Lloyd90

So taking it away from an actual farming family that might run it better knowing what they’re doing and maybe even make a profit / run a viable business…

Clarkson also reckons he’s losing a fortune on his new pub. Both his pub and farms appear to be “unviable businesses” in their own rights. Considering his large wealth and access to the top advisors, accountants etc, what’s his agenda? Similar to the theme of why should everyone pay IHT but not farmers, what other businesses can be totally unviable yet continually claim subsidies and keep doing them as a “way of life” with tax payer top up? Coal mines? Closed down… British steel? It’s not looking good. Sad state of affairs but genuine question.

Can’t risk it anymore. Under cooked is worse risk than over cooked 🤣

🤣🤣 I thought slow cookers were foolproof, but several times trying to use one I had some food burn on the side of it. I thought that wasn’t supposed to happen.

Well he 100% kicked the shoot off that I used to go beating on. Syndicate shoot with 2 lads stuck loads of work into it.

The farmer on my permission is a tenant farmer, the land is owned by a family who don’t farm it themselves and just own several farms in the area. My old permission / shoot I used to go was bought up by Dyson and he kicked all the shoots off. He wanted somewhere to put his billions without IHT.

We’re not talking about small companies with a handful of employees. That’s who should be able to give and charge interest on director loans. Who they’re aimed at. I’m talking about the types of people named in the Panama papers. Or this: https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jan/30/offshore-companies-with-uk-property-not-stating-beneficial-owners Its exactly those types of people who’ve got inheritance tax added to farms… because they were using it not as intended to fiddle massive amounts of land / income out from inheritance tax. The everyday man who inherits a house from a deceased relative may end up paying it, but a millionaire who buys up a sporting estate is exempt. What game have you been in for 30 years?

Yes, director “loans” are allowed to charge interest. https://www.pricebailey.co.uk/blog/directors-loan-interest-reduce-tax-bill/ As are “loans” from one company to another, with one company based in an off shore tax haven which pays no / tiny amounts of tax, whilst the company “based in the UK” makes a loss.

That’s the point, these “businesses” are set up for the sole purpose of “making a loss”… same as the billionaires and multi millionaires buying farms and claiming subsidies, just to avoid inheritance tax. Sour grapes to expect a billionaire to pay the same % as I do?

Yes sure, sounds fair. I’ll just start the “business” off £6,000,000,000 from my father in law.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68253857.amp Works out about 23% tax overall on an income of £2.2m. Yet I’m paying 40% + on earnings over £52k or thereabout, earning a lot less than 100k. Think my tax worked out about 33% over total income last year. Exactly. Get a car pickup as a “work vehicle”, write it off the business as a devaluing asset, yet I buy the exact same car on PAYE and can’t claim back the VAT, VAT on fuel, depreciation etc. Lots of “loopholes” that they intentionally leave open. I just want an even playing field.

Unless you’re a multi multi millionaire where you pay a much lower rate than someone earning money on PAYE. Sunak being a prime example.

You can have a cash ISA, or a stocks and shares ISA. I have opened my daughter a S&S isa and will choose the funds / stock myself. Not sure on rates for a cash ISA as usually lower (but lower risk).

Yes, people should, I think over a certain (but not very big) amount. Anyone with sense would be taking advantage of an ISA or similar arrangement that is tax free.

Dead before he hit the ground. Its what I’d prefer.