To ask why you support the farmers, regarding inheritance tax?

[WheresFluffy]

Just that, really.
I'm interested to know why people support, or not, the farmers regarding the inheritance tax changes.

YABU - it's been done to death
YANBU - learning why people believe things is important.

I 100% them. I've found most who don't have little understanding of the way farming and inheritance tax works. All the mention of new land rovers and massive cash bank balances must come from people who have never met a farmer.

If farms are sold to pay IHT they risk being hoovered up by big conglomerates, for whom food quality and countryside management are very very low on the priority list behind profit. And the more of them there are the more clout they'll have. Anyone fancy an Amercian style system of food standards? Not me!

I care about the countryside, and responsible food production, and also (seems melodramatic but with climate change will be increasingly important) the stability and self-sufficiency of the food supply chain.

@Spl3ndid
I also mention that if the farmer was single the threshold would be lower. The highest threshold only applies if there are two of you either married or in a CP.

I don't support the ones protesting.

Starmer isnt stupid. He doesnt want farms closing so hes presumably costed it and these wealthier farmers can afford it.

In general, I don't think family farms should be taxed. If they want to weed out people who buy up land and call themselves farmers whilst not actually using the land for farming, couldn't it be a condition for example that the farm needs to sell a certain amount of produce each year in order to be exempt from inheritance tax? Or that the farm needs to stay in the family for at least a further 7 years, or else it will be liable for IHT. If a farm is genuinely being farmed and is being passed down from one generation of farmers to the next, I believe it should be exempt.

*unsync *

I completely agree with all your points. This attack on the easy target (in the general public's eyes) is so shortsighted.

The idea that all this land sold off to pay IHT will be magically bought up by lovely responsible farmers who magically have the cash to do is so very naive.

A genuine family farm can avoid any liability using the generous allowances and the 7 year rule. Rich landowners have persuaded poorer people to campaign to protect their tax breaks.

I support them

We should jack IHT altogether. It’s raises a tiny amount in the scheme if things and imagine all the people who would come here and invest here if they didn’t have to pay IHT. That’s a growth policy.

Farming exists on the assumption the farm itself will be passed on down through families. They make fuck all money typically so as a business are deeply unattractive to anyone except the poor fuckers born into it.

this tax will fuck the whole industry into the hands of corporations and our food will be destroyed for profit even worse than now

Agree with this and support the farmers. I think a lot of this debate is bound up with the UK's (lack of) food culture and how messed up our general relationship with food and the rural landscape is - as a nation we just want cheap sustenance and don't really care where it comes from. There's little awareness of our food's origins, how much it costs to produce it, the relationship between farms and the supermarkets we purchase our food from, and the huge importance of food security. Personally I don't want U.K-owned farms being lost and most of the food I eat being produced by Monsanto.

I saw one farmer commenting to another that they put their farm in trust so it can be passed down the family and only cost about £900 to do. What are the downsides to a trust? I am genuinely interested

..and yet you opened a thread that was clearly titled and posted on it 🙃. Why would you do that?

No I don't support a tax break introduced by thatcher for the benefit of landowners
amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/nov/17/farmers-have-hoarded-land-for-too-long-inheritance-tax-will-bring-new-life-to-rural-britain

Broadly support them- if some rich "pretend farmers" are taking advantage of current IHT exemptions, then close that loophole, don't punish everyone. Locally grown food is in the interests of national security and emissions reduction and should be encouraged. They also haven't properly costed it out as it's clear they were scrabbling about at the last minute trying to scrape together some more policies for the budget, just like it didn't seem to occur to them that employers NI increases might affect their growth plans. I actually voted for the twats, Won't be doing that again.

What’s sad is that the James Dysons and Clarksons of this world, who bought their land purely to dodge inheritance tax, will put their assets in trust and avoid it. It is ordinary farmers who don’t earn much who will fail to succession plan and be stung by the tax.

It needs reworking so that people who are genuinely growing a proper amount of food on their land get tax relief and everyone else does not.

I support them because my horses need hay/feed, the hedges and verges need to be maintained as local authorities don't bother anymore, I don't want to see our beautiful countryside succumb to weeds in 2 years when the mega rich buy the land up for the tax breaks/meet net zero targets etc but don't bother maintaining it, I like eating good locally sourced food, I like the fact that in really bad weather the farmers clear the roads when the gritters can't get through, when there were fires locally in 2022 a farmer ploughed some waste land on fire that hadn't been maintained and therefore caught fire saving people's homes and potentially lives as firefighters couldn't leave the other jobs, I like seeing animals grazing in the countryside.

Yes.

One of our local farmers has had the farm in the family for several generations. He's now in his 70s. He and his son work very hard. If they have to pay inheritance tax when the farmer dies, they'll have to sell off a bit of the farm, probably making it unfeasible to keep going.

I don't appreciate my food security being messed with

If they wanted to stop people buying land to avoid inheritance tax a more nuanced rule could have been bought into play such as working farms don't pay inheritance tax they are like the teachers punishing the class because one or two children are acting like dicks

How does this cover the more common scenario that someone buys the land and then rents it to farmers?

I support them because I was in the industry as a farm worker/contractor. I also live in a semi-rural area so it affects where we live too. I worked mainly for SMEs in agriculture across the south and midands.

I think the IHT change is a poor policy as it stands. I am not against closing tax loopholes for very wealthy private non-farming investors who don't bother to rent to tenant farmers and hoard valuable agricultural land that could be used for food production, nor private non-farming investors buying a farm as a weekend getaway and leave the land fallow, or development businesses that sit on land passing it through shell companies trying to break agricultural ties by having sky high rents no one can afford so the council is forced to agree to planning other business activities. I don't even mind a sliding scale of IHT for large landowners who rent to farm tenants or leisure activities or other landowners who rent for camping etc.

I get that this could bring land prices down so those of us with the vocation could get a foot into farming but this will take some years to do. In the meantime many farmers who are just your normal average farmer not the brand new range rover set who will be utterly broken by this and while you could plan to hand it over to the next generation, it's a very dangerous business and few of us get the opportunity of knowing the exact date we will die so can't plan easily for it. Meantime those with mortgages outstanding will see dropping land values affecting their borrowing and be in negative equity.

As a country the UK populace is far removed from it's farming ancestors so our structures often leave out the rural industries or treat them as something distainful, or some kind of tourist novelty. There is little understanding for agriculture as an industry by the people who make the laws regardless of party.

Agriculture is extremely high pressured, subject to the vagaries of weather, global politics, and supply and demand. Farmers are accused of being grabby but yet the middlemen who buy for the supermarkets use thumbscrew tactics to squeeze every last drop of profit for shareholders in the food retail businesses and food processors don't often get called greedy or grabby just doing their job. I'm not having a go at shareholders either but this business structure in our food business causes untold misery for those who produce food.

The SME farmer is the bottom of the pile and a public who think they should just sell off some land just don't seem to get that food producers going out of business or producing less directly affects them. Not only does it affect food prices, it affects our health, the places we live, and even our eco system.

We are on the brink of a world war again, how we will be affected I don't know but food security is one of the keys to our nation surviving especially as islands, we are incredibly easily cut off. We are an increasing population, our food supply is affected already by war and global politics, this is absolutely no time to be losing farmers.

With the allowance, I can't see how many of your SME customers will be anywhere near the required value to pay. If they do because the land they sit on, is currently valued way above it's true value then it does need something to address it. Removing IHT and looking at how big finance and multi national companies have bought up UK land is required.

A good example would be tate and lyle. Why should the UK taxpayer be paying a ltd company millions annually in subsidy payments.

On what basis do you think this? Data, please

I support them because I like living in a rural area, and if farming land ends up being broken up and sold off, it will be built on. Our countryside is vital for food production, wildlife habitats and ecological balance - it must be protected.

Other family businesses pay so why not farmers. Starmers got it right.

Why will they? They have 10 years tax free to pay it off?