NFU says government will reap what it sows after alternative to family farm tax goes unheard by Treasury
The devastating impacts on farming families and the nation’s food security from the family farm tax sit squarely on government’s shoulders, the NFU said yesterday (18 February), after ministers bluntly refused any suggestion of a compromise offered by farming unions and organisations.
The stark warning comes after Exchequer Secretary James Murray and Food Security Minister Daniel Zeichner called in representatives from across the farming sector including the TFA (Tenant Farmers Association), CLA (Country Land and Business Association) and CAAV (Central Association of Agricultural Valuers), and the wider UK farming unions, only to tell them the government had no interest in compromise.
Speaking after yesterday’s meeting, NFU President Tom Bradshaw said: “Disappointed doesn’t cover how I feel after this meeting. Today, we have repeated our concerns about the impact on farming families; they don’t care. On the impact on families who can’t afford vast tax bills coming their way on the death of a loved one; they don’t care. On the elderly – the most vulnerable people in our farming community – who feel they are now a burden on their family; they don’t care.
“This morally bankrupt position sits with this government, and, without change, ministers will reap the consequences.”
The NFU president said farming groups went into yesterday’s meeting with an inheritance tax solution based on a “claw back mechanism” suggested by other tax experts.
“Put simply, farmers don’t get money when they inherit, they get the farm, the business asset, and often the debt. Any money they do get, they get when they sell. So, our suggestion is based on that premise,” he explained.
“Our suggestion, which is almost revenue neutral meaning the Chancellor gets her planned income, is that if an inherited farm is sold then inheritance tax gets paid. Crucially, this would allow family farms that want to continue to produce the nation’s food to do so, while giving the Treasury what it wants.”
Yet Bradshaw said this solution was met with no response from the Treasury yesterday.
“Despite the Chancellor calling for alternatives, and today the UK food sector went collectively to share those, I am hugely disappointed there was no response from Treasury today, no acknowledgement that this could be done better,” he said.
“This is the same Treasury department which admits it has not yet carried out impact assessments on its current policy. Let’s remember, this policy has now been challenged by farming unions and agriculture representatives from across the UK, it has been challenged by the independent Office of Budget Responsibility, by the Efra Select Committee, by tax advisors to the government, and recently the National Preparedness Committee has reminded us that UK food security is in a precarious state.
“And every single major food retailer in the UK has also called for change. Why? Because they can see what this will do to the security of the supply of their products.”
Bradshaw added: “This is a mess, but there is still time for Treasury to review. I urge them to look at the proposal put to them by all the major farming organisations today. It will raise the money needed. It is a way forward which is fair, removes the huge risk to British agriculture, including significant emotional and financial pressures, and delivers for UK food security, something the government continues to insist is a priority.”
He concluded his impassioned statement with an expression of thanks to farming members and supporters, and condemnation of the government’s actions to date.
“I want to thank NFU members for their continued support and I thank the public who continue to stand by British farming, with 275,000 people signing our petition. Thank you to those back-benchers who have come out to support their rural constituencies and thank you to those political parties which have pledged to dump this awful policy if they’re elected,” Bradshaw said.
“From what we are told, the Chancellor has refused even to meet with her own worried MPs on this issue. Heads in the sand, fingers in ears, zero empathy. What a way for a government to behave.”
