Jeremy Clarkson is damaging farmers

Why didn’t you say all that in the first place instead of blethering about Jeremy.

As a farmer I’m not happy to have Clarkson as a self appointed spokesman. His program has done some good, but imo he needs to pipe down on this issue.

Please, please can we stop trotting out the idea that lower land prices will enable wannabe farmers to get a foothold. It simply won’t happen because of the huge capital investment required.

Farmers have, and will continue to diversify since time immemorial. The new APR ruling along with moves on business relief will cause succession planning headaches which we have to accept and work with.

Ironically the introduction of APR has brought in the likes of Clarkson and Dyson and is a contributing factor to rising land prices. Rollover I believe is a bigger trigger.

Rising land values do not benefit farmers until they wish to sell, and are set to become a liability on death.

Also, fed up of the advice to just hand it on. It’s not that simple. You can not benefit from assets you’ve handed on. There is no money for handers on to pay rent to the next generation. Not to mention the possibility of divorce, illness, falling out with next generation. Many farmers have a tale of how handing on early led to loss of land and hardship after a divorce int the next generation.

My belief is that farming has been going through extraordinary changes in the last few decades. This latest is part of a wider social and economic change.

Successive governments have failed to address this, disappointingly this government is following suit. Brexit has been catastrophic. And before you pile on, the widely accepted figure is that 53% of farmers who vote voted leave. Which means 47% did not, apparently 45% voted remain. Not so v different from 52/48.

It appears there is no coherence: do we want food security? Do we want to minimise food miles? Have nutritious food with known provenance? Do we wish to move away from mono cropping? Towards a more sustainable way of farming? How do we want our countryside to look? What is it for?

The polarisation of rural and urban, rich bastard farmers can pay serves no one. I think it’s unarguable that those of have bought land as a tax advantageous investment should be targeted. Current proposals are going to have a disproportionate effect on those who
can least afford it.

As someone with no experience of farming and only a vague understanding of what a hard life it must be I found Clarksons farm really enlightening. He freely admits it's not hard for him cos he has other incomes (Amazon). He's really opened my eyes to farmers struggles.

I couldn't bear him before his farm show.. in this he came across as quite humble and keen to help other farmers, despite being a total buffoon at times.

I really can't see how he's done anything but help.

Ive always found him fuuny.

What of it? You know some wealthy farmers. Most are not.

It’s a cliche on here. The working class girl who now earns a ‘six figure salary’. Are you sniffy about her and her wealth.

Lots of farmers with kids at private school in Suffolk as well as Cornwall

The ones who can't afford that are also highly unlikely to be affected by the inheritance tax

I don’t know anyone like that round here.

Due to the politics of envy, rather than actually sensible well thought logical politics.

Totally agree. He may be a total knob but I personally have learnt more about farming since his show started

Exactly. This is what people don't understand and why Clarkson has done such a good job for increasing public awareness of the problems faced by farmers. When the crop is ready for harvesting, it's ready - that day! You can't do it a week earlier or a week later. All the conditions have to be right, i.e. the crop itself, the weather, etc. You really can't wait for "Farmer Giles" over the other side of the valley to finish harvesting his fields (and his neighbours) before he comes over to do yours! Farmers WILL share equipment, there are also self employed combine owners/drivers who a farmer can hire in, so there is an element of sharing of equipment, but it's still highly limited (and more expensive to hire someone's equipment especially if you have to hire it every year for decades where it would end up costing far more than buying your own - as they can last decades!).

Yes, it looks crazy that there will be hundreds of combine harvesters sat idle in barns for several months of the year, but that's just the nature of it!

You could say the same of snowploughs parked up in airports, waiting for the two or three days per year when there's heavy snow. Or the snow ploughs in railway sidings for 11 months of the year.

Farmers make their contribution by providing food for the country, most of the time for no profit. If they have to start selling land, it becomes unviable for growing crops/produce/keeping cattle on. And then they lose so much money they can't afford ot keep running it as a farm. It is a lot more complicated than just diversifying. And this isn't just a business. These farms have often been in the family for hundreds of years. The farmers have worked on them 24/7 all their lives. It isn't a job to them. It is their very way of life. A way of life that they are now at risk of losing.

Let's face it, it is Labour that is damaging farmers (and the private sector in general).

derxa

Where do you get your information? Farmers are a hugely varied breed

From the Cornish farmers we know/have known. Two lots who had children in our daughter’s class at independent school (their 4 other children between them were also at independents). One farmed between Truro and Falmouth and the other a big dairy and beef farm on The Roseland with additional holiday let complex. Another with an organic beef business on the South Coast.

Didn't want for anything. I expect their on paper income was derisory (one in particular used to openly laugh about that).

Clarksons bleating is a spectacular own goal for farmers.

The whinging ‘poor me, nobody works as hard as meeeeee’ rhetoric is boring. My father is a farmer, both sets of grandparents were farmers and my golden balls brother and multiple other male cousins are now farmers. All with large farms on prime land.

Without exception, none of them have a mortgage and all live in expensively finished, new build houses. The kids have ponies and are all presented with new cars on their 17th birthdays. My niece’s prom dress cost £900…. ( she’s 15)

Brand new cars and jeeps every year. Farm labourers employed so they can have weekends and holidays off. My brother and his family are currently in Lapland, having had 2 weeks in the Med during the summer.

Farmers love to whinge-I’ve listened to it my whole life and I am currently loving winding my cousins up about about their tax bills 😁

Of course I do think that sone of the inheritance raised should be specially targeted at the farming industry in general - so much is expected , many are living socially isolated lives with low incomes and expected to adapt to climate change and we need to improve uk food security

Perhaps the take form the ultra rich farms and give to the poor ones would be more acceptable message as well

@MoreDangerousThanAWomanScorned isn’t business relief taxed at 20% above the exemption level

Mixed blessing, I think- he's a great spokesman and has done a huge amount to raise awareness of the difficulties farmers face. Yet he's also an illustration of why the IHT change was brought in.

As I understand it most (real) farmers would be happy with a change that catches people making a purely financial investment but not genuine family farms. One suggestion is that there should be no IHT on death but if the person who inherits the land then sells it within a specified period (10 years say), the tax would become payable- good explainer here https://taxpolicy.org.uk/2024/11/24/how-to-stop-iht-avoidance-but-protect-farmers/
If JC could get behind this as a workable compromise- protecting farmers but not tax avoiders- that would give it a better chance.

''Organise collective buying and collective machinery sharing.''

This is a great idea in principle, but generally all the wheat in one area tends to be ready to harvest in the same short period, so all the machinery would be needed at the same time. If its dry enough to harvest but the forecast is rain, you can't imagine the pressure this would cause.

I find it hard to think of a farm worth less than a million!

If, and it's a big IF, there's a problem with current IHT laws, then change the law to target the "rich" playing at being farmers and protect the genuine family farms. It's not rocket science.

Protect the genuine family farms? Like applying it only to farms worth over £3 million if they include a family home owned by a couple, levying it at 20% over the £3 million rather than the 40% all other family businesses pay and giving 10 years to pay it?

Jeremy is probably one of the few farmers who will be impacted by inheritance tax .. upwards of 3 million in practise when around only a third of farms are valued over 1 million ?

The majority of farmers , especially those with smaller farms and smaller incomes , won't be affected but as always with inheritance tax it seems to trigger irrational responses