Following on from the Budget, why shouldn't Farmers pay inheritance tax like the rest of us?

[Lloyd90]

1 hour ago, JohnfromUK said:

 

I think Clarkson having a shoot on his farm is widely known even though he doesn't mention it much now he's doing the Clarkson's Farm show. 

I suspect Clarkson has measure in place for tax planning, of which the farm will only be an element.  He's a rich man and no doubt has good advisors.  But the current protest is more about small and medium family farms.  It gets Clarkson's support and I expect most are glad to have him 'on team', because he brings press coverage. 

Clarkson makes a play on farming, but also freely admits he is only able to live as he does and farm because he has loads of other income streams which he can use to subsidise his farm.

But like everyone he pays the taxes he owes (well I assume he does as it has not been suggested otherwise), so why shouldn't he be able to give away his property on which he has already paid the taxes?

 

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. 

[Dave-G]

I just watched a commentator on BBC newsnight first claim he didn't know who Clarkson was - then under a minute later let slip the farm was bought for tax purposes.

[Lloyd90]

3 minutes ago, Dave-G said:

I just watched a commentator on BBC newsnight first claim he didn't know who Clarkson was - then under a minute later let slip the farm was bought for tax purposes.

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… 

[Dougy]

If i personally needed to save money the 1st thing i would do is STOP giving it away. !!! I wouldn't ask my neighbour for donations. 

 

We give away around £4.5 Billion away each year in aid to different country's  

 

Correction £14 billion

Edited November 19 by Dougy

[shaun4860]

4 hours ago, amateur said:

 

To be lectured by an ex-civil servant that our "riches" should distributed to the "poor" (probably not as poor as many of our grandparents were in the 1930s) is rich.

Don’t forget a rather well off ex civil servant 🤔

 

[shaun4860]

5 hours ago, oowee said:

There are some farms caught up in this yes. It’s only a very small number of farms 

The Liebour govt says it will raise £520 million a year.

Hardly a “very small number of farms”

 

[JohnfromUK]

7 hours ago, Lloyd90 said:

what’s his agenda?

Simple; it makes TV he can sell - and very profitably.

7 hours ago, Lloyd90 said:

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.

The NHS for one, it provide a vital, but costly service, and is a 'way of life' for a great many (staff and patients).

 

[button]

7 hours ago, Lloyd90 said:

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… 

He didn't take it away he bought it

[TIGHTCHOKE]

7 minutes ago, button said:

He didn't take it away he bought it

And I bet whoever sold it was VERY glad of his money.

[JohnfromUK]

7 hours ago, Lloyd90 said:

Coal mines? Closed down

Off topic, but coal mines were subsidised for many years as a nationalised industry and though individual mines were closed for individual reasons, safety, geology, water ingress, worked out being some, - but as an 'industry' - it became undependable and a national liability due to strikes.

If it was still there today, it would be in the process of being closed for environmental reasons, which is a whole other topic!

[TIGHTCHOKE]

2 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

Off topic, but coal mines were subsidised for many years as a nationalised industry and though individual mines were closed for individual reasons, safety, geology, water ingress, worked out being some, - but as an 'industry' - it became undependable and a national liability due to strikes.

If it was still there today, it would be in the process of being closed for environmental reasons, which is a whole other topic!

STOP being so damned sensible, your logical approach will not work with many peoples agendas.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Good old Clarkson, the interview with that bloody Victoria Derbyshire for BBC Newsnight was VERY telling.

 

I strongly suspect that every sensible farming family in the  country will be seeking the help of tax experts and putting their land in to trusts and hoping to live for 7 years.

One benefit is it might make farming suicides stop for a few (7) years.

 

One thing about this whole debacle is the massive difference in numbers of farms affected.

The Government and the Chancellor seem to feel very few farms will actually be troubled, BUT they also say the move will raise and awful lot of money, it CAN'T be both?

[TIGHTCHOKE]

"The Country Land and Business Association (CLA) say that as many as 70,000 farms could be affected, a figure that has been backed by the Liberal Democrats and appears to have been calculated from Defra's Farm Business Survey, which suggested between 30% and 35% of the 209,000 farms in the UK could be valued at more than £1m."

 

"The National Farmers’ Union (NFU) says the plan to combine APR with business property relief (BPR), which covers things such as grain and machinery, with a single allowance of £1m before inheritance tax, means more farms will be affected.

It said elderly farmers are in the “cruellest predicament" as they may not live for another seven years to take advantage of exemptions for gifting assets."

[JohnfromUK]

1 hour ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

many peoples agendas

But mine's not an 'agenda'.  Mine is facts!  😜

Although I do have a (small) amount of farmland, mine is well below the value where the new IHT will cut in, so I have no personal change in tax liabilities on my estate from this issue, so no 'personal' agenda.

[JohnfromUK]

55 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

The Government and the Chancellor seem to feel very few farms will actually be troubled, BUT they also say the move will raise and awful lot of money, it CAN'T be both?

Correct - and part of the explanation lies in Starmers claim that tax begins an estate value of over £3M.  As I explained in the second last post on the previous page - that is not the case for a great many people, and is a very exceptional circumstances.  MOST estates will start paying from a much lower level.

IF it is only very few, why do it?   Like adding VAT to private education (which is predicted to raise near nothing net) it is jealousy, spite and socialist dogma, NOT sound economics that is driving these changes.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

6 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

But mine's not an 'agenda'.  Mine is facts!  😜

Although I do have a (small) amount of farmland, mine is well below the value where the new IHT will cut in, so I have no personal change in tax liabilities on my estate from this issue, so no 'personal' agenda.

Yes I quite agree, my point was about "other peoples agendas"

[Penelope]

14 hours ago, JohnfromUK said:

I don't believe it is a small number - and nor do the NFU.

It is very expensive (another un-necessary expense) to have to keep taking expensive legal and financial advice because Gov't keeps changing rules.  Avoiding tax (legally avoiding, NOT evading) should not require continuous bleeding of funds into setting up complex legal measures that just loose more money from hard pressed businesses and benefit the legal and accountancy professions.

 

Neither do DEFRA.

[button]

2 hours ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

And I bet whoever sold it was VERY glad of his money.

Exactly and they would have to pay the appropriate taxes, there is a lot who just suffer envy of others success and wealth, sad really

[39TDS]

What doesn't seem to get much of a mention is that this tax will lead to the breakup of farms. There is no way to pay this tax other than to sell off some of the land, it is all very well saying it can be paid over 10 years but that is at 9% interest. Farm returns would mean that debt makes the farm unviable and in many cases that loss of land would make the farm unviable.

When they get broken up some will be bought by bigger farms but a significant amount will still be bought by rich people wanting somewhere nice to live. More often than not these people don't farm the land, they just want it to look pretty so stick a few sheep in there or a Highland cow or even just keep it mown off regularly. So all this land is now taken out of food production along with that which gets "rewilded", BNG etc.

It is inevitable that this is going to lead to much less food production in this country, more reliance on imported food. I can not see any likelihood of this leading to anything other than very big food price rises and food shortages. Then there will be riots.

I think this is a route we were already on as farming is struggling to make ends meet. Introducing this tax is going to accelerate the process very quickly. It may remove a loophole for the very rich to protect their money but they will inevitably find a new one meanwhile you have destroyed the industry that provides your food. A spiteful shortsighted tax

The claims that farmers should contribute this tax to help the NHS is fanciful. The £500m it is supposed to raise is the NHS budget for just one day, it won't make a difference at all. If the NHS was given twice that amount it would be swallowed up with no noticeable difference and they would still ask for more. Seems ironic to me they claim to be trying to protect the Holy cow of the NHS by killing off the farming industry.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

12 minutes ago, button said:

Exactly and they would have to pay the appropriate taxes, there is a lot who just suffer envy of others success and wealth, sad really

This is unfortunately EXACTLY what the labour Government are guilty of.

[ShootingEgg]

2 hours ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

with a single allowance of £1m before inheritance tax, means more farms will be affected

Owning two tractors and a combine hits that 1m.. before land, buildings the farm house etc is the added on. So labour and there followers saying this doesn't effect many is total and utter rubbish 

[oowee]

9 hours ago, shaun4860 said:

The Liebour govt says it will raise £520 million a year.

Hardly a “very small number of farms”

 

How many of the £520m are farms? 

 

3 minutes ago, 39TDS said:

What doesn't seem to get much of a mention is that this tax will lead to the breakup of farms. There is no way to pay this tax other than to sell off some of the land, it is all very well saying it can be paid over 10 years but that is at 9% interest. Farm returns would mean that debt makes the farm unviable and in many cases that loss of land would make the farm unviable.

When they get broken up some will be bought by bigger farms but a significant amount will still be bought by rich people wanting somewhere nice to live. More often than not these people don't farm the land, they just want it to look pretty so stick a few sheep in there or a Highland cow or even just keep it mown off regularly. So all this land is now taken out of food production along with that which gets "rewilded", BNG etc.

It is inevitable that this is going to lead to much less food production in this country, more reliance on imported food. I can not see any likelihood of this leading to anything other than very big food price rises and food shortages. Then there will be riots.

I think this is a route we were already on as farming is struggling to make ends meet. Introducing this tax is going to accelerate the process very quickly. It may remove a loophole for the very rich to protect their money but they will inevitably find a new one meanwhile you have destroyed the industry that provides your food. A spiteful shortsighted tax

The claims that farmers should contribute this tax to help the NHS is fanciful. The £500m it is supposed to raise is the NHS budget for just one day, it won't make a difference at all. If the NHS was given twice that amount it would be swallowed up with no noticeable difference and they would still ask for more. Seems ironic to me they claim to be trying to protect the Holy cow of the NHS by killing off the farming industry.

Land is being taken from farming now precisely because of its tax advantages. 

[TIGHTCHOKE]

1 minute ago, ShootingEgg said:

Owning two tractors and a combine hits that 1m.. before land, buildings the farm house etc is the added on. So labour and there followers saying this doesn't effect many is total and utter rubbish 

It would appear so.

[oowee]

3 minutes ago, ShootingEgg said:

Owning two tractors and a combine hits that 1m.. before land, buildings the farm house etc is the added on. So labour and there followers saying this doesn't effect many is total and utter rubbish 

It does not mean they pay IHT. Lots of chomping on the bit here without a lot of knowledge. 

[TIGHTCHOKE]

This is interesting;

TTK is stating that the BBC are backing the Farm IHT issue.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/11/19/tractor-protest-live-inheritance-tax-raid-clarkson/