posted 14 hours, 50 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Barti Ddu 🏴☠️🏴 (U9094)
posted 22 hours, 51 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 4 minutes ago
Barti Ddu, I do sympathise with that cause. I still don't really understand how the measure under discussion would have devastating results. Small farmers will be much less affected than large estates, and if their farm is valued above £1million, they pay a marginal tax rate on the excess, not on that first million. And from what I read, they have a decade to pay. If they can't sustain that level of taxation, that's horrible for them, but they do have a £1million+ asset to sell. In that eventuality, I guess there are ways that I don't appreciate, in my ignorance, in which this affects the local community, and perhaps you can explain that to me so I understand better. As I see it, if the farm is viable (which a multi-million valuation would suggest) it will continue to operate, and will continue to sustain the same number of local jobs as before. Why would it lead to the closure of shops and pubs, or contribute to the decline of the Welsh language?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Small farms, in comparison to the large estates, will have a value over £1m. It’s not just the farm house and the land, you have other assets such as livestock, machinery etc.
This will lead smaller farms having to sell parcels of land to continue operating. This is even before the inheritance tax comes into effect.
Now, a number of communities in North Wales have seen the young farming workers move to find work elsewhere. They are predominantly Welsh speaking individuals.
A direct result of this is the closure of Welsh rural primary schools, because the population isn’t there to sustain them. I’m sure you can work out for yourself the impact of Welsh primary schools closing has on a Welsh speaking community. The footfall isn’t there to keep the shops and pubs viable either. Pubs around me are community run, just so they can keep the village going, but this is getting harder to do.
Welsh speaking young people are moving to larger towns areas, where Welsh is not a daily way of life in a lot of circumstances.
Now I appreciate this is unique to Wales, but the inheritance tax will exasperate matters.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe too late to acknowledge your post - sorry, had work to do yesterday. From what you write I can see that this inheritance tax reform could exacerbate the problem in Welsh communities, and no one wants that. I guess I would just comment that dealing with the hole in public finances - unless the government concludes that massive borrowing is possible - involves unleashing pain on people: in the form of tax rises or cuts to services and benefits. My preference would always be to ask the wealthier sections of the population to shoulder more of that burden, and overall I think the government is more or less attempting to do that. I guess when applying this to farmers, it comes down to who should feel that pain instead, or why they in particular they should be exempt from it. That's a hard question for either of us to answer. I do think the UK and Welsh governments should also pay attention to the health of rural Welsh communities (and rural communities in general), which is clearly a problem with much broader causes. And I hope that the effects prove to be more in line with the milder projections.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Good to read your reply.
I think we are on the same page mostly. My issue is not the paying the inheritance tax, more the consequences of it, and the fact in would be irreversible.
For example, they do have a 10 year timeframe to pay it, but who wants to take over a business and be saddled with a massive debt.
The forward planning of gifting it, and hoping you live for another 7 years is has it’s dangers too. I know of many instances where divorce has led to selling off of family farms. It’s a dangerous move in many ways.
Anyway, I think I have raised legitimate concerns, and I appreciate a sensible debate with an honest poster.
posted 14 hours, 40 minutes ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by It’s time for some Lancashire hotPote, Ruben (U17054)
posted 2 hours, 36 minutes ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 2 hours, 26 minutes ago
Inheritance tax is the most stupid concept.
Imagine going to work, getting taxed, going to the supermarket in your car that you paid tax on, whilst paying road tax, with petrol that you've paid tax on, getting into the shop buying food that's got tax on it, taking it home...giving it to your kid, and they need to pay tax on it when you hand it to them.
Crazy.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not a fan of equality of opportunity then Nick?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Would you be happy with the above scenario?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m certainly comfortable with it.
Personally, I’d prefer it if we had a far more progressive tax system, for example, with a reduced VAT burden and higher income tax threshold, and with CGT equalised with income tax, higher corporation tax, and more income tax bands.
But then you can’t have everything, can you?
posted 14 hours, 35 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 🏴 JA606 Class Act (U2462)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by kramthered (U10304)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 🏴 JA606 Class Act (U2462)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by It’s time for some Lancashire hotPote, Ruben (U17054)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by kramthered (U10304)
posted 29 minutes ago
My understanding of economics is rudimentary, but I’m going to guess without googling, that, the more the poorer are paid the more they spend allowing companies to invest more ?
If I’m correct, then it’s good for the economy to settle the strikes ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you want to get money circulating around the economy, you put more in the pockets of the lowest paid, who spend the greatest proportion (all) of their disposable income.
In short, yes, you’re right.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's why I keep arguing (not sure why I bother though sometimes) in Facebook groups in Gwynedd around an Article 4 direction that it'd be better for people if property values fell and that people had a smaller mortgage and more money to spend. You'd think I was the devil for suggesting this though. "What about my investment"?
—————————————————-
If you’re inclined watch politics live today on BBC
They had a professor of economics who rationally explained that the affect of this policy is likely to result in land prices decreasing which is great for the next generation of farmers.
The Tory MP response was something along the lines of try telling that to the farmers 🤷🏻♂️
——————-
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2024/11/19/why-inheritance-tax-charges-are-really-good-for-real-farmers-but-not-for-financial-whizz-kids/
Wasn't this, was it?
———————————-
No, the BBC don’t invite Richard Murphy on much these days 🤔
Here it is
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0bjf8p5
A much milder man, but his patience was tested.
posted 14 hours, 27 minutes ago
comment by kramthered (U10304)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 🏴 JA606 Class Act (U2462)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by kramthered (U10304)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 🏴 JA606 Class Act (U2462)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by It’s time for some Lancashire hotPote, Ruben (U17054)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by kramthered (U10304)
posted 29 minutes ago
My understanding of economics is rudimentary, but I’m going to guess without googling, that, the more the poorer are paid the more they spend allowing companies to invest more ?
If I’m correct, then it’s good for the economy to settle the strikes ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you want to get money circulating around the economy, you put more in the pockets of the lowest paid, who spend the greatest proportion (all) of their disposable income.
In short, yes, you’re right.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's why I keep arguing (not sure why I bother though sometimes) in Facebook groups in Gwynedd around an Article 4 direction that it'd be better for people if property values fell and that people had a smaller mortgage and more money to spend. You'd think I was the devil for suggesting this though. "What about my investment"?
—————————————————-
If you’re inclined watch politics live today on BBC
They had a professor of economics who rationally explained that the affect of this policy is likely to result in land prices decreasing which is great for the next generation of farmers.
The Tory MP response was something along the lines of try telling that to the farmers 🤷🏻♂️
——————-
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2024/11/19/why-inheritance-tax-charges-are-really-good-for-real-farmers-but-not-for-financial-whizz-kids/
Wasn't this, was it?
———————————-
No, the BBC don’t invite Richard Murphy on much these days 🤔
Here it is
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0bjf8p5
A much milder man, but his patience was tested.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Much appreciated.
posted 8 hours, 55 minutes ago
The 7 year rule on IHT has a limit of £335k all in unless it’s from a married couple which then is raised to £500k.
Having been frozen year on year and as property prices increase; many millions more are subsequently caught out by it and are forced to sell property in 6 months after the death of the gifter. HMRC may extend that period to 1 year at their discretion which often happens to be fair.
Not only a tax but a significant stealth tax as the limits haven’t even kept place with inflation.
Sign in if you want to comment
British farmers
Page 11 of 11
7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11
posted 14 hours, 50 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Barti Ddu 🏴☠️🏴 (U9094)
posted 22 hours, 51 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 4 minutes ago
Barti Ddu, I do sympathise with that cause. I still don't really understand how the measure under discussion would have devastating results. Small farmers will be much less affected than large estates, and if their farm is valued above £1million, they pay a marginal tax rate on the excess, not on that first million. And from what I read, they have a decade to pay. If they can't sustain that level of taxation, that's horrible for them, but they do have a £1million+ asset to sell. In that eventuality, I guess there are ways that I don't appreciate, in my ignorance, in which this affects the local community, and perhaps you can explain that to me so I understand better. As I see it, if the farm is viable (which a multi-million valuation would suggest) it will continue to operate, and will continue to sustain the same number of local jobs as before. Why would it lead to the closure of shops and pubs, or contribute to the decline of the Welsh language?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Small farms, in comparison to the large estates, will have a value over £1m. It’s not just the farm house and the land, you have other assets such as livestock, machinery etc.
This will lead smaller farms having to sell parcels of land to continue operating. This is even before the inheritance tax comes into effect.
Now, a number of communities in North Wales have seen the young farming workers move to find work elsewhere. They are predominantly Welsh speaking individuals.
A direct result of this is the closure of Welsh rural primary schools, because the population isn’t there to sustain them. I’m sure you can work out for yourself the impact of Welsh primary schools closing has on a Welsh speaking community. The footfall isn’t there to keep the shops and pubs viable either. Pubs around me are community run, just so they can keep the village going, but this is getting harder to do.
Welsh speaking young people are moving to larger towns areas, where Welsh is not a daily way of life in a lot of circumstances.
Now I appreciate this is unique to Wales, but the inheritance tax will exasperate matters.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe too late to acknowledge your post - sorry, had work to do yesterday. From what you write I can see that this inheritance tax reform could exacerbate the problem in Welsh communities, and no one wants that. I guess I would just comment that dealing with the hole in public finances - unless the government concludes that massive borrowing is possible - involves unleashing pain on people: in the form of tax rises or cuts to services and benefits. My preference would always be to ask the wealthier sections of the population to shoulder more of that burden, and overall I think the government is more or less attempting to do that. I guess when applying this to farmers, it comes down to who should feel that pain instead, or why they in particular they should be exempt from it. That's a hard question for either of us to answer. I do think the UK and Welsh governments should also pay attention to the health of rural Welsh communities (and rural communities in general), which is clearly a problem with much broader causes. And I hope that the effects prove to be more in line with the milder projections.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Good to read your reply.
I think we are on the same page mostly. My issue is not the paying the inheritance tax, more the consequences of it, and the fact in would be irreversible.
For example, they do have a 10 year timeframe to pay it, but who wants to take over a business and be saddled with a massive debt.
The forward planning of gifting it, and hoping you live for another 7 years is has it’s dangers too. I know of many instances where divorce has led to selling off of family farms. It’s a dangerous move in many ways.
Anyway, I think I have raised legitimate concerns, and I appreciate a sensible debate with an honest poster.
posted 14 hours, 40 minutes ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by It’s time for some Lancashire hotPote, Ruben (U17054)
posted 2 hours, 36 minutes ago
comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 2 hours, 26 minutes ago
Inheritance tax is the most stupid concept.
Imagine going to work, getting taxed, going to the supermarket in your car that you paid tax on, whilst paying road tax, with petrol that you've paid tax on, getting into the shop buying food that's got tax on it, taking it home...giving it to your kid, and they need to pay tax on it when you hand it to them.
Crazy.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not a fan of equality of opportunity then Nick?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Would you be happy with the above scenario?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m certainly comfortable with it.
Personally, I’d prefer it if we had a far more progressive tax system, for example, with a reduced VAT burden and higher income tax threshold, and with CGT equalised with income tax, higher corporation tax, and more income tax bands.
But then you can’t have everything, can you?
posted 14 hours, 35 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 🏴 JA606 Class Act (U2462)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by kramthered (U10304)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 🏴 JA606 Class Act (U2462)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by It’s time for some Lancashire hotPote, Ruben (U17054)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by kramthered (U10304)
posted 29 minutes ago
My understanding of economics is rudimentary, but I’m going to guess without googling, that, the more the poorer are paid the more they spend allowing companies to invest more ?
If I’m correct, then it’s good for the economy to settle the strikes ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you want to get money circulating around the economy, you put more in the pockets of the lowest paid, who spend the greatest proportion (all) of their disposable income.
In short, yes, you’re right.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's why I keep arguing (not sure why I bother though sometimes) in Facebook groups in Gwynedd around an Article 4 direction that it'd be better for people if property values fell and that people had a smaller mortgage and more money to spend. You'd think I was the devil for suggesting this though. "What about my investment"?
—————————————————-
If you’re inclined watch politics live today on BBC
They had a professor of economics who rationally explained that the affect of this policy is likely to result in land prices decreasing which is great for the next generation of farmers.
The Tory MP response was something along the lines of try telling that to the farmers 🤷🏻♂️
——————-
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2024/11/19/why-inheritance-tax-charges-are-really-good-for-real-farmers-but-not-for-financial-whizz-kids/
Wasn't this, was it?
———————————-
No, the BBC don’t invite Richard Murphy on much these days 🤔
Here it is
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0bjf8p5
A much milder man, but his patience was tested.
posted 14 hours, 27 minutes ago
comment by kramthered (U10304)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 🏴 JA606 Class Act (U2462)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by kramthered (U10304)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 🏴 JA606 Class Act (U2462)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by It’s time for some Lancashire hotPote, Ruben (U17054)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by kramthered (U10304)
posted 29 minutes ago
My understanding of economics is rudimentary, but I’m going to guess without googling, that, the more the poorer are paid the more they spend allowing companies to invest more ?
If I’m correct, then it’s good for the economy to settle the strikes ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you want to get money circulating around the economy, you put more in the pockets of the lowest paid, who spend the greatest proportion (all) of their disposable income.
In short, yes, you’re right.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's why I keep arguing (not sure why I bother though sometimes) in Facebook groups in Gwynedd around an Article 4 direction that it'd be better for people if property values fell and that people had a smaller mortgage and more money to spend. You'd think I was the devil for suggesting this though. "What about my investment"?
—————————————————-
If you’re inclined watch politics live today on BBC
They had a professor of economics who rationally explained that the affect of this policy is likely to result in land prices decreasing which is great for the next generation of farmers.
The Tory MP response was something along the lines of try telling that to the farmers 🤷🏻♂️
——————-
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2024/11/19/why-inheritance-tax-charges-are-really-good-for-real-farmers-but-not-for-financial-whizz-kids/
Wasn't this, was it?
———————————-
No, the BBC don’t invite Richard Murphy on much these days 🤔
Here it is
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0bjf8p5
A much milder man, but his patience was tested.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Much appreciated.
posted 8 hours, 55 minutes ago
The 7 year rule on IHT has a limit of £335k all in unless it’s from a married couple which then is raised to £500k.
Having been frozen year on year and as property prices increase; many millions more are subsequently caught out by it and are forced to sell property in 6 months after the death of the gifter. HMRC may extend that period to 1 year at their discretion which often happens to be fair.
Not only a tax but a significant stealth tax as the limits haven’t even kept place with inflation.
Page 11 of 11
7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11