Far right attempting to subvert the farmers protests in London.

Given what’s happened in Europe and the likes of Clarkson’s “ethnic cleansing” comment it looks like it’s going to be eventful.

Whatever you think of the farmers concerns, if of kicks off no-one wins, least of all the farmers.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/nov/17/far-right-groups-plan-to-hijack-farmers-protest-in-london-against-tax-changes

If it’s anything like their previous organised process they’ll be about 50 people there or 5,000 according to GBeebies.

So they’ll have a protest, block the roads and we wont get the same level of criticism off GB news looking to arrest protestors like they were with JSO

And as for refusing to transport produce or meat. I dont think thats going o work as both are perishable goods, and also farmers and other such businesses would be hurt by those actions

But if they want to cut off their noses to spite their faces then go for it. When they lose a lot of income or face going out of business, they’ll only have themselves to blame and those smaller farms will be bought up by the giant farms

Is there a counter protest in support of IHT? Just heard on money box of a poor young shepherdess first generation farmer not sure how she’ll cope. With the £2mn farm bought for her by her parents.

It is amusing having Clarkson and his fellow celeb **** who having brought farms to dodge inheritance tax (clarkson even admits to it) and hence pushing up prices for actual farmers now are front and **** centre of protecting farmers from operating under the same rules as everyone else.

I wish they’d stop using the word farmers and call them what they are… landowners

An interesting article by Will Hutton in today’s Observer

Farmers have hoarded land for too long. Inheritance tax will bring new life to rural Britain

I wish the press would stop suggesting that everyone who lives in the countryside is a farmer or related to one, or works for one. About 1%* of the rural population is concerned with farming, the rest of us just live beside it.

* made up statistic by me, but you take my point.

I’m looking forward to the right wing campaign to defend South Asian shopkeepers from paying inheritance tax when they leave their business to their children.

I don’t understand why they expect to be treated differently from any other family business that is passed on.

I don’t understand why they expect to be treated differently from any other family business that is passed on.

Because they are farmers of course!

I mean its obvious and I am not sure why you are questioning the fact that the removal of a privilege isnt the same thing as actually attacking them. Lets skip over the minor detail they are still being treated better but just not quite as much as before.

I do hope the police are checking any tractors joining in a protest for red diesel since I am pretty sure whining about removal of partial privileges doesn’t count as a legitimate reason.

To be fair I guess many are annoyed that most of the side benefits of the bribes for French farmers no longer now apply post Brexit but perhaps the farming community might want to reflect on their general support for brexit.

Obviously there are plenty of poor sods caught up in it but overall I have the same sympathy as for people in living in Cornwall whining about how the EU schemes have vanished.

This isn’t just about farmers is it? There are changes to APR (Agricultural Property Relief) but also BPR (Business Property Relief).

Are we going to see businesses in general needing to borrow, take on shareholders, or sell off chunks? Or shut up shop completely because none of those are affordable from profits or result in the business no longer being viable due to missing key parts or being too small.

Can farm/business owners not gift their farms/business to their children when they retire.  Then if they live more than 7 years no IHT is due.  This doesn’t even feel dodgy – passing business on at retirement rather than death seems wholly reasonable

Am missing something obvious?

binnersFull Member
I wish they’d stop using the word farmers and call them what they are… landowners

An interesting article by Will Hutton in today’s Observer

Farmers have hoarded land for too long. Inheritance tax will bring new life to rural Britain

Christ, that’s something of an eye opener if it even vaguely resembles the truth on how few farmers will be effected by these changes?

The obvious thing you are missing is that farmers don’t have pensions. So they hold out until the end. If you gift the farm and still derive benefit, you will still have an interest and be liable to IHT. Perhaps they will now take out pensions and life assurance like the rest of us.

Will DC pensioners also be protesting that their pots when passed on will now be taxed for IHT and income tax on withdrawal?

made up statistic by me, but you take my point.

12 million people live in rural areas in England and 0.285 million work in agriculture. Thats 2.3%. As a percentage of the 68 million total, it’s 0.4%. Three million work in retail and another three million work in hospitality.

Can farm/business owners not gift their farms/business to their children when they retire.  Then if they live more than 7 years no IHT is due.  This doesn’t even feel dodgy – passing business on at retirement rather than death seems wholly reasonable

Am missing something obvious?

That works if you’re 65 today, but most owners will be older and made plans to hand over at death.

I heard that it was unwise to hand down to your 35 year old child at when you’re 65 because there’s a chance they could get divorced, losing half the farm in the process. Or all of it if selling half makes it too small to be viable.

Of course – it was something obvious I was missing.

B*stards voted for Brexit….my sympathy is limited…..specially Clarkson, Dyson, Windsor

And a fair few round here (anecdotal) aren’t farming other than turning their barns into light industrial or small office park

It is amusing having Clarkson and his fellow celeb **** who having brought farms to dodge inheritance tax (clarkson even admits to it)

I thought it slightly odd Clarkson got into farming – I just figured he knew the TopGear gig had had its hay day, so he did the Clarksons farm thing as a nice little TV show, earner into retirement, even if the farm doesn’t make money the TV show income would be enough to cover it plus some?

But it makes even more sense now! lol! and why he’s a bit angry about it!

The obvious thing you are missing is that farmers don’t have pensions.

That also applies to other businesses so why are farmers special?

Will DC pensioners also be protesting that their pots when passed on will now be taxed for IHT and income tax on withdrawal?

Unless I am missing something the change is to bring the farmers in line with those DC pensioners?

Which brings us back to the key point. Its not that farmers are being victimised but that one of their privilges is being withdrawn.

In no small part to the Clarksons and Dysons of this world who have gone into farming to protect themselves from the taxes mere mortals who aint farmers have to pay.

That also applies to other businesses so why are farmers special?

Well, yeah.. anyone who is self employed can choose, or not choose, to pay into a private pension, even in employment you can opt out of paying into the company pension provider if you really want to?…

And a fair few round here (anecdotal) aren’t farming other than turning their barns into light industrial or small office park

It’s called diversification: it’s what farmers were encouraged to do to make up for the loss of earnings from traditional farming practices, like sheep, crops, etc. For example, one might think that wool, as a natural, biodegradable material that doesn’t use petrochemicals, can be used to make a wide variety of clothing, and in the case of Herdwick sheep, which have a very coarse, wiry fleece, the fleece can be chopped up, mixed with a bio-resin and moulded into furniture. The truth is, farmers make bugger-all from wool, humans quite happily carry on buying synthetic fleeces which shed microfibres into the environment, into humans, and apparently into the air, which is affecting the weather, and us, because those microfibres are turning up in human brains.

Those complaining about farmers might look at which industry has the highest suicide rates nationally. And ask why that might be.

It’s also why many farmers are jumping at the chance to turn otherwise unproductive land, (why might it be unproductive, one might ask), and allow solar farms to be built on the fields. To the intense annoyance of the local NIMBIES who then start bleating on about the destruction of ‘their’ beautiful landscape, the loss of food producing land, blah, blah, blah, like the sheeple they are.
Putting solar panels across a field doesn’t destroy it, farmers often put sheep into the field to control the grass, and the sheep enjoy the protection from the weather. And the panels have a finite life, and will be removed leaving a grassy field behind. The income from the solar often means the difference between the survival of the farm, or it’s loss and another family farm broken up and sold to rich commercial concerns.

Christ, that’s something of an eye opener if it even vaguely resembles the truth on how few farmers will be effected by these changes?

Have a listen to the latest “The Rest Is Money” podcast to get the verdict of a tax expert on that very subject. Spoiler – it resembles the truth quite closely, few farmers are likely to be affected, the near-mythical “small family farm” outfits least of all. A lot of Reeves’ other tax changes get something of a hard time too.

12 million people live in rural areas in England and 0.285 million work in agriculture. Thats 2.3%. As a percentage of the 68 million total, it’s 0.4%. Three million work in retail and another three million work in hospitality.

Hang on. Apparently, there are 12M in predominantly rural local authorities. But of those 12M how many are economically active? So you need to take out all the under 16 year olds and the retirees…sure it’s not a huge proportion, but 2.3% doesn’t sound right. Plus there are many people who live in urban areas but work in agriculture or supporting it.

And 0.4% sounds wrong too. There are 27.8M economically active people in England and Wales, so using (presumably) the entire population of the UK at 68M as a denominator is a bit skewed!

I think it’s around 1% of the workforce from memory.

Clarkson is getting off on helping shine the light on farmers but always remember first and foremost he’s getting paid to make a television programme.

It doesn’t really have much in common with being an actual farmer.

He’s waxing on about buying and eating British (which I’m good with) but he’s spent his whole career attacking everything and anything that would taint the free-market gods.

Hypocrisy to a deadline.

All that said this government has made an absolute mess of its taxation targets and that coupled with the fact that in reality few people in are happy paying more tax – we have a real battle on with all this stuff.

A lot of Reeves’ other tax changes get something of a hard time too.

Disasters waiting to happen.

According to the ons, 63% of the population of England and wales are of working age (16-65). So you can multiply those percentages by 1.6. I was only replying to the “made up” statistic denominator. So 3.7% of the rural population and 0,6% of the total. There are 10x more people working in retail and hospitality.

Why would the farmers be attempting to subvert their protest. (Innocent emoji)

At least based on the vast majority around here.

Those complaining about farmers might look at which industry has the highest suicide rates nationally. And ask why that might be.

Low skilled construction workers seem to have a higher suicide risk. Diversification is fine but the point is it’s not then farming it’s being a landlord like many others who may face a harsher tax regime than farmers do.

Is there a reason that passing on a farming business is different tax wise to passing on any other family business? Genuine question.

The changes are intended to tackle a minority, the likes of Clarkson. The majority of small family farms will (hopefully) not be affected. As ever some will fall either side of the line, fairly or unfairly.

There is a perception that “all farmers” are rich, have new Range Rovers and their kids go to private schools. The fact is most farmers struggle to break even working 7 days a week and they have been screwed over by the supermarkets.

Farmers are the salt of the earth and we must tug our forelocks when they allow us the privilege of passing over their land (that we pay them handsomely to sit and look at).

Its not that farmers are being victimised but that one of their privilges is being withdrawn.

And this tax exemption was created in 1984 by Mrs Thatcher’s Govt.

I asked somebody the other day, if this tax ‘change’ is the death of the “family farm” as you claimed, how come you’re telling me these farms have been passed down for “generations”, when the exemption only came in 40 years ago – how did they cope before the change?

Not had an answer to that one…

Interesting take from people here. The thread title is broadly the working title of my PhD.

I’m pitching an article about the protests to the conversation on Wednesday, although it looks like the Guardian beat me to it somewhat!

I was at their protest on Saturday and I’ll be there on Tuesday too. Tuesday is going to be a huge turnout.

It’s a shame we won’t get to see Tommy Robinson roll up on his trusty Massey Ferguson with his flat cap and pipe. Damn you, British justice system!

I always find it funny when Telegraph readers get to find out just how uncouth their ‘allies’ are. I suppose a proportion of the well-heeled rural types have their ‘hunt supporters’ though, so they’re more used to being surrounded by thugs.

Against the wishes of the organisers and many of the farmers, a few hunts are turning up on Tuesday. The far right have been sniffing around since the early days, and the group No Farmers No Food was setup by James Melville a climate change denier/conspiracy theorist.

Many farmers live in real precarity though and make little if any money from actual farming. The whole food system in the UK is totally **** and is actually liable to be very problematic in years to come.

Farmers are the salt of the earth and we must tug our forelocks when they allow us the privilege of passing over their land (that we pay them handsomely to sit and look at).

When the chips on your shoulders are so big that they become blinkers….

Is there a reason that passing on a farming business is different tax wise to passing on any other family business? Genuine question.

The argument is – Farms as a ‘business’ appear to have a high value – because the land they reside on is worth huge amounts of money. However the income generated from this very expensive ‘business’ is very low.

If you went to the bank and asked to borrow 10 million quid to buy business that might net you 50k in profit a year …Oh and I need another 250k to spend on all the kit and equipment I need. Sorry, one more thing, if the weather is wrong then I’ll make a loss…

They’d laugh you out of the door!

The problem, in reality, is two-fold – the on paper value of the land being ridiculously high, plus the fact that this change is being brought in too quick. If you have enough years left working your farm before you plan to hand it to your kids, you can plan, fund, and potentially use other methods (gifting) to manage the tax bill. Those hit hard now, are the ones who planned to hand the farm on the in the next couple of years, and havent got any cash in the bank to pay this bill. Its understandably not great to be in the position of “Now Son, all this you can see is now yours, oh and heres a bill for 300 thousand pounds to the inland revenue”

Its no doubt its highly contentious, and easy to see both sides. Dont listen to Clarkson the oaf – he plays a character and he’ll say what he wants as long as he is in the news (The Michael O’leary of the farming world now maybe….!?) but its worth having a watch of some of the videos by Harry Metcalfe, who whilst clearly has his own agenda, does explain some of the facts pretty well. Latest here, but its also been covered previously: https://youtu.be/oOR4hbosb6I?si=Y22fS1F6bR_wcABP

My opinion? Yes, something needs to be done about it, all the rest of us have to pay it, however as ever, its the way its been implemented that is typically awful, and symbolic of the short sightedness of a system that only thinks as far as the end of the current 4 year political cycle.

For some perspective on the size of the farming sector we all rely on, Outputs were about £40bn and inputs about £33bn making a Total Income From Farming in 2023 of £7bn. One presumes tax is payable on some of this income. If farming was a FTSE listed company, it would not quite make the top 10 of largest companies in the UK. The government collected £829bn in tax revenue in 2023, £443bn from income tax and NI. Farming returns less than air passenger duty (4bn), Inheritance tax is about £7bn. On the economic scheme of things, the budget changes, including farming, were rounding errors.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/hmrc-tax-and-nics-receipts-for-the-uk/hmrc-tax-receipts-and-national-insurance-contributions-for-the-uk-new-annual-bulletin 

I asked somebody the other day, if this tax ‘change’ is the death of the “family farm” as you claimed, how come you’re telling me these farms have been passed down for “generations”, when the exemption only came in 40 years ago – how did they cope before the change?

Not had an answer to that one…

Perhaps because supermarkets have squeezed the price of food to the point that lots of farms are now only viable through subsidy. Land prices are also significantly higher other than brief a peak in the 70s.

I live and work in a rural community, my shop is used by the farming and much wider community and is a bit of a hub for talk and chatter… Being in the Cotswolds we have a range of customers from multi,multi millionaires right down to below the poverty line.

Loads of people have been coming in talking about the iht changes – but not one farmer. The ones most up in arms are the millionaires or multi millionaires, generally the ones that own the vast majority of the land In the area, but don’t farm it themselves – so landowners.

The Cotswolds is horrendously expensive for land, but at an agricultural level it’s not great. It’s rocky, poor soil and quite hilly. Traditionally it’s been used for grazing, specifically sheep (when wool was a commodity), now it’s mixed use. So a working farm doesn’t have a great deal of income due to low yields.

So you have poor yield on high cost land – putting all working farms above the iht bracket. Most farmhouses are well north of 1mil+ the average house price for a 2 bed is 1/2 a million…. As a result almost all land has been bought up for investment or by big farms and estates. Within a few miles of my shop the lre are 4 estate farms as well as land owned by Princess Anne, King Charles, Zara Tindal etc. There are a few cottage farmers, but most don’t have farming as a primary income.

So you make broadly there a point that I think is really interesting TiRed. Wtf are Labour thinking here…..they will undoubtedly lose a small bit of political capital, it’ll make things tricky for their rural MPs, and it will net a miniscule amount of money! It just seems like a crazy political decision.

I still don’t understand this land valuation thing.

If you have a business that is valued at £2 million and you can’t make minimum wage working 7 days a week, then why would you keep it?

£2 million is £30,000 a year for over 60 years.

£2 million invested in any other business would create a greater income.

From what I understand, it won’t even affect many farms worth less than £3.5 million.

It’s complete nonsense.

**** them. They should pay tax the same as the rest of us.

The far right have been sniffing around since the early days, and the group No Farmers No Food was setup by James Melville a climate change denier/conspiracy theorist.

See also their attempts to worm their way into control of the National Trust.

I agree that the changes appear to be a bluntish instrument which need to be fine tuned to pick out those who are hoarding land for investment/tax avoidance purposes or using it as a non-agricultural asset. Perhaps with more generous allowances and deferments based on farm income and type rather than purely land value.

The media still holds an idealised view of every farm being a tiny bucolic haven, rather than the rather more diverse collection ranging from massive estates to tiny tenanted hill farms. Take the coverage of the burglary at the Windsor estate this morning – it was presented as if someone had snuck into William and Kate’s yard and taken their quadbike, rather than a premises somewhere miles away on the 15,000 acres dotted with palaces, stables, and dozens of farms.

But the recent changes in NI for anything other than tiny businesses is liable to have a far more damaging and instantaneous change on the lives of hundreds of thousands of people, but the disseminated nature of this means that the voices of a far smaller but politically connected lobby are grabbing the attention.

 It just seems like a crazy political decision.

Introducing tax changes which will make life harder for a lot of small business and their soon-to-be ex-employees while ignoring tax abuse elsewhere seems equally unwise.