Farmers threat

Fridgeman said:
To brand every farmer as well of is a little dangerous I suspect there will be farmers out there producing the products we demand who just about make a living the threshold
Click to expand...
Nobody is stating all farmers are well off. It’s a fact that some own millions and millions of land and their family often have for centuries tax free property passed from generation to generation is a bad thing for greater society
 
sherlock said:
If the farmers get the same treatment as the oil protestors, will you be on here saying how unfair it is?

Can’t have it both ways. If it was unfair for the oil protestors it will be unfair for the farmers.
Click to expand...
I'm sure he would, the thing is the farmers won't be treated the same because they represent a different interest. Making the sentences handed down to the climate protesters doubly harsh (politically motivated).
 
BoroMart said:
Working people or working class people. Farmer with millions of pounds of land are not working class

Working class farmers who don’t own that land won’t be affected
Click to expand...
I respect your view but I can’t agree if a farm has been running for one hundred years and the present owner works hard all year round receiving a £40k salary but has assets from land and machinery to work the farm I would have more respect for him working for a living contributing to taxes than him selling of his land putting his feet up and do nothing productive for the rest of his life I just think it’s dangerous that we believe every farm or farmer is well off yes the land and machinery might add up but if they are working assets they can never be cashed while the farm works in lots of cases
I just believe Starmer should have really looked at those with the broadest shoulders as promised,Starmer himself will be worth more than some of these farms or other businesses mentioned in the thread but as I understand his tax will not rise ?
 
LaPennaBianca said:
Are you taking into account the massive NI cuts the Tories made in 2023/24?

This labour government didn't arrive in a vacuum.

Kemi Badenoch was part of the government that made these unsustainable cuts, made especially to make life difficult for any successor government.

It was a cynical trick.
Click to expand...
I could be wrong but I think these were employees NI cuts not employer’s NI labour increase the latter
 
sherlock said:
If the farmers get the same treatment as the oil protestors, will you be on here saying how unfair it is?

Can’t have it both ways. If it was unfair for the oil protestors it will be unfair for the farmers.
Click to expand...

You really need to ask that?
For the avoidance of doubt, the answer is yes.

But they won’t get the same treatment.
 
Fridgeman said:
I respect your view but I can’t agree if a farm has been running for one hundred years and the present owner works hard all year round receiving a £40k salary but has assets from land and machinery to work the farm I would have more respect for him working for a living contributing to taxes than him selling of his land putting his feet up and do nothing productive for the rest of his life I just think it’s dangerous that we believe every farm or farmer is well off yes the land and machinery might add up but if they are working assets they can never be cashed while the farm works in lots of cases
I just believe Starmer should have really looked at those with the broadest shoulders as promised,Starmer himself will be worth more than some of these farms or other businesses mentioned in the thread but as I understand his tax will not rise ?
Click to expand...
Well that’s quite a lot of assumptions. In this create this hypohh to ethical scenario.

I believe in treating equally. Nobody should have freedom to pass assets on without tax while everyone else has to pay it. They can always raise food prices to get greater profit/pay. It would be negligible price rise on the shelf for everyone
 
Fridgeman said:
What worries me most is that this budget wasn’t targeted on wealth it was or focused on taxation on the private sector but as a result some very hard working people will really struggle when these changes kick in, I fully expect inflation to rise unemployment to rise and business failures to rise I really hope I am wrong but the whole budget is gambling on the tax rises not interfering with growth or tax receipts for a projected number of years if this gamble fails we will all be in a significantly worse position than we are now

Now don’t get me wrong conservatives were disastrous in pursuit of austerity but that for me was just an out right lie as they actually just kept on spending billions on vanity projects but I fear we are being fooled again with promises of a brighter future ahead without any real substance unless you get growth these plans will not work and I can’t see any policies from this budget that promotes growth, no growth will equal more borrowing and inevitable even higher taxes for the same services when you take into account inflation from higher business costs that worries me no end
Click to expand...
We won't know how bad/good this budget is for years
Lots of people happy to make a guess tho
Take your pick - someone will be right
 
BoroMart said:
Well that’s quite a lot of assumptions. In this create this hypohh to ethical scenario.

I believe in treating equally. Nobody should have freedom to pass assets on without tax while everyone else has to pay it. They can always raise food prices to get greater profit/pay. It would be negligible price rise on the shelf for everyone
Click to expand...
I completely respect that
I have never worked on a farm or know any farmers but I don’t believe a blanket policy based on profession rather than actually wealth is a good thing but time will tell I fear labour has got this as wrong if not worse than the Tory’s but with the increase spending it really is no time to get things wrong 🤞
 
Fridgeman said:
I completely respect that
I have never worked on a farm or know any farmers but I don’t believe a blanket policy based on profession rather than actually wealth is a good thing but time will tell I fear labour has got this as wrong if not worse than the Tory’s but with the increase spending it really is no time to get things wrong 🤞
Click to expand...
I see where you are coming from.
They have, however, just stopped a blanket policy for farmers - no IHT. A blanket policy that was introduced in 1984. They paid IHT up until then.
They are bringing them into line with the rest of society albeit at lower rates and a longer period to pay it off.
 
LaPennaBianca said:
They were, but they left a massive hole in the budget that someone needed to pay.

And you can guarantee that Badenoch would be bringing it up if it was employees.

It's completely cynical.
Click to expand...
It’s just perspective it sounds like we all want a system where the well off pay their share and wealth is more evenly distributed it’s just from my perspective that’s not what labour addressed in the budget they literally protected the public sector regardless of wealth and targeted the private sector regardless of wealth I hope they got this right, my gut tells me otherwise 😢
 
1finny said:
I see where you are coming from.
They have, however, just stopped a blanket policy for farmers - no IHT. A blanket policy that was introduced in 1984. They paid IHT up until then.
They are bringing them into line with the rest of society albeit at lower rates and a longer period to pay it off.
Click to expand...
I don’t always reply to your thread responses finny but they are always thought through and objective 👍
 
Fridgeman said:
To brand every farmer as well of is a little dangerous I suspect there will be farmers out there producing the products we demand who just about make a living the threshold as I understand it is for assets land and machinery so I would expect that a working farm with lots of working machinery needed to run the farm will get caught up as a result of adding these assets regardless of cash in the bank or debt, I have no allegiance to farmers but the whole idea of them and us turns my stomach I am all for taxing those who can genuinely afford it but this blanket policy will fail some working farmers and personally I do think the majority will be hard working personally I would rather have products produced in the uk rather than imported do I think it’s important to protect British business in any sectors as best we can
Click to expand...
Well I’ve met a lot of farmers through various ways and I’m yet to meet one poorer than me
 
Fridgeman said:
I respect your view but I can’t agree if a farm has been running for one hundred years and the present owner works hard all year round receiving a £40k salary but has assets from land and machinery to work the farm I would have more respect for him working for a living contributing to taxes than him selling of his land putting his feet up and do nothing productive for the rest of his life I just think it’s dangerous that we believe every farm or farmer is well off yes the land and machinery might add up but if they are working assets they can never be cashed while the farm works in lots of cases
I just believe Starmer should have really looked at those with the broadest shoulders as promised,Starmer himself will be worth more than some of these farms or other businesses mentioned in the thread but as I understand his tax will not rise ?
Click to expand...
If the owner is only making £40k per year off over £3m worth of assets then it's a terrible return on investment and they would be far better off selling up. They'd get £150k risk free just sitting in a bank account off £3m. I just really, really don't believe that the £40k figure is anything more than accounting to reduce profit which incurs tax.

Reality is that anyone that is only making £40k probably has a much smaller farm so assets will be well below the IHT threshold and won't affect them or they earn a lot more and can comfortably afford to pay the tax.
 
Chemicalworker said:
Well I’ve met a lot of farmers through various ways and I’m yet to meet one poorer than me
Click to expand...
That’s fair enough but remember a working farm could be 100 years old or more just making a living and possibly the farm land house are assets are the only pension, now don’t get me wrong I have worked 38 years most of which I never had any pension in place and even now it’s only nest so very poor I will work until 67 possibly older having started at 16 but I like to think I have a balance view of life I personally don’t begrudge working farmers at all there will be good and bad I just think this policy isn’t really targeted at wealth particularly just at branding a certain sector of being wealthy I just think that’s divisive and dangerous
 
Nano said:
If the owner is only making £40k per year off over £3m worth of assets then it's a terrible return on investment and they would be far better off selling up. They'd get £150k risk free just sitting in a bank account off £3m. I just really, really don't believe that the £40k figure is anything more than accounting to reduce profit which incurs tax.

Reality is that anyone that is only making £40k probably has a much smaller farm so assets will be well below the IHT threshold and won't affect them or they earn a lot more and can comfortably afford to pay the tax.
Click to expand...
Even a small farm will have a farm house live stock machinery plus land I don’t think it would to far fetched to assume a small farm reaching the threshold but my point remains I am not sure how much Starmer is worth but I believe he is a multi millionaire he will also have built up a large pension I am sure is he not to be classed as an individual with broader shoulders? Because I can’t see anything in the budget that would increase a person tax in that position unless they run their own business is that what was promised to the electorate?
 
Fridgeman said:
Even a small farm will have a farm house live stock machinery plus land I don’t think it would to far fetched to assume a small farm reaching the threshold but my point remains I am not sure how much Starmer is worth but I believe he is a multi millionaire he will also have built up a large pension I am sure is he not to be classed as an individual with broader shoulders? Because I can’t see anything in the budget that would increase a person tax in that position unless they run their own business is that what was promised to the electorate?
Click to expand...

If Starmer has any investments - which wealthy people do - then he will be being taxed a great deal more.

On Capital Gains Tax, the budget saw an increase in the rate paid by basic-rate taxpayers from 10% to 18% and from 20% to 24% for higher-rate taxpayers.
 
LaPennaBianca said:
If Starmer has any investments - which wealthy people do - then he will be being taxed a great deal more.

On Capital Gains Tax, the budget saw an increase in the rate paid by basic-rate taxpayers from 10% to 18% and from 20% to 24% for higher-rate taxpayers.
Click to expand...
Totally right and he probably does have investments but let’s say he or anybody like him has a good salary good pension and 3m in the bank then they surely have the broadest shoulders but were not targeted despite his promises of those with the broadest shoulders
I am not having a go by the way thank you for taking your time to debate 👍
 
BoroMart said:
Working class farmers who don’t own that land won’t be affected
Click to expand...
In practice I don't think this will be the case.

If the large landowners decide to sell land to pay IHT then they will likely sell off the land farmed by tenants who may then lose their livelehood.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top