Totally agree but then a) no tax revenue will be drawn from this as farmers will now play the seven-year “gift” trick en masse; b) why are the government not instead going after bigger fleecers like oligarchs, banks and corporates?; c) given b, won’t Reform have an “anti-establishment” field day? - ThreadSky

savethenhs.bsky.social • 106 days ago

Totally agree but then a) no tax revenue will be drawn from this as farmers will now play the seven-year “gift” trick en masse; b) why are the government not instead going after bigger fleecers like oligarchs, banks and corporates?; c) given b, won’t Reform have an “anti-establishment” field day?

Comments

ralphmould.bsky.social•106 days ago

This is actually where I think the argument defending IHT reform really unravels. The idea that gifting is a "trick", when it is, and always has been, the most tax efficient form of providing for children. Almost as if the most important aspect is control over resources, not ahead of time..

ralphmould.bsky.social•106 days ago

I think it would be really interesting to investigate whether expedited inter generational transfers of wealth led to higher growth, or reduced inequalities

catiomiles.bsky.social•106 days ago

If a farmer is 80 today he may not do the “trick” of gifting the assets to the family as he may not live 7 more years.

That’s why some farmers, especially those old and frail, are deeply upset about these changes.

And no one thinks about them.

Imagine they were NHS workers or train drivers…

ralphmould.bsky.social•106 days ago

Yes, and I do have sympathy where as ever the biggest impacts are at the margins. Which is why we'd benefit from some specific information where it doesn't quite work, or is particularly unfair. Arguments on general principle don't really wash though.. but that is where they are being made.

catiomiles.bsky.social•106 days ago

You may have sympathy as any normal person would have.

But not the Labour government, they simply are not interested in the world outside big cities and state funded jobs.

markslater.bsky.social•106 days ago

They will from the largest holdings & inheritance tax isn’t just about farms, albeit Clarkson et al have managed to grab all the headlines & make it all about them.

Tax avoiders pushed up the price of agricultural land 4-fold in the 20 years after the farm tax inheritance loophole was introduced.

savethenhs.bsky.social•106 days ago

Yeah he’s awful but who would he sell his land to? Aspiring small farmers or a big corporate? If the latter… what are the consequences. Don’t get me wrong. I think tax should be the same for all. I want to know what the consequences would be here and how we mitigate any (potentially) negative ones.

markslater.bsky.social•106 days ago

If he breaks it up and sells it to smallholders then great. If he sells it to a corporate (another vested interest scare tactic) then I expect they’ll run it more efficiently and food production will increase. Either way, it makes a nonsense of the ‘no farmers, no food’ campaign line.

savethenhs.bsky.social•106 days ago

I do hope you’re right but I don’t trust corporates any more than I do Clarkson.

savethenhs.bsky.social•105 days ago

Another problem: if Clarkson is greedy enough to buy up swathes of land in order to avoid tax, why would he be generous enough to sell that land to small holders at what would be far less than he would get if he sold to a corporation?

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply