Starmergeddon: They Came And Ate Us

[SaintK]

Labour are going to have to u-turn on this one. It's clear that the calculations on how many farmers will be affected are wrong and they'll have to find a more targeted approach for Dyson and Clarkson et al.

If they think the current pushback is bad wait until Clarksons Farm series 4 the antagonists are Reeves and Starmer.

Really?

Yep, DEFRA and the treasury are in quite a lot of disagreement over it.

Really?
Where are you seeing that?

[weegie01]

Average farm size in the uk is 80 hectares, around 200 acres. So you’ve picked an example which doesn’t portray the average situation.

That’s what people are doing here, pretending big farms and big assets are the average.

This is part of the 'lies, damn lies and statistics' that allow different parties to present the situation in a way that suits.

Govt figures that arrive at the 80h average include all holdings that meet the tax definition of 'farm'. There are 200k of these. Half of these are under 20 hectares and are not remotely farms in any commonly understood meaning of the word. These are the hobby farms, houses with a few paddocks etc and they drag the average size down dramatically. Even assuming that all of these are 20h, take these out and the average for the rest goes up to 140h or 350h. These are all very crude.

This is exactly the kind of thing that allows politicians to talk a if hardly anyone is affected as the include these tens of thousands of smallholdings that are not remotely farms. Farmers on the other hand are talking about genuine working a farm to make a living farms which are typically much bigger. Farmers are however doing themselves no favours by vastly over egging the pudding.

It is terrible legislation in that there are plenty of low hanging fruit that could have greatly increased the tax take by dealing with genuine abuse of the system. Rather find a way to go after them and leave the genuine farmers to get on with it.

This has nothing to do with the low numbers the government have. They literally gave the number of farms inherited last year as their figures. The 500 a year includes 345, that wouldn't even qualify if held by a married couple.

I am responding to Biffer's particlular point on the size of farms being overstated.

APR claimed in the past is a poor measure as the values are notoriously wrong. 100% reduction of the wrong figure gives the same result as 100% reduction of the correct one so one really worried if the figures were correct.

Having said that, the APR numbers are a case in point. Labour are able to say it is a tiny fraction who will as included in the overall numbers are all the mickey house holdings that are in no way farms.

[SaintK]

A true son of the soil. I wonder why he can't use his security detail in Clacton if it's too dangerous for him there?

[Tichtheid]

Fucksakes, at least when John Terry dressed up for the occasion he had actually been part of the team.

How many sheep has that shitehawk put through a dip? HAs he ever walked behind a potato harvester or moved bales?

How do people swallow these lies from him? He's no farmer.

[laurent]

Fucksakes, at least when John Terry dressed up for the occasion he had actually been part of the team.

How many sheep has that shitehawk put through a dip? HAs he ever walked behind a potato harvester or moved bales?

How do people swallow these lies from him? He's no farmer.

the head of the biggest farming union in France is the owner of a 700 hectare farm that he splits to get more EU money and has actually never farmed.
He is managing Avril group owner of Lesieur, Puget, Vivien Paille, Sanders ou Diester brands.

Farmer vote these guys as their representatives...

[epwc]

How do people swallow these lies from him? He's no farmer.

It's a fucking mystery

[weegie01]

I do genuinely believe this is poor legislation, but I also believe there is wholesale abuse of the applicable tax regimes. As an example, one of our neighbours just been telling us how he has bought 10 sheep for his 60 acres so he can continue to claim it is a farm. Despite his wife's herd (literally) of horses etc using most of the grazing. He was also gloating about putting his new Defender through the 'farm' as a commercial vehicle even though it is a passenger Defender not a commercial, but no one will ever check.

This kind of blatant abuse is endemic and really needs looked at, but HMRC just lack the footsoldiers to do so.

[Hal Jordan]

The "set up a company to run the car" dodge is pretty widespread, but most people don't appreciate that it's largely a deferral of the tax, but which cares when you're driving a brand new Defender?

I was speaking to the son of a generational farmer this morning, his brother now runs the farm and has to keep thinking up specific jobs for his dad to do to keep him thinking he's still the farmer without interfering in the running of the place. Not out of lack of capacity in thinking he's in charge, he just can't stop the old boy sticking his nose in so may as well keep him gainfully employed somehow.

"Let it goooo, Let it go-ha-hoh!"

[inactionman]

I do genuinely believe this is poor legislation, but I also believe there is wholesale abuse of the applicable tax regimes. As an example, one of our neighbours just been telling us how he has bought 10 sheep for his 60 acres so he can continue to claim it is a farm. Despite his wife's herd (literally) of horses etc using most of the grazing. He was also gloating about putting his new Defender through the 'farm' as a commercial vehicle even though it is a passenger Defender not a commercial, but no one will ever check.

This kind of blatant abuse is endemic and really needs looked at, but HMRC just lack the footsoldiers to do so.

I only know of one person who has been investigated by HMRC, and he took the piss beyond belief - written off directors loans and all sorts. HMRC don't have capacity to go after all but the most egregious so he was doing this for years.

It's nowhere near the same scale and in a different discipline, but my accountant has been very clear and very consistent over what they'll accept as a business expense for my one-man-band business - to the point of enquiring about whether old phones were disposed of or were sold on.

I'm happy to go on their advice as they know the regs better than I (or else why would I employ them), but more importantly in relation to avoidance they're a third party with a duty to ensure my tax liabilities are met - and they can't hide behind ignorance

Most business of any size beyond sole trader will use an accountant, and it's there that the first line of defence should exist, and there should be swingeing penalties for those who bend the standards. I'd hope it would be less work for the taxman to audit the accountants and make these accountants actually accountable with a stiff enough penalty to ensure they won't prepare or submit returns that are not bang on the legislation. The chap I know who was investigated works in financial services so is relatively savvy, but even he would have had an accountant who - if not actively promoting the dodges - was happy to submit his business returns

I get loads of adverts for accountants who promise that they can get me 90% take-home of my invoiced income, there's no way on earth they can do that without some subterfuge. They need to be stamped down on.

[Dinsdale Piranha]

Average farm size in the uk is 80 hectares, around 200 acres. So you’ve picked an example which doesn’t portray the average situation.

That’s what people are doing here, pretending big farms and big assets are the average.

1000 made the maths nice and easy. It's also about the size of of my two uncle's farms - they were both tenant farmers - and therefore enough to provide a decent living.

200 acres is unlikely to provide a sustainable income on its own. You had better have another job and it doesn't alter the fact that you are well within the IHT bracket with very little way to pay it.

How much of that value is down to the residence though? The most expensive farms I'm seeing for sale on the sites I checkde had manor houses, and multiple residencies. These alone are worth multiple millions in any other circumstance, and should be looking at the full 40% IHT at just £1m, rather than 20% after £3m (or we can go with £500k and £1.5m).

If you have a farm with multiple manor houses on it, you are almost certainly a landlord before you are a farmer. I'm guessing these are who are being targeted but it's also going to catch family farms who might have been farming the same land for generations.

I have examples of this within the family.

My sister owns about 90 acres of unexceptional farmland north of Reading. It is rented to my cousin who farms it. There's a bungalow on the land for a farmworker and the rental from the bungalow is more than the rental for the 90 acres. - a few thousand a year.

My aunt - who is 90 - owns a farm, also near Reading. It's about 300 acres. There is one house on it - rented out. Another cousin runs it as a proper working farm. If this becomes subject to IHT after the 2026 deadline then my cousin will likely have to find around half a million if she wants to keep the farm. What will actually happen is the family will give up farming after 4 generations and it will be bought by a large agribusiness - or a well connected property developer who could make a fortune if they could build half a dozen houses on it.

[Biffer]

Labour are going to have to u-turn on this one. It's clear that the calculations on how many farmers will be affected are wrong and they'll have to find a more targeted approach for Dyson and Clarkson et al.

If they think the current pushback is bad wait until Clarksons Farm series 4 the antagonists are Reeves and Starmer.

Really?

Neeps - read BBC Verified report and then tell me their calculations are wrong!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8rlk0d2vk2o

That analysis doesn't say which figure is correct.

[Hal Jordan]

I see Two Jags is now No Jags.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

My aunt - who is 90 - owns a farm, also near Reading. It's about 300 acres. There is one house on it - rented out. Another cousin runs it as a proper working farm. If this becomes subject to IHT after the 2026 deadline then my cousin will likely have to find around half a million if she wants to keep the farm. What will actually happen is the family will give up farming after 4 generations and it will be bought by a large agribusiness - or a well connected property developer who could make a fortune if they could build half a dozen houses on it.

I like the idea of a well connected property developer who builds 6 homes on 300 acres in the name of making money

[Begbie]

A true son of the soil. I wonder why he can't use his security detail in Clacton if it's too dangerous for him there?

Wearing fucking wellies He really is a pathetic piece of shit.

[Hal Jordan]

A true son of the soil. I wonder why he can't use his security detail in Clacton if it's too dangerous for him there?

Wearing fucking wellies He really is a pathetic piece of shit.

Performative grievance grifter.

[epwc]

He's a real proper cunt:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... s-industry

[fishfoodie]

Wearing fucking wellies He really is a pathetic piece of shit.

Wellies & Rupert the bear strides; I'm not surprised be needs protection !

I'd chin him on a matter of principle just for his fashion statements

[SaintK]

He's a real proper cunt:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... s-industry

Christ! I wondere how many other organisations like that he's involved with

[Biffer]

£200k spread over 10 years interest free remember!

So you can even time when you want to take the mortgage out with regards to clearing the last of it. And if course, that's assuming you have a farm with £4m in the first place.

A farm with a value of £4m is unlikely to be a viable business to start with. It's too small. 500 acres would be a good starting point for an actual income.

Again, you numbers here are only about the very largest farms.

90% of farms in the UK are less than 500 acres.

59% are less than 123 acres.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistic ... uk-at-june

You can give your opinion on how hard it is for farms that size as much as you like, but those are actual real numbers that start to indicate how much less of a problem IHT is than you're trying to suggest.

[Dinsdale Piranha]

So you can even time when you want to take the mortgage out with regards to clearing the last of it. And if course, that's assuming you have a farm with £4m in the first place.

A farm with a value of £4m is unlikely to be a viable business to start with. It's too small. 500 acres would be a good starting point for an actual income.

Again, you numbers here are only about the very largest farms.

90% of farms in the UK are less than 500 acres.

59% are less than 123 acres.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistic ... uk-at-june

You can give your opinion on how hard it is for farms that size as much as you like, but those are actual real numbers that start to indicate how much less of a problem IHT is than you're trying to suggest.

So fuck the actual farmers making a full time living off their own farm, there aren't enough of them to care - gotcha.

[Biffer]

A farm with a value of £4m is unlikely to be a viable business to start with. It's too small. 500 acres would be a good starting point for an actual income.

Again, you numbers here are only about the very largest farms.

90% of farms in the UK are less than 500 acres.

59% are less than 123 acres.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistic ... uk-at-june

You can give your opinion on how hard it is for farms that size as much as you like, but those are actual real numbers that start to indicate how much less of a problem IHT is than you're trying to suggest.

So fuck the actual farmers making a full time living off their own farm, there aren't enough of them to care - gotcha.

If you're trying to back your argument up with numbers that are blatantly very wrong, it's your own fault when someone points out your argument is pish.

[robmatic]

Again, you numbers here are only about the very largest farms.

90% of farms in the UK are less than 500 acres.

59% are less than 123 acres.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistic ... uk-at-june

You can give your opinion on how hard it is for farms that size as much as you like, but those are actual real numbers that start to indicate how much less of a problem IHT is than you're trying to suggest.

How much are you expecting that 123-acre farm to be worth, just out of interest?

[Biffer]

Again, you numbers here are only about the very largest farms.

90% of farms in the UK are less than 500 acres.

59% are less than 123 acres.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistic ... uk-at-june

You can give your opinion on how hard it is for farms that size as much as you like, but those are actual real numbers that start to indicate how much less of a problem IHT is than you're trying to suggest.

How much are you expecting that 123-acre farm to be worth, just out of interest?

Even on an average price of about £12k/acre, about £1.5 million. Add the farmhouse and equipment to get approx £2million. Husband and wife allowance plus family home allowance plus farm allowance means no IHT. But price per acre is very variable.

https://rural.struttandparker.com/artic ... r-2023-24/#

But the increasing prices are due to rich wankers like Clarkson buying land to get round iht.

[Raggs]

Again, you numbers here are only about the very largest farms.

90% of farms in the UK are less than 500 acres.

59% are less than 123 acres.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistic ... uk-at-june

You can give your opinion on how hard it is for farms that size as much as you like, but those are actual real numbers that start to indicate how much less of a problem IHT is than you're trying to suggest.

How much are you expecting that 123-acre farm to be worth, just out of interest?

Even on an average price of about £12k/acre, about £1.5 million. Add the farmhouse and equipment to get approx £2million. Husband and wife allowance plus family home allowance plus farm allowance means no IHT. But price per acre is very variable.

https://rural.struttandparker.com/artic ... r-2023-24/#

But the increasing prices are due to rich wankers like Clarkson buying land to get round iht.

Does average price per acre come from overall sale prices of farms? Or land only sales?

[Biffer]

How much are you expecting that 123-acre farm to be worth, just out of interest?

Even on an average price of about £12k/acre, about £1.5 million. Add the farmhouse and equipment to get approx £2million. Husband and wife allowance plus family home allowance plus farm allowance means no IHT. But price per acre is very variable.

https://rural.struttandparker.com/artic ... r-2023-24/#

But the increasing prices are due to rich wankers like Clarkson buying land to get round iht.

Does average price per acre come from overall sale prices of farms? Or land only sales?

In that calculation I've taken it as an arable land price and then added on for farmhouse and other stuff. Thought that was clear.

[Raggs]

Even on an average price of about £12k/acre, about £1.5 million. Add the farmhouse and equipment to get approx £2million. Husband and wife allowance plus family home allowance plus farm allowance means no IHT. But price per acre is very variable.

https://rural.struttandparker.com/artic ... r-2023-24/#

But the increasing prices are due to rich wankers like Clarkson buying land to get round iht.

Does average price per acre come from overall sale prices of farms? Or land only sales?

In that calculation I've taken it as an arable land price and then added on for farmhouse and other stuff. Thought that was clear.

I mean where did you get the price of £12k an acre? The article you link gives £11,300 but it's not the latest one.

https://rural.struttandparker.com/artic ... mmer-2024/

This suggests it's £11k, but comes from all sales of farms, estates and blocks of land. Given the properties aren't sold separately to the land, and I don't believe come with a separate valuation, it suggests to me that in many cases, it includes the farmhouse etc. Many of which are worth millions on their own I'd guess. Cheapest being £6,500 per acre, most expensive being £17k per acre, strongly suggests something else is making the difference in price, and it's not the land quality

In addition, from briefly looking over, apart from Wales, Prime vs Poor land, only had a relatively small difference in price (15%?), in Wales, prime is nearly double poor. Something is making that difference, and I suspect it's the houses on the land.

https://www.fwi.co.uk/business/markets- ... e-you-live

I know the above isn't from this year, which is why I'm not taking it for prices, just showing that something is causing the variance between good and bad land to go away in "desirable" areas.

[Yeeb]

It would be quite easy to exempt the true farmers from the clarksons, introduce some kind of time based sliding scale of exemtption: if you’ve held the land for 30 years or family held it before that, 99% exempt - Clarkson Dyson Jonny come lateley Cayman Trustsfarian chipping Norton Alex James blur cheese man etc have to pay it.

[TedMaul]

I'd let the chap from Groove Armada off cos he's a nice bloke.

[dpedin]

It would be quite easy to exempt the true farmers from the clarksons, introduce some kind of time based sliding scale of exemtption: if you’ve held the land for 30 years or family held it before that, 99% exempt - Clarkson Dyson Jonny come lateley Cayman Trustsfarian chipping Norton Alex James blur cheese man etc have to pay it.

Unfortunately I don't think it is that easy to implement such exemptions, many farmers will buy/sell parcels of land all the time so disentangling that would be a nightmare for all involved. All that would happen is it would end up in court and the only winners then are the lawyers. Even Frog Faced Farage would claim to be a farmer now he has bought a pair of wellies and has a large back garden!

Lets remember we are in this mess because the exemption from IHT via APR and BPR implemented about 40 years ago created a tax loophole which non farmers have exploited to avoid paying IHT and in the process have driven land prices up to way beyond their inherent value, they are priced higher because of the added IHT exemption value. The only way to reset the price of land is to get rid of or dramatically reduce the IHT exemption and let land prices drift back to where they should be. This would mean IHT for farmers would be based on more realistic valuations of their land and reducing IHT liabilities for many. The softening of the blow of IHT changes - only paying half the IHT rate and being able to pay it back interest free over 10 years - are reasonable to me but perhaps something needs to be done to help farmers in their 80's to help them 'gift' farms to children without having to live another 7 years?

Other than that I think farmers should be subjected to IHT on the same basis as every other individual leaving property, land or asset rich businesses. There is however a separate issue about supporting farms to tackle the business models imposed by big businesses that drives down returns in order to maximize profits for the likes of Tesco et al. Unfortunately many are using the IHT changes as a vehicle for raising legitimate issues about the farming business model which I dont think helps their position.

[Dinsdale Piranha]

Again, you numbers here are only about the very largest farms.

90% of farms in the UK are less than 500 acres.

59% are less than 123 acres.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistic ... uk-at-june

You can give your opinion on how hard it is for farms that size as much as you like, but those are actual real numbers that start to indicate how much less of a problem IHT is than you're trying to suggest.

So fuck the actual farmers making a full time living off their own farm, there aren't enough of them to care - gotcha.

If you're trying to back your argument up with numbers that are blatantly very wrong, it's your own fault when someone points out your argument is pish.

Feel free to show me any numbers I have given that are incorrect.

I have pointed out what it takes to make an actual living on a farm. Smaller farms are frequently rented out to a farmer who may well be farming several farms. For all I know the owners may well own it to avoid IHT. This legislation catches the full time, multi generational farmer with their own farm.

But as you said, there aren't many of them so you don't care.

[tabascoboy]

[robmatic]

Again, you numbers here are only about the very largest farms.

90% of farms in the UK are less than 500 acres.

59% are less than 123 acres.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistic ... uk-at-june

You can give your opinion on how hard it is for farms that size as much as you like, but those are actual real numbers that start to indicate how much less of a problem IHT is than you're trying to suggest.

How much are you expecting that 123-acre farm to be worth, just out of interest?

Even on an average price of about £12k/acre, about £1.5 million. Add the farmhouse and equipment to get approx £2million. Husband and wife allowance plus family home allowance plus farm allowance means no IHT. But price per acre is very variable.

https://rural.struttandparker.com/artic ... r-2023-24/#

But the increasing prices are due to rich wankers like Clarkson buying land to get round iht.

A detached family home, outbuildings, machinery, livestock etc. being £500k is a little bit of an underestimate I would say, but even then you are getting towards the IHT limit and you are saying that almost half of all farms are bigger than this. Sounds like it is a problem for a fairly big proportion of farmers in that case?

[Biffer]

Does average price per acre come from overall sale prices of farms? Or land only sales?

In that calculation I've taken it as an arable land price and then added on for farmhouse and other stuff. Thought that was clear.

I mean where did you get the price of £12k an acre? The article you link gives £11,300 but it's not the latest one.

https://rural.struttandparker.com/artic ... mmer-2024/

This suggests it's £11k, but comes from all sales of farms, estates and blocks of land. Given the properties aren't sold separately to the land, and I don't believe come with a separate valuation, it suggests to me that in many cases, it includes the farmhouse etc. Many of which are worth millions on their own I'd guess. Cheapest being £6,500 per acre, most expensive being £17k per acre, strongly suggests something else is making the difference in price, and it's not the land quality

In addition, from briefly looking over, apart from Wales, Prime vs Poor land, only had a relatively small difference in price (15%?), in Wales, prime is nearly double poor. Something is making that difference, and I suspect it's the houses on the land.

https://www.fwi.co.uk/business/markets- ... e-you-live

I know the above isn't from this year, which is why I'm not taking it for prices, just showing that something is causing the variance between good and bad land to go away in "desirable" areas.

I took a bit above the average quoted for 22-23, and added on more for house etc to give what I reckon is a higher end price for a farm that size. Not sure if you're thinking that price is too high or too low? Just looking to demonstrate that for an average farm, it's unlikely to attract IHT.

[Biffer]

So fuck the actual farmers making a full time living off their own farm, there aren't enough of them to care - gotcha.

If you're trying to back your argument up with numbers that are blatantly very wrong, it's your own fault when someone points out your argument is pish.

Feel free to show me any numbers I have given that are incorrect.

I have pointed out what it takes to make an actual living on a farm. Smaller farms are frequently rented out to a farmer who may well be farming several farms. For all I know the owners may well own it to avoid IHT. This legislation catches the full time, multi generational farmer with their own farm.

But as you said, there aren't many of them so you don't care.

You were using 500 / 1000 acres as if it was the norm, I pointed out that's not the case. If they're farming rented land, it doesn't attract IHT. In fact if they're renting it opens up the possibility of them being able to buy the land they're farming, which is a good thing, no? The legislation hits farmers who own their own farm if its a whack larger than the average. You haven't provided numbers with any backing, just made them uup and expected us to take it as true. They don't represent typical farms and your assertions about everything else are just that, assertions with no evidence etc.

[Biffer]

How much are you expecting that 123-acre farm to be worth, just out of interest?

Even on an average price of about £12k/acre, about £1.5 million. Add the farmhouse and equipment to get approx £2million. Husband and wife allowance plus family home allowance plus farm allowance means no IHT. But price per acre is very variable.

https://rural.struttandparker.com/artic ... r-2023-24/#

But the increasing prices are due to rich wankers like Clarkson buying land to get round iht.

A detached family home, outbuildings, machinery, livestock etc. being £500k is a little bit of an underestimate I would say, but even then you are getting towards the IHT limit and you are saying that almost half of all farms are bigger than this. Sounds like it is a problem for a fairly big proportion of farmers in that case?

Other analysis posted earlier in the thread suggests it's more like 10-15% of farms.

If they are family farmers then there are ways to make your sons partners with shared ownership that reduces the asset being assessed for IHT. With reasonable and sensible planning, most family farmers, but not the very largest, will be OK. It's people like Clarkson and Dyson and their ilk that will be affected. And the twenty Dukes who own more than a million acres between them and have had no tax on their estates for the 500-800 years it's been in their family. And yeah, fuck them.

[C T]

Even on an average price of about £12k/acre, about £1.5 million. Add the farmhouse and equipment to get approx £2million. Husband and wife allowance plus family home allowance plus farm allowance means no IHT. But price per acre is very variable.

https://rural.struttandparker.com/artic ... r-2023-24/#

But the increasing prices are due to rich wankers like Clarkson buying land to get round iht.

A detached family home, outbuildings, machinery, livestock etc. being £500k is a little bit of an underestimate I would say, but even then you are getting towards the IHT limit and you are saying that almost half of all farms are bigger than this. Sounds like it is a problem for a fairly big proportion of farmers in that case?

Other analysis posted earlier in the thread suggests it's more like 10-15% of farms.

If they are family farmers then there are ways to make your sons partners with shared ownership that reduces the asset being assessed for IHT. With reasonable and sensible planning, most family farmers, but not the very largest, will be OK. It's people like Clarkson and Dyson and their ilk that will be affected. And the twenty Dukes who own more than a million acres between them and have had no tax on their estates for the 500-800 years it's been in their family. And yeah, fuck them.

I'll have you know that the Dukes NEED that land, to set it on fire and shoot.

Will no one think on the Dukes!

[robmatic]

Even on an average price of about £12k/acre, about £1.5 million. Add the farmhouse and equipment to get approx £2million. Husband and wife allowance plus family home allowance plus farm allowance means no IHT. But price per acre is very variable.

https://rural.struttandparker.com/artic ... r-2023-24/#

But the increasing prices are due to rich wankers like Clarkson buying land to get round iht.

A detached family home, outbuildings, machinery, livestock etc. being £500k is a little bit of an underestimate I would say, but even then you are getting towards the IHT limit and you are saying that almost half of all farms are bigger than this. Sounds like it is a problem for a fairly big proportion of farmers in that case?

Other analysis posted earlier in the thread suggests it's more like 10-15% of farms.

If they are family farmers then there are ways to make your sons partners with shared ownership that reduces the asset being assessed for IHT. With reasonable and sensible planning, most family farmers, but not the very largest, will be OK. It's people like Clarkson and Dyson and their ilk that will be affected. And the twenty Dukes who own more than a million acres between them and have had no tax on their estates for the 500-800 years it's been in their family. And yeah, fuck them.

OK, only 15% of an entire industry will be affected then. None of your stats are suggesting that it isn't significant.

To be honest, I also reckon that with widespread tax avoidance, many farmers will probably cope. But I can see why they are disgruntled about it.

And I hate to break it to you, but those twenty Dukes will be no more affected than they were previously.

[Raggs]

In that calculation I've taken it as an arable land price and then added on for farmhouse and other stuff. Thought that was clear.

I mean where did you get the price of £12k an acre? The article you link gives £11,300 but it's not the latest one.

https://rural.struttandparker.com/artic ... mmer-2024/

This suggests it's £11k, but comes from all sales of farms, estates and blocks of land. Given the properties aren't sold separately to the land, and I don't believe come with a separate valuation, it suggests to me that in many cases, it includes the farmhouse etc. Many of which are worth millions on their own I'd guess. Cheapest being £6,500 per acre, most expensive being £17k per acre, strongly suggests something else is making the difference in price, and it's not the land quality

In addition, from briefly looking over, apart from Wales, Prime vs Poor land, only had a relatively small difference in price (15%?), in Wales, prime is nearly double poor. Something is making that difference, and I suspect it's the houses on the land.

https://www.fwi.co.uk/business/markets- ... e-you-live

I know the above isn't from this year, which is why I'm not taking it for prices, just showing that something is causing the variance between good and bad land to go away in "desirable" areas.

I took a bit above the average quoted for 22-23, and added on more for house etc to give what I reckon is a higher end price for a farm that size. Not sure if you're thinking that price is too high or too low? Just looking to demonstrate that for an average farm, it's unlikely to attract IHT.

My point is that the house and buildings will have already been included in that average price.

[Biffer]

I mean where did you get the price of £12k an acre? The article you link gives £11,300 but it's not the latest one.

https://rural.struttandparker.com/artic ... mmer-2024/

This suggests it's £11k, but comes from all sales of farms, estates and blocks of land. Given the properties aren't sold separately to the land, and I don't believe come with a separate valuation, it suggests to me that in many cases, it includes the farmhouse etc. Many of which are worth millions on their own I'd guess. Cheapest being £6,500 per acre, most expensive being £17k per acre, strongly suggests something else is making the difference in price, and it's not the land quality

In addition, from briefly looking over, apart from Wales, Prime vs Poor land, only had a relatively small difference in price (15%?), in Wales, prime is nearly double poor. Something is making that difference, and I suspect it's the houses on the land.

https://www.fwi.co.uk/business/markets- ... e-you-live

I know the above isn't from this year, which is why I'm not taking it for prices, just showing that something is causing the variance between good and bad land to go away in "desirable" areas.

I took a bit above the average quoted for 22-23, and added on more for house etc to give what I reckon is a higher end price for a farm that size. Not sure if you're thinking that price is too high or too low? Just looking to demonstrate that for an average farm, it's unlikely to attract IHT.

My point is that the house and buildings will have already been included in that average price.

Yeah, very possi ly, I just wanted to add something on just in case so that I was going to a high value for that farm to prove the point that the average size is unlikely to be affected.

[Biffer]

A detached family home, outbuildings, machinery, livestock etc. being £500k is a little bit of an underestimate I would say, but even then you are getting towards the IHT limit and you are saying that almost half of all farms are bigger than this. Sounds like it is a problem for a fairly big proportion of farmers in that case?

Other analysis posted earlier in the thread suggests it's more like 10-15% of farms.

If they are family farmers then there are ways to make your sons partners with shared ownership that reduces the asset being assessed for IHT. With reasonable and sensible planning, most family farmers, but not the very largest, will be OK. It's people like Clarkson and Dyson and their ilk that will be affected. And the twenty Dukes who own more than a million acres between them and have had no tax on their estates for the 500-800 years it's been in their family. And yeah, fuck them.

OK, only 15% of an entire industry will be affected then. None of your stats are suggesting that it isn't significant.

To be honest, I also reckon that with widespread tax avoidance, many farmers will probably cope. But I can see why they are disgruntled about it.

And I hate to break it to you, but those twenty Dukes will be no more affected than they were previously.

So that 10-15% are going to include the stereotype rich farmer which people complain about being presented as a norm. They are far more likely to be able to afford that tax.