metalblue
Well-Known Member
What a load of nonsense. I'm surprised at that from you. That's absolutely nothing to do with the argument I was making.
If the "rich (non farmers)" find another vehicle, then that's good for people who want to farm, as it stops driving up the price of farmland, and taking it out of the hands of the people who want to farm. The likes of Kaleb Cooper might even be able to buy farmland, rather than being hired hands for people who just wanted to avoid tax.
But there are clearly other issues in the farming industry that create a situation where farms are so valuable, yet make so little money. As I said, if you had £1b to improve farming in this country, would cutting IHT for the wealthier farmers be your first idea?
I re-read your post and you’re correct, apologies, I misread the point you were making. Let me try again but there is probably no single answer.
Farmer produce margins are tight due to limited markets - supermarkets for example will use their dominant market position to pay as little as possible - there is a natural ceiling to what will be paid domestically when you can import produce. But farmers aren’t really going to be concerned with their earnings versus land value - they only care about profit per acre and that has nothing to do with the value of the land.
Land value has certainly increased above inflation over the past 3 decades (not as much as house prices) so there is a case to be made that non farmers are distorting the value but “penalising” actual farmers isn’t really the solution either. The main problem as I see it, isn’t the IHT in principle, but that farms don’t earn huge sums so it limits them being able to mortgage to pay the IHT bill.