Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Register Log in

[News] Farmers



BrightonCottager

BrightonCottager

Well-known member
Sep 30, 2013
2,866
Brighton
PILTDOWN MAN said:
Restrictions on the house are likely to stop it. You would need planning permission to change the deeds. You will not get it!
Click to expand...
You don't need planning permission to change the deeds. If the farmhouse was the original and there's not been planning permission to build new homes or other non- agricultural buildings or create new planning units, there are unlikely to be planning conditions restricting the occupier of a home to an agricultural worker. And over the last few years, permitted development rights have been hugely increased to allow conversion of agricultural buildings to homes and other uses without a full planning application.
 




beorhthelm

beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius
Jul 21, 2003
36,065
think it's been pointed out couple of times, now read elsewhere, the "gift the farm" or put it in a Ltd company incurs captial gains tax and difficult/not practical with loans and mortgages involved. at least ees more complicated than we're appreciating.
 
Last edited:


Curious Orange

Curious Orange

Punxsatawney Phil
Jul 5, 2003
10,257
On NSC for over two decades...
PILTDOWN MAN said:
I'll give it one more go.

Firstly Brexit.

Farmers were no different to the rest of us in voting patterns.

They were however targeted directly. The Common Agricultural Policy was costing the government far more than what our farmers were getting out of it. The leavers promised the farmers they'd be better off, they aren't.

The CAB was based on the low producing farms (the French peasant farmer) and not the advanced farms. The idea was to bring these low producing farms up to standard. In fact what was happening was they were holding back the advanced farms. Some of us remember the butter mountain or the milk lake. CAB ended up paying farms not to produce food. How stupid is that?

When people say our farmers can't feed us and we have to import, there are various reasons for it. We can but our costs are higher. These higher costs are sometimes red tape but also producing the actual food. Everyone is now expects to have supermarket shelves full of produce that are out of our season or our climate doesn't suit. Farming has attempted to produce these foods in our country but the cost is higher ie growing under glass in heated greenhouses.

Size of farms

Yes there's loads of small farms. Many may attempt to produce but few actually are viable unless they're niche (growing watercress for example). To satisfy the needs of the country we need large scale farming.

When many small farms, with a house, are sold they are being bought by people who have no intention of farming but having a horse for their daughter. By law many of these properties (land) are not allowed to have just horses but need to be agricultural. This has been flaunted however these properties will still listed as a farm. Then there are the houses sold with agricultural tie, these too often have people buying them with no intention of producing anything. Again listed as a farm.

The medium sized farms, normally family owned, are our backbone producers, they need protecting. Farming is a f***ing hard job often with little reward and has struggled for years. The average age of a farmer is 59, 33% over the retirement age. Why is this? It's been a huge struggle to get young blood to work the land. Surely being able to pass the family farm down the line without penalty safeguards these farms.

When we all know that the climate crisis needs us all to re-think the way we live our lives we must look at where we get our food from. We need to accept seasonal foods, grown locally at a fair price to all. Cheap imports are not good.

IHT

People keep using Clarkson to tar all farmers with. This just isn't the case. I'm in full agreement these type of landowner should not be able to avoid IHT and indeed it should be 40%. To administer IHT would not be hard to do if it was on a simple scheme.

Why not have a simple system.

Land/farm bought,
last 15 years 40%
15 to 20 years 30%
20 to 25 years 20%
25 and over 0%

That will take the vast majority of historic family farms out of IHT. The caveat would be should any historic farm sold after being transferred down then 20% would become payable. (make this time limited)

This has obviously caused a great deal of anger but in truth exactly how much is going to be raised by this policy? This government has certainly taken a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
Click to expand...

Superb post, so well worth me quoting if anyone missed it.

The Common Agrigultural Policy was by far and away the worst thing about the European Union, as it was blatantly corrupt and anti-competitive. This has been known about for decades and has probably indirectly lead us to where we are today.

I am deeply troubled by the direction of travel in terms of industry in this country. There does seem to be an unwillingness by successive governments to maintain strategic independence of core capabilities, we already are not energy independent (we could be, easily), our manufacturing base has been allowed to a large degree to be off-shored, our educational focus seems to encourage the academic over vocational. And now we are discouraging farming?

I don't have an answer to any of these issues. They just trouble me.
 
Last edited:


D

Diablo

Well-known member
Sep 22, 2014
4,414
lewes
Like everything these days very complicated....Huge difference of opinion even on here about what Farmers can and can`t do. Smart Rich investors with fancy Lawyers will prob get round the rules leaving genuine farmers to foot the bill.
 


Dr Q

Dr Q

Well-known member
Jul 29, 2004
1,852
Cobbydale
100 % with the farmers on this one.
Seriously embarressed now that I put my X next to the Labour Candidate in my area (who didn't win), Starmer and his cronies are slowly ripping the heart of the country (which previous Governments had begun of course)
 
  • Like
Reactions: abc




Rdodge30

Rdodge30

Well-known member
Dec 30, 2022
774
WATFORD zero said:
I'm sorry, but of course it's possible. How has every other family business managed to keep going ?

This was a tax loophole only open to farmers. They will now have to do what every other family business (and family with assets do).

It's not even as if this tax loophole has been closed, there's still huge advantages for farmers under IHT, it's just been tightened up a little :shrug:
Click to expand...
But, as has been explained on here many times , farming is different. It just is. There are farms with land worth £3m that would pay £400,000 IHT when they only turn a net profit of £50/60k per year. So it doesn’t make any difference if you get 10 years to pay it does it?

The land is c£10k per acre and the return is £500 per acre per year.

There really aren’t many other types of businesses in similar positions
 


Rdodge30

Rdodge30

Well-known member
Dec 30, 2022
774
IMG_3178.jpeg
 


Herr Tubthumper

Herr Tubthumper

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 11, 2003
63,063
The Fatherland
Rdodge30 said:
But, as has been explained on here many times , farming is different. It just is. There are farms with land worth £3m that would pay £400,000 IHT when they only turn a net profit of £50/60k per year. So it doesn’t make any difference if you get 10 years to pay it does it?

The land is c£10k per acre and the return is £500 per acre per year.

There really aren’t many other types of businesses in similar positions
Click to expand...
I disagree. There must be hundreds, if not thousands, of businesses sitting on expensive land/property turning modest profits. Dockerils is a local example. Farming is no different in this sense.

I believe Strongroom Studios own their buidling in Shoreditch, they opened in the 80s...their buidling must be worth millions now. They're not hugely profitable.

Why should farmer's be singled out for beneficial tax arrangements? It's just not fair.
 
Last edited:




WATFORD zero

WATFORD zero

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 10, 2003
27,957
Rdodge30 said:
But, as has been explained on here many times , farming is different. It just is. There are farms with land worth £3m that would pay £400,000 IHT when they only turn a net profit of £50/60k per year. So it doesn’t make any difference if you get 10 years to pay it does it?

The land is c£10k per acre and the return is £500 per acre per year.

There really aren’t many other types of businesses in similar positions
Click to expand...

A farm worth £3M if owned by a couple will most likely be under the 'special farmer' IHT threshold, paying no IHT whatsoever. If however a couple aren't farmers, they would pay £800,000 on a £3M estate. There is absolutely no doubt farmers are different :shrug:
 


D

dsr-burnley

Well-known member
Aug 15, 2014
2,687
Herr Tubthumper said:
I disagree. There must be hundreds, if not thousands, of businesses sitting on expensive land/property turning modest profits. Dockerils is a local example. Farming is no different in this sense.

I believe Strongroom Studios own their buidling in Shoreditch, they opened in the 80s...their buidling must be worth millions now. They're not hugely profitable.

Why should farmer's be singled out for beneficial tax arrangements? It's just not fair.
Click to expand...
Are you arguing that businesses with expensive propertyshould be forced to sell up as well? And if so, is it a good thing?

Perhaps something could be done on the basis that land is passed on free of IHT, but if and when it is sold, CGT is charged on the original, presumably negligible, cost.
 


Rdodge30

Rdodge30

Well-known member
Dec 30, 2022
774
WATFORD zero said:
A farm worth £3M if owned by a couple will most likely be under the 'special farmer' IHT threshold, paying no IHT whatsoever, unlike a couple who aren't farmers, who would pay £800,000 on a £3M estate :shrug:
Click to expand...
Which clearly isn’t ok either
 












Rdodge30

Rdodge30

Well-known member
Dec 30, 2022
774
WATFORD zero said:
It's what it's been for people who aren't farmers since about 2009 (IIRC)
Click to expand...
And it’s not right, I remember there was a discussion on here before the election about what taxes should go up and I said then I’m not a fan of Inheritance tax. It is very often wrong. Barmy that the punishment for receiving an inheritance is to be taxed so heavily that the only option is to sell the inheritance. How does anyone think that’s ok, farmers or not?
 


RandyWanger

RandyWanger

Je suis rôti de boeuf
Mar 14, 2013
6,817
Done a Frexit, now in London
WATFORD zero said:
Fine. Where would you raise the £7.5B pa instead ?
Click to expand...

No country in the history of the world has every taxed its self into prosperity.
Countries that have lowered CGT and IHT (or have none) have better economies.
People with more money in their pockets spend it.
Thankfully our randparents had theirs in a trust, when we inherited it, we didn't squirrel it overseas, we purchased and renovated a house, putting money into the economy.
Parents have setup a trust so I am not bothered if they scrap it or not as I won't be paying it.
Evidence is out there, ask google or ai or read a book. Lower tax boost growth, higher tax shrinks the economy.
 


D

Diablo

Well-known member
Sep 22, 2014
4,414
lewes
Rdodge30 said:
And it’s not right, I remember there was a discussion on here before the election about what taxes should go up and I said then I’m not a fan of Inheritance tax. It is very often wrong. Barmy that the punishment for receiving an inheritance is to be taxed so heavily that the only option is to sell the inheritance. How does anyone think that’s ok, farmers or not?
Click to expand...

Tend to agree. Those who work hard and earn well, pay income tax on their earnings. Those who are frugal and save then pay tax on the interest they earn and then when they die it is taxed again !!
 










You must log in or register to reply here.
Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports

Share this page


Top
Link Here