Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

The FACTS about the farming IHT issues

343 replies

notanothernamechange24 · 26/11/2024 15:52

Decided to write a post to kind of myth bust a lot of what is being said around the agricultural Inheritance Tax issue. Because this issue is important to EVERYONE and will affect all of us.
It’s going to be a long post but please read it in full.

What has changed?
So with the budget the government has removed both APR relief and BPR relief from all businesses.
APR = Agricultural Property Relief - this covers the land, the buildings and the farmhouse.
BPR = Business Property Relief - this covers the machinery, equipment, livestock, consumables such as seed and fertiliser and crop in the ground.
Now the first million of combined assets from both APR and BPR is IHT free and anything over 1 million is taxed at 20%.
Under certain conditions it MIGHT be possible for SOME farms to get up to 3 million tax free. But that doesn't work for all. It’s a case of if your circumstances meet the exact criteria your ok if not you won’t get the full 3 million.

When the government talk about 500 farms per year being affected they are only talking about the APR proportion of the tax. They have deliberately excluded talking about the fact that BPR is also included and taxed.

The NFU are saying that 75% of family farms will be affected.

• it will also include a significant number of tenant farmers as they still will be affected by BPR.
BPR will also affect a number of other industries as well.
Haulage firms, Contractors and any businesses with high asset values comparative to income will be badly affected.

At the same time subsidies are being cut by 70% in some cases
Tax on fertiliser is going up by £50 per ton.
Tax on domestic vehicles is going up over 200%
NI for employers is going up.

Why shouldn't farmers pay tax like every other business?
Because quite simply farming doesn't work like any other business does. Most businesses work out their pricing by working out the cost of production + profit and tax. They are in control of who they sell to. When component prices go up so to does the selling price.
Farming doesn't work like that. Farmers have little to no control over prices.
The combination of global markets, supermarket competition and subsidized food control the prices.
At the same time input costs and yields are not controllable either. Weather conditions play a huge role in how good the harvest is. Unless you are able to grow all your feed for your livestock there can be huge variation year to year on feed prices.

Farming is a high asset value to low income business. It is unique purely because it is a rubbish business model. But it is a necessary business. Without it quite simply we would have no food.

Why do farms make so little return?

A lot of the foods you buy are subsidised by the government and has been for decades.
if we had to pay the full costs we would have an even more serious poverty issue than we have already.

After the war in the 1950s we had a serious issue with malnutrition and issues like rickets. Food was short and expensive. The country on its knees after the horrors of the 1940s. In order to combat that the government subsidised lots of essential foods. So the public were paying artificially low prices for things like milk. They then paid the farmers a subsidy to partially make up the shortfall

For context in the 1980s people were paying approximately 25% of their household income on average on food.
Today it is approximately 13% so half.

A pint of milk was equal to two pints of beer
Now beer per pint is 13 x more expensive than a pint of milk.

If people want farmers to go back to paying IHT then they will need to double what they pay for food.

Can you afford that? Can everyone you know afford it?

It’s important to note too that even with subsidies farmers still do not get the full value of what they produce.

What about people buying land to avoid paying tax?
The likes of Clarkson and Dyson buying land is a red herring. That land is still in the business production of food. It's doing what's needed.

Many many big landowners rent agricultural land out at very reasonable rates for tenant farmers. They do so because they don't need the money for the rent (it needs to cover its cost not much more) because the payoff comes in the form of reduced IHT.

I personally know a farmer who rented land for 17 years from a landowner. Then when landowner was considering selling up he sold it to the farmer at a really good price and guaranteed the farmers mortgage!

That said though this budget will do nothing to deter those who seek to reduce their IHT bill as it will still be the cheapest way of reducing IHT bill.

But farmers voted for Brexit
farmers voted for brexit in no greater numbers percentage wise than any other profession.
Don't make sweeping judgments without actually knowing the FACTS.

Farmers are no more responsible for brexit than any other profession

What about Gifting the farm?

The trouble is you don't know when you're going to die.
If you gift it on then you can't benefit from the farm in anyway after that. So you can't pass it on and remain living in the farmhouse for example. Even if the person you pass it on to is also living there.

And what if people don't die in the right order. Farming is considered to be the most dangerous profession in the UK now. What if the oldest generation pass it on and the younger generation die first?

Putting land in trusts is also complicated. For large landowners that is probably what they will do. So therefore the very wealthy will still avoid IHT.

But for the majority of farms putting it in a trust doesn’t work because once it’s in a trust you can’t borrow against it. So you can’t raise a loan or mortgage against it. This will slow or halt development and progression.

What are the potential consequences of this?
If we lose too many family farms due to this tax then they are likely gone forever. Other farmers won’t be able to buy up all the available land - they simply don’t have the money especially now.

If food production here reduces we become even more vulnerable to the instability of global markets.
At best it would mean price hikes at worst if there were to be another major war or global disaster we could have serious food shortages. You only have to think back to the panic in 2020 with covid to see the potential for chaos.

The predicted income from this tax is approximately 500million a year.
We are currently sending 536million a year abroad to develop agriculture in other parts of the world. Brazil being one of the largest recipients of our money - Brazil is the 11th largest economy in the world.

Stop sending more money abroad and leave farmers alone

OP posts:
Thread gallery
13
quantumbutterfly · 26/11/2024 20:13

quantumbutterfly · 26/11/2024 19:54

The food supply chain deals with products that are not only highly regulated for consumer safety, they often have a finite shelf life for the same reasons and are stocked on a 'just in time' basis. It is as much of a nightmare to run smoothly as it is to manage the national grid.

The general public used to be much more aware of what harvest time meant to the UK but have been so distanced from the reality of production that they don't know when it is.

Farming is the historical reason we have daylight saving time and 6 week summer holidays.

During wwll people were encouraged to use potatoes as a staple carbohydrate as it was a more efficient use of land but monoculture is a dangerous risk (remember the colorado beetle scare in the 70's - there's a reason why Australia is so hot on biosecurity).

Blips in the supply chain such as panic buying (covid), distribution issues (Evergreen container ship blocking the Suez canal), supply issues (one of the largest grain producers in the world Ukraine being at war) cause major headaches for the people behind the scenes but all most people notice is that shelves are empty and prices change.

notanothernamechange24 · 26/11/2024 20:15

ladydiggins · 26/11/2024 19:51

Out of interest - pre Brexit, how much EU subsidy was the average farm receiving? Anyone know how much that has changed post Brexit?

There's a hell of a lot of hyperbole about how UK farms keep the UK fed lately. The UK hasn't been self-sufficient in terms of food production since well before WW2.

More recently, UK self-sufficiency on 'indigenous produce' (ie turnips/cabbage/spuds etc) was running at 75%. Other produce at 61%.

It is a fallacy that UK farmers keep the nation fed. Haven't done for decades, if not centuries.

Here's an interesting article on a 'hard-working hill-farmer' prominent on the recent protest.

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/protesting-farmer-profiled-by-the-times-is-retired-stockbroker-who-chaired-london-stock-exchange-386392/

Make of that what you will.

We are never going to be able to be 100% self sufficient.
We simply can't produce enough food in a relatively small space for the population. And certainly not for a population that wants to eat whatever they want whenever they want.

But are you seriously suggesting that reducing food production in the UK and becoming even more reliant on foreign imports is a sensible move?
Especially under current global conditions?

We have already seen the effects of short term transportation and food supply issues. Anyone remember 2020?

OP posts:
skippy67 · 26/11/2024 20:16

EasternStandard · 26/11/2024 18:12

Don't you benefit from higher food security?

Err, yeah probably. And farmers should pay their share of tax. Just like everyone else.

quantumbutterfly · 26/11/2024 20:16

notanothernamechange24 · 26/11/2024 20:15

We are never going to be able to be 100% self sufficient.
We simply can't produce enough food in a relatively small space for the population. And certainly not for a population that wants to eat whatever they want whenever they want.

But are you seriously suggesting that reducing food production in the UK and becoming even more reliant on foreign imports is a sensible move?
Especially under current global conditions?

We have already seen the effects of short term transportation and food supply issues. Anyone remember 2020?

.....and certainly not for an exponentially expanding population that expands onto agricultural land.

ARealitycheck · 26/11/2024 20:17

The combined threshold for a single landowner is around £1.35m for a couple £3m and is transferable when one partner dies.

The suggested clause on eg ten years for tenanted ground would be to easy to abuse imo.

notanothernamechange24 · 26/11/2024 20:19

Clavinova · 26/11/2024 19:52

ARealitycheck
I note the OP commented on tenant famers a couple of times. Well for one they won't be affected by IHT

The Tenant Farmers Association have a template letter to send to their MPs;

Impact of Budget Measures on Inheritance Tax for the Let Sector of Agriculture

An unintended consequence of the announced changes to Inheritance Tax reliefs in the Chancellor of the Exchequer's recent Budget statement is that it leaves many family tenanted farms in a precarious position. Landlords of tenant farmers who are having to consider their new inheritance tax position may seek to terminate tenancies where they can to mitigate any tax liability or even secure sufficient funds to pay any future tax when it arises. In addition, for fear of increasing the value of their estates, landlords will stop investing in their holdings for the benefit of the land and its productivity.

The Tenant Farmers Association (TFA) has been lobbying for mitigating measures to be included and I would ask you to consider supporting the measures being proposed by the TFA in your work within Parliament. These measures are as follows:

  • Increase the combined APR/BPR threshold from £1 million to £2 million
  • Allow the combined APR/BPR threshold to be transferable between spouses and civil partners.
  • Allow landlords to include within their zero rate band for Inheritance Tax the value of any land subject to a secure tenancy under the Agricultural Holdings Act 1986 or under a Farm Business Tenancy of 10 years or more which do not contain scheduled, unconditional break clauses.

There has been some positive progress by the sounds of things today.

One suggestion that has been floated is similar to this and goes slightly further in that if a landowner sells his land to a long term tenant who is earning a living off the land there could be tax breaks for them. Almost like rent to buy schemes.

Which really would be a win win for landowners and tenants

I think there is now some room for very cautious optimism.

OP posts:
ARealitycheck · 26/11/2024 20:21

notanothernamechange24 · 26/11/2024 20:15

We are never going to be able to be 100% self sufficient.
We simply can't produce enough food in a relatively small space for the population. And certainly not for a population that wants to eat whatever they want whenever they want.

But are you seriously suggesting that reducing food production in the UK and becoming even more reliant on foreign imports is a sensible move?
Especially under current global conditions?

We have already seen the effects of short term transportation and food supply issues. Anyone remember 2020?

You keep telling us (despite not being a farmer and not having a business even connected to agriculture) that production will reduce if this poor much maligned multi million £ business has to part with some tax money. Have you any proof of the likelihood of this?

Your quote 'We have already seen the effects of short term transportation and food supply issues. Anyone remember 2020?' You mean during covid a totally unique issue that affected everything, not just food. Do you actually remember going hungry during that time?

Another2Cats · 26/11/2024 20:37

EuclidianGeometryFan · 26/11/2024 19:02

@notanothernamechange24
Are you able to answer this? what happened to multi-generational farms before the IHT break came in?

@lljkk

Inheritance taxes (previously estate duty or capital transfer tax) have long been a burden to many land owners.

For example, many of the stately homes now owned by the National Trust were passed to them as the inheritors could not afford to pay the relevant tax and so were gifted to the nation in lieu of the tax.

For example, from 1949, there was a progressive tax rate.

If you inherited an estate worth £35,000 in 1949 (about £1 million in today's money) then the tax rate was 21% on the whole amount.

It varied from estates worth less than £2,000 (£60,000 today) paid nothing up to estates worth more than £1 million (£30 million today) paying 80% tax.

[Finance Act 1949, Seventh Schedule]

But, even here, there was also a reduction given for agricultural property (there was a 45% discount).

[Finance Act 1949, Section 28]

The Atlee government certainly changed taxation of assets to a great extent but even they recognised that farmers were a special case.
.

Then along came Denis Healey in 1975 (totally off-topic but he had a really interesting history, with his time in the army - see his obituary).

I think it was likely that it was Denis Healey who first came up with the quote:

"In practice, however, the [inheritance tax] has always been a largely avoidable, indeed, a voluntary, tax."

[Hansard, 26 March 1974]

This was the origin of lifetime transfers being taxable (PETs), although back then it was only three years and not seven.

But even here, the Labour government gave farmers a tax free allowance of £250k (£1.9 million in today's money) under the Finance Act 1975, Schedule Eight.

If the Labour government of Harold Wilson with Denis Healey as Chancellor gave farmers an extra tax free allowance of £1.9 million equivalent then that is likely the least that the present government could do.
.

But going back to the 1970s gives another idea of why farmers were more likely to be able to afford this back then - the EEC (today, the EU).

More specifically the "Common Agricultural Policy" (CAP).

Britain joined the EEC in 1973 and this was the period of emphasis on supporting farmers.

In 1985, 73% of the entire EEC budget was spent on supporting farmers via the CAP (thank France for this) and this was the era of the "butter mountain" and the "wine lake" where farmers were guaranteed minimum payments for their produce and given other subsidies.

By 2013, it had fallen to 37% of all EU expenditure.

The situation for farmers 40 years ago (or even 30 or 20 years ago) was very different indeed than it is today.

notanothernamechange24 · 26/11/2024 20:40

@ARealitycheck it's already happening on a big scale in the US

www.morningbrew.com/stories/investment-firms-are-buying-more-farmland

There are multiple projects going on in Scotland at present. Prime farmland bought for reforestation - which initially sounds positive but it is taking productive land out of agriculture and food production. Therefore it's reducing our ability to produce food, driving prices up and increasing our demand on foreign imports.

It would be foolish to believe that available farmland here in the UK wouldn't be bought by the likes of BP, Shell, Amazon just to name a few to offset their carbon emissions.

OP posts:
JusteanBiscuits · 26/11/2024 20:41

notanothernamechange24 · 26/11/2024 18:40

The average you quote includes small holdings and small parcels of land that are not producing food on scale or providing a viable income for the owner.

There will be few viable farms that are valued below 2 million

It also includes the other end of the spectrum. The multi multi million pound swathes of farming land owned by millionaires avoiding IHT, Oxford / Cambridge colleges etc.

User14March · 26/11/2024 20:41

@hairbearbunches if I will the lotto tonight can I buy a country estate & sidestep all future IHT by letting Crown oversee my land?

quantumbutterfly · 26/11/2024 20:41

ARealitycheck · 26/11/2024 20:21

You keep telling us (despite not being a farmer and not having a business even connected to agriculture) that production will reduce if this poor much maligned multi million £ business has to part with some tax money. Have you any proof of the likelihood of this?

Your quote 'We have already seen the effects of short term transportation and food supply issues. Anyone remember 2020?' You mean during covid a totally unique issue that affected everything, not just food. Do you actually remember going hungry during that time?

Edited

You're right, we have an obesity crisis, maybe food should be less available/more expensive.

Clavinova · 26/11/2024 20:41

ladydiggins
Here's an interesting article on a 'hard-working hill-farmer' prominent on the recent protest
Make of that what you will

I've just read elsewhere that his family bought the farm in 1929.

WhitegreeNcandle · 26/11/2024 20:42

skippy67 · 26/11/2024 20:16

Err, yeah probably. And farmers should pay their share of tax. Just like everyone else.

fab. Pay a fair cost for the product. I’ve said here before I’m on a link contract with a supermarket. They know all our costs and fix a price based on that. If our costs go up our price goes up. So it’s like a guaranteed margin. Lots of things like this are great but you can guarantee the cost they use is the NMW. They don’t include family and household labour. Call out fees for livestock emergencies at 2am.

Im actually a farmer who doesn’t necessarily disagree with this. I think it could be done much better but in theory if I’m going to inherit over 3 million then it’s only fair to spread a bit of that love. I do think it’ll be incredibly unfair for farmer 80+. I also think it highlights massively how farming is subsided by other farming incomes and some farmers not taking a true wage and working horrendous hours. k suspect some of those farms aren’t actually economically viable but that’s not an easy thing to hear when it’s your lifetimes work and your family home.

interesting comments earlier in the thread about how farmer have it no harder than other essential jobs. We are our own worst enemy, we don’t take holidays, days off or expect our business to provide those things. There’s no such thing as paternity/mat leave for farmers. My dh had to work 3 nights in a row when our first ds was born. That’s not ok though and as farmers I’m not sure we should be saying it’s ok anymore. T

ARealitycheck · 26/11/2024 20:46

ladydiggins · 26/11/2024 19:51

Out of interest - pre Brexit, how much EU subsidy was the average farm receiving? Anyone know how much that has changed post Brexit?

There's a hell of a lot of hyperbole about how UK farms keep the UK fed lately. The UK hasn't been self-sufficient in terms of food production since well before WW2.

More recently, UK self-sufficiency on 'indigenous produce' (ie turnips/cabbage/spuds etc) was running at 75%. Other produce at 61%.

It is a fallacy that UK farmers keep the nation fed. Haven't done for decades, if not centuries.

Here's an interesting article on a 'hard-working hill-farmer' prominent on the recent protest.

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/protesting-farmer-profiled-by-the-times-is-retired-stockbroker-who-chaired-london-stock-exchange-386392/

Make of that what you will.

Let me just wring out my hanky for this poor man...
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/officers/iBGkA0mSeFVHu0P2dotsFp9BHOU/appointments 😂

John KEMP-WELCH personal appointments - Find and update company information - GOV.UK

Free company information from Companies House including registered office address, filing history, accounts, annual return, officers, charges, business activity

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/officers/iBGkA0mSeFVHu0P2dotsFp9BHOU/appointments

WhitegreeNcandle · 26/11/2024 20:47

Another2Cats · 26/11/2024 20:37

@lljkk

Inheritance taxes (previously estate duty or capital transfer tax) have long been a burden to many land owners.

For example, many of the stately homes now owned by the National Trust were passed to them as the inheritors could not afford to pay the relevant tax and so were gifted to the nation in lieu of the tax.

For example, from 1949, there was a progressive tax rate.

If you inherited an estate worth £35,000 in 1949 (about £1 million in today's money) then the tax rate was 21% on the whole amount.

It varied from estates worth less than £2,000 (£60,000 today) paid nothing up to estates worth more than £1 million (£30 million today) paying 80% tax.

[Finance Act 1949, Seventh Schedule]

But, even here, there was also a reduction given for agricultural property (there was a 45% discount).

[Finance Act 1949, Section 28]

The Atlee government certainly changed taxation of assets to a great extent but even they recognised that farmers were a special case.
.

Then along came Denis Healey in 1975 (totally off-topic but he had a really interesting history, with his time in the army - see his obituary).

I think it was likely that it was Denis Healey who first came up with the quote:

"In practice, however, the [inheritance tax] has always been a largely avoidable, indeed, a voluntary, tax."

[Hansard, 26 March 1974]

This was the origin of lifetime transfers being taxable (PETs), although back then it was only three years and not seven.

But even here, the Labour government gave farmers a tax free allowance of £250k (£1.9 million in today's money) under the Finance Act 1975, Schedule Eight.

If the Labour government of Harold Wilson with Denis Healey as Chancellor gave farmers an extra tax free allowance of £1.9 million equivalent then that is likely the least that the present government could do.
.

But going back to the 1970s gives another idea of why farmers were more likely to be able to afford this back then - the EEC (today, the EU).

More specifically the "Common Agricultural Policy" (CAP).

Britain joined the EEC in 1973 and this was the period of emphasis on supporting farmers.

In 1985, 73% of the entire EEC budget was spent on supporting farmers via the CAP (thank France for this) and this was the era of the "butter mountain" and the "wine lake" where farmers were guaranteed minimum payments for their produce and given other subsidies.

By 2013, it had fallen to 37% of all EU expenditure.

The situation for farmers 40 years ago (or even 30 or 20 years ago) was very different indeed than it is today.

Edited

Really interesting and useful post. Thank you.

ARealitycheck · 26/11/2024 20:48

WhitegreeNcandle · 26/11/2024 20:42

fab. Pay a fair cost for the product. I’ve said here before I’m on a link contract with a supermarket. They know all our costs and fix a price based on that. If our costs go up our price goes up. So it’s like a guaranteed margin. Lots of things like this are great but you can guarantee the cost they use is the NMW. They don’t include family and household labour. Call out fees for livestock emergencies at 2am.

Im actually a farmer who doesn’t necessarily disagree with this. I think it could be done much better but in theory if I’m going to inherit over 3 million then it’s only fair to spread a bit of that love. I do think it’ll be incredibly unfair for farmer 80+. I also think it highlights massively how farming is subsided by other farming incomes and some farmers not taking a true wage and working horrendous hours. k suspect some of those farms aren’t actually economically viable but that’s not an easy thing to hear when it’s your lifetimes work and your family home.

interesting comments earlier in the thread about how farmer have it no harder than other essential jobs. We are our own worst enemy, we don’t take holidays, days off or expect our business to provide those things. There’s no such thing as paternity/mat leave for farmers. My dh had to work 3 nights in a row when our first ds was born. That’s not ok though and as farmers I’m not sure we should be saying it’s ok anymore. T

This I agree with totally. Farms like other businesses should be looking at viability.

ARealitycheck · 26/11/2024 20:50

notanothernamechange24 · 26/11/2024 20:40

@ARealitycheck it's already happening on a big scale in the US

www.morningbrew.com/stories/investment-firms-are-buying-more-farmland

There are multiple projects going on in Scotland at present. Prime farmland bought for reforestation - which initially sounds positive but it is taking productive land out of agriculture and food production. Therefore it's reducing our ability to produce food, driving prices up and increasing our demand on foreign imports.

It would be foolish to believe that available farmland here in the UK wouldn't be bought by the likes of BP, Shell, Amazon just to name a few to offset their carbon emissions.

That doesn't actually say that the land is being taken out of production which is what I asked. It is supposition on your part.

notanothernamechange24 · 26/11/2024 20:51

@ARealitycheck Fantastic so you're happy to pay significantly more for your food then?

You're also happy for thousands of children in the UK to go hungry?

OP posts:
notanothernamechange24 · 26/11/2024 20:52

@ARealitycheck it doesn't take a genius to connect the dots 🙄

OP posts:
ARealitycheck · 26/11/2024 20:55

notanothernamechange24 · 26/11/2024 20:51

@ARealitycheck Fantastic so you're happy to pay significantly more for your food then?

You're also happy for thousands of children in the UK to go hungry?

As a previous poster pointed out, by and large we are all overweight so it may not be a totally bad thing foor prices increasing. As a youngster I recall dairy being expensive and veg and tattie being affordable, hence why it was a large part of our diet.

But remember when we are on about paying the cost of production. That farm that receives eg £100k a year subsidy loses that and it goes back into the pocket of the taxpayer.

notanothernamechange24 · 26/11/2024 21:01

@ARealitycheck no your talking about paying the true value of the food produced - not the cost. They are two different things which you seem to fail to understand.

If you pay a fair price for your food, farmers won't need subsidies. They will be making a fair price.

And whilst yes we do have an obesity crisis in the Uk the answer to that is not making good healthy foods more expensive.

And nor does making an obese person thinner help put food on the table for families who are already struggling with the cost of living.

OP posts:
quantumbutterfly · 26/11/2024 21:03

You do appreciate i was being sarcastic about obesity. The cheapest foods are often ultra processed and not particularly wholesome and quite probably contributing to obesity.

It's always stunned me that we talk about fair trade for farmers on the other side of the world but never on our doorstep.

.

ARealitycheck · 26/11/2024 21:12

notanothernamechange24 · 26/11/2024 21:01

@ARealitycheck no your talking about paying the true value of the food produced - not the cost. They are two different things which you seem to fail to understand.

If you pay a fair price for your food, farmers won't need subsidies. They will be making a fair price.

And whilst yes we do have an obesity crisis in the Uk the answer to that is not making good healthy foods more expensive.

And nor does making an obese person thinner help put food on the table for families who are already struggling with the cost of living.

Sorry I genuinely don't understand what you are getting at in this post. The cost to the man on the street is the only thing he is concerned about.

As an aside, a vast amount of so called food poverty and obesity could be aleviated by people cooking meals at home. We are far too reliant on takeaways and prepacked meals.

notanothernamechange24 · 26/11/2024 21:18

@ARealitycheck if you don't understand the difference between the cost of producing something and the price you should sell it for I can't help you!
It's really basic business sense.

And whilst I agree that people would be healthier if they are more home prepared meals. That's not a reality for thousands of people in the UK for all manner of reasons.

This isn't the ideal world we are talking about it's the real one and if food prices rise there will undoubtedly be many households either hungry, choosing between heating and eating or in debt!

OP posts:
Swipe left for the next trending thread