leading ones, instead its all about hacking out a niche then sell to a global market leader. Long term this is rubbish for the country.
Individual shareholders may or may not have to pay IHT but the corporation that owns the farm won't be.
It's the old selling off the family silver, going on since Mrs T's government, rearing its head again.
We've been hollowing out out economy in this manner for forty years.
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!
As an aside, I'm firmly of the view that agribusinesses manage the land in a far worse manner than small farmers.
There's a very good argument for looking at the problem of agricultural land (whether its use is economically efficient and environmentally beneficial; whether it's being abused by the very rich as a tax dodge, etc).
But bringing in an ill thought out measure like this, with virtually no consultation, which overturns the arrangements of the last half century, and is quite likely to have negative unintended consequences, is not the way to go about it.