Farmers are revolting

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8rlk0d2vk2o


Paul Johnson, the director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), an independent economy think-tank, told Sky News: "The changes will affect a remarkably small number of some of the most valuable farms."

He added: "[Farms are] still more generously treated, actually, than farms used to be in decades past."

The Treasury estimates that 500 estates including agricultural land will be affected by the agricultural property relief reform, external per year.

Dan Neidle, an independent tax expert, says the number of actual farms, external affected is likely to be below 500 per year.

There were a total of 462 inherited farms valued above £1m in 2021-22, according to HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC), external:

345 valued between £1m and £2.5m

80 at £2.5m to £5m

37 above £5m

Under the new rules, those 462 farms would be affected by the 20% inheritance tax on any value above £1m (not on the whole value).

However, as Mr Neidle points out, like for the rest of the population, there is no inheritance tax to be paid on the value of property up to £325,000, bringing the untaxed total to £1.325m.

If a farmer is married, his or her spouse would be able to pass on another £1.325m tax free, taking the total untaxed amount to £2.65m.

There were 117 farms valued above £2.5m in 2021-22, according to the HMRC figures, external.

In addition, there is an £175,000 tax-free allowance on a main residence when it's being passed on to children or grandchildren. This brings the total untaxed amount for a farming couple to up to £3m.

Steve Reed, the secretary of state for the environment, food and rural affairs, confirmed the "vast majority" of farmers will not be affected by changes. Writing in the Telegraph, external, he said "only the richest estates will be asked to pay".

That's 500 farms a year mind, payable upon death, which you never know when it's coming and is likely to land people with a hefty bill that they simply may not have as many farmers are asset rich and cash poor.

It does strike me as the govt picking the wrong fight, especially given the importance of the sector and the fact that the land is a requirement of the function of the farm, as opposed to land anyone else may happen to own.

I wonder if a better idea may be to look more at taxes when farmland is sold for non farm uses? That is where that can be extraordinary profits generated and the argument that we would be hitting viable farms is greatly reduced as by definition the land has been sold out of agricultural use anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

That's 500 farms a year mind, payable upon death, which you never know when it's coming and is likely to land people with a hefty bill that they simply may not have as many farmers are asset rich and cash poor.

It does strike me as the govt picking the wrong fight, especially given the importance of the sector and the fact that the land is a requirement of the function of the farm, as opposed to land anyone else may happen to own.

I wonder if a better idea may be to look more at taxes when farmland is sold for non farm uses? That is where that can be extraordinary profits generated and the argument that we would be hitting viable farms is greatly reduced as by definition the land has been sold out of agricultural use anyway.

---

I'm not that bothered either way with the inheritance tax changes - although I can see the sense in the Will Hutton argument, and the 70,000+ farms affected figure thrown about by the NFU, the Tories, the Lib Dems and the Tory press is deliberately misleading.

But I agree with you on your main point (wow!). I think the Budget focus should have been on taxing profits - especially excess profits - and not some of the other measures that are bound to wash through to jobs, wages and prices (employer NI etc).

The Starmer government is a typical centrist western Neo Liberal government of the past quarter century and seems happy to look on as a massive wealth transfer takes place from the poor (and some not so poor) to the mega rich. Despite the shallow roots, Starmer's huge majority was an opportunity to introduce radical game-changing policies and Starmer/Reeves opted for status quo fiddling in the budget. The needle nudged slightly on the side of progressive/redistributive but only slightly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1959

I'm not that bothered either way with the inheritance tax changes - although I can see the sense in the Will Hutton argument, and the 70,000+ farms affected figure thrown about by the NFU, the Tories, the Lib Dems and the Tory press is deliberately misleading.

But I agree with you on your main point (wow!). I think the Budget focus should have been on taxing profits - especially excess profits - and not some of the other measures that are bound to wash through to jobs, wages and prices (employer NI etc).

The Starmer government is a typical centrist western Neo Liberal government of the past quarter century and seems happy to look on as a massive wealth transfer takes place from the poor (and some not so poor) to the mega rich. Despite the shallow roots, Starmer's huge majority was an opportunity to introduce radical game-changing policies and Starmer/Reeves opted for status quo fiddling in the budget. The needle nudged slightly on the side of progressive/redistributive but only slightly.

---

Yeah I don't think anyone would argue in that scenario. Encourages agricultural use, recognises the role of land in production of food whilst recognises the vast profits available when land is removed from that sector

Farmers? What the ones who always vote Tory, the party that left a £20 billion black hole in the finances resulting in the need to change inheritance tax rules?
Farmers? The ones who used to get billions of European money to throw their produce away, then went and voted for Brexit.
Farmers? The same ones where the inheritance tax would only affect 500 farmers because they’re already ****ing millionaires?
Farmers? The ones who took it up the arse from Tesco and Asda, and who undercut their neighbouring farms?
Farmers? The same ones who started this ‘No Farmers, No Food’ campaign BEFORE Labour got into power knowing their number was up even under the Tories
Farmers? The ones who’d rather fcuk a sheep as it’s tighter than their sister’s fcuking brother!
Fcuk ‘em

I didn't notice much farmers support for the miners , steelworks, Palestine etc

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fingers

Farmers? What the ones who always vote Tory, the party that left a £20 billion black hole in the finances resulting in the need to change inheritance tax rules?
Farmers? The ones who used to get billions of European money to throw their produce away, then went and voted for Brexit.
Farmers? The same ones where the inheritance tax would only affect 500 farmers because they’re already ****ing millionaires?
Farmers? The ones who took it up the arse from Tesco and Asda, and who undercut their neighbouring farms?
Farmers? The same ones who started this ‘No Farmers, No Food’ campaign BEFORE Labour got into power knowing their number was up even under the Tories
Farmers? The ones who’d rather fcuk a sheep as it’s tighter than their sister’s fcuking brother!
Fcuk ‘em

---

I could also add
Farmers? Who abandoned poor calves in telephone boxes years ago leaving them vulnerable and afraid as a protest against something or other. They will insist on having their way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

That's 500 farms a year mind, payable upon death, which you never know when it's coming and is likely to land people with a hefty bill that they simply may not have as many farmers are asset rich and cash poor.

It does strike me as the govt picking the wrong fight, especially given the importance of the sector and the fact that the land is a requirement of the function of the farm, as opposed to land anyone else may happen to own.

I wonder if a better idea may be to look more at taxes when farmland is sold for non farm uses? That is where that can be extraordinary profits generated and the argument that we would be hitting viable farms is greatly reduced as by definition the land has been sold out of agricultural use anyway.

---

They could always get a loan to pay the tax off. That's what us mere mortals do when we're strapped for cash

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dorcus

I could also add
Farmers? Who abandoned poor calves in telephone boxes years ago leaving them vulnerable and afraid as a protest against something or other. They will insist on having their way.

---

Farmers always the victim.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jeepster

Farmers always the victim.

---

Sometimes its Pensioners but that's O.K isn't it ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Heathblue

Sometimes its Pensioners but that's O.K isn't it ?

---

Rich pensioners fab, poor pensioners dreadful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jeepster

Farmers always the victim.

---

That revolting Jeremy Clarkson is on the bandwagon now. Even with all his wealth he's complaining. Poor dab has already admitted he only bought a farm to circumvent paying Inheritance Tax: pity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dorcus

That revolting Jeremy Clarkson is on the bandwagon now. Even with all his wealth he's complaining. Poor dab has already admitted he only bought a farm to circumvent paying Inheritance Tax: pity.

---

He's saying now that he only said that because he didn't want to admit that he'd bought the farm for shooting pheasants

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by delmbox

He's saying now that he only said that because he didn't want to admit that he'd bought the farm for shooting pheasants

---

That's what Shape Shifters do.

I hope those protesting farmers who have driven their tractors to London are getting their fuel tanks dipped for red diesel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Lung

I hope those protesting farmers who have driven their tractors to London are getting their fuel tanks dipped for red diesel.

---

👍

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dorcus

That revolting Jeremy Clarkson is on the bandwagon now. Even with all his wealth he's complaining. Poor dab has already admitted he only bought a farm to circumvent paying Inheritance Tax: pity.

---

He's an utter cnnt isn't he ?

Didn't like being put on the spot by the " BBC "

Horrible tory twat

And the tory and Liberal tossers out shouting for votes

Scraping the barrel that lot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Lung

I hope those protesting farmers who have driven their tractors to London are getting their fuel tanks dipped for red diesel.

---

I would book them all , fine them heavily , seize their vehicles and burn down their barns

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

He's an utter cnnt isn't he ?

Didn't like being put on the spot by the " BBC "

Horrible tory twat

And the tory and Liberal tossers out shouting for votes

Scraping the barrel that lot

---

Will this be the standard response to rich people on protests now? Cool if so!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dorcus

Rich pensioners fab, poor pensioners dreadful.

---

Fair play there are some right ***** on here , but you’re the biggest of them all full of hate and jealousy, all in the knowledge that you’re spouting nonsense behind the safety of your keyboard.

As someone else pointed out PM me some details to see if we have things in common on social media as you sound delusional and deranged , and I’m sure you’re not?

The end of farming lol 😆

Bullshit

No iht since 1984

The farmers of the cold, winter hills struggle but most of em are well in

They voted brexit

They voted Tory

Suck it up

Jeremy Clarkson ? Feed him to the vegans

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

The difference of course is that the asset is fundamental to the job of farming. Owning land may be an asset to me, to sell or develop etc, but for farms it is a requirement of the job.

It does seem another mistake from the government to me. An unnecessary fight and a risky one given the importance and fragility of the sector

---

Yeah but it's been a loophole for tossers like Clarkson to abuse for years. When you change a tax, there will always be some people who feel a bit hard done by.

I think all this really highlights if another delusion within the British public. If so many farmers are legitimately barely scraping by then a) we don't actually have 'food security' and consumers need to pay more and b) a hefty proportion of the next generation that inherit the the farms will just sell them anyway, why wouldn't you if you are sitting on an asset worth millions that you can only earning 20k a year from. Now, there will be farmers struggling but my guess is a lot are actually making a decent margin and can afford it.

It feels like every story about removal of exemptions and benefits (vat on private schools, farmers iht, wfa) only focuses on the few who will be hit a bit by it and not the many who can actually afford it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

Yeah but it's been a loophole for tossers like Clarkson to abuse for years. When you change a tax, there will always be some people who feel a bit hard done by.

I think all this really highlights if another delusion within the British public. If so many farmers are legitimately barely scraping by then a) we don't actually have 'food security' and consumers need to pay more and b) a hefty proportion of the next generation that inherit the the farms will just sell them anyway, why wouldn't you if you are sitting on an asset worth millions that you can only earning 20k a year from. Now, there will be farmers struggling but my guess is a lot are actually making a decent margin and can afford it.

It feels like every story about removal of exemptions and benefits (vat on private schools, farmers iht, wfa) only focuses on the few who will be hit a bit by it and not the many who can actually afford it.

---

Very few will be hit by this

But the tory boys in the farming community ...thats most of them ....and their tory backers will rinse this

Absolute chancers

I would love to see Clarkson on his knees , suffering financially , he's a total ditto head

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1959

I'm not that bothered either way with the inheritance tax changes - although I can see the sense in the Will Hutton argument, and the 70,000+ farms affected figure thrown about by the NFU, the Tories, the Lib Dems and the Tory press is deliberately misleading.

But I agree with you on your main point (wow!). I think the Budget focus should have been on taxing profits - especially excess profits - and not some of the other measures that are bound to wash through to jobs, wages and prices (employer NI etc).

The Starmer government is a typical centrist western Neo Liberal government of the past quarter century and seems happy to look on as a massive wealth transfer takes place from the poor (and some not so poor) to the mega rich. Despite the shallow roots, Starmer's huge majority was an opportunity to introduce radical game-changing policies and Starmer/Reeves opted for status quo fiddling in the budget. The needle nudged slightly on the side of progressive/redistributive but only slightly.

---

Why wouldn't a tax on excessive profits affect wages/employees or consumers if employer NI does? It's just the cost of doing business going up and the majority would either find a way to avoid it or do exactly as they say they will do with the NI rise and kick employees or the consumer. They can't avoid employer NI so they are kicking off.

If you believe tesco, the world is going to end. How has a large supermarket been able to absorb 10% rises in the min wage but not a small rise in employer NI?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by delmbox

He's saying now that he only said that because he didn't want to admit that he'd bought the farm for shooting pheasants

---

Is that a silent h?