Commenting on the letter, NFU Cymru President Aled Jones said: “There has been some speculation that there could be changes to the Inheritance Tax treatment of agricultural property. NFU Cymru is very much alive to this and has been working on this issue for some time, having written to all Welsh MPs and the Chancellor on this matter at the beginning of the month, and having raised and discussed the issue with numerous MPs over the last few weeks.
“Following further speculation about possible changes to inheritance tax in recent days, the four UK NFUs have now penned a joint letter to the Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, setting out why these reliefs, which are crucial to the viability of farm businesses, should be kept in place. The recent speculation, if correct, is very concerning, as we know that APR and BPR are key to preserving family farms as viable small businesses when they are passed down the generations.
“Returns from farming are often extremely modest, with the return on capital employed for farming, after taking into account a wage for the farmer, averaging less than 1%. This means that the vast majority of farm owners would be unable to meet any IHT charge, even utilising the entire return on capital made during the whole period of ownership. My great worry is that such changes would force the break-up of farms, something which would be devastating for Wales’ family farm structure and the wider rural community.
“The removal or reform of APR would also mean that many landowners, large or small would no longer be incentivised to ensure their land is farmed, something which is often done by way of farm tenancies. My fear is the very real risk that the reform of APR will cause a significant contraction of farmland being made available for tenancies or contracts, which is often the lifeblood of small family farm businesses and a critical entry point for young and first-time farmers. With around 30% of agricultural land in Wales rented, it is clear that any change to APR could impact a huge number of farm businesses and their ongoing viability.
'Threat to our family farm structure'
“These changes, if they go ahead, are not only a threat to our family farm structure and our tenanted sector but also to our food security and the shared ambition of farmers, the government and the public to protect and grow our sector and enhance our farmed environment.”
Changes to APR and BPR were also high on the agenda for NFU Cymru’s Rural Affairs Board, which discussed the rumoured changes the previous day. NFU Cymru Rural Affairs Board Chairman Hedd Pugh said: “Like Aled and everyone else involved in Welsh agriculture, NFU Cymru’s Rural Affairs Board was deeply concerned to hear of these possible changes. The last few years in particular have been very difficult for farmers as inflation and extreme market volatility have battered sector confidence, whilst at the same time of course the basis for paying support to farmers is subject to complete overhaul. The impact of ending or curtailing these reliefs on farmland will be felt for generations, and in many cases farms and farmland could be lost to food production forever.”
Mr Jones concluded: “We now really need to ensure that sector confidence is restored, and we urge UK Government to consider carefully the impacts such changes would have on an already fragile sector before making any final decision.”
Write to your MP
With the Chancellor's Budget due on 30 October, time is running out to make your voice heard. The NFU is urging farmers to write to your MP, if you haven't already, and safeguard the future of our farms.
Write to your MP
Read the letter sent to the Chancellor
Dear Chancellor,
As farming unions representing farmer and grower businesses across the UK, we are writing to you to express our severe concerns about the recent speculation that Inheritance Tax Reliefs that are crucial to farm businesses, including Agricultural Property Relief (APR) as well as Business Property Relief (BPR), are to be reviewed, and either abolished or curtailed, in the forthcoming Budget.
While farmers and growers understand that your government will need to make some difficult tax and spending decisions in the Budget and over the weeks that follow, they have also listened closely to the words you, the Prime Minister, and others have said about the importance of backing British farming, stimulating growth and investment in the sector, and underpinning our food security and environmental performance through sustained support for British agriculture. Last year, the Prime Minister said that farmers cannot have “constantly moving goalposts,” promising to lead a government that listens to farmers, that “that heeds early warnings, that shows the level of ambition needed to tackle the challenges that you face”.
In particular, with many farmers battered by the loss of direct payments, two years of severe flooding, inflation and extremely volatile market conditions, we welcomed reassurances from the Defra Secretary of State, The Rt Hon, Steve Reed MP, last year that Labour “have no intention of changing APR”.
This speculation is, therefore, extremely concerning. In particular, the impact of removing or reforming IHT reliefs available to farm businesses, and the contribution they make to our food security and our countryside, seem not to be understood within government. Whatever the motivation might be for individuals purchasing farmland, it is clear that the rules for qualifying for these reliefs mean that such investment has become a critical part of the ongoing viability of farms of all types and sizes throughout the UK. APR and BPR are not, as has been suggested, ‘loopholes’, but targeted and necessary reliefs designed to allow multi-generational businesses to contribute towards our food security and economic growth.
APR and BPR underpin viable working farming businesses, of all shapes and sizes. Returns from farming are often extremely modest, with the return on capital employed for farming, after taking into account a wage for the farmer, averaging less than 1%. This means that the vast majority of farm owners would be unable to meet any IHT charge, even if they were to utilise their entire return on capital employed during their career/period of ownership.
Just as importantly, APR is also a crucial aspect driving the availability of farm tenancies across the UK. If APR were to be abolished or curtailed, many landowners – large and small - would no longer be incentivised to ensure their land is farmed. Often this is done by way of farm tenancies, but also by employing farm managers and workers directly or through contracting arrangements with neighbouring farmers. There is a very real risk that the removal or curtailment of APR will cause a major contraction of farmland being made available for tenancies or contracts, which is often the lifeblood of small family farm businesses and a critical entry point for young and first-time farmers. Given that 64% of UK farmland is occupied by farms that consisted wholly or partly of tenant holdings, and 45% of all holdings in England are either fully or partially tenanted, it is clear that the abolition or curtailment of APR could impact a huge number of farm businesses and their ongoing viability.
This is not only a threat to our food security, but also to the shared ambition of farmers, the government and the public to protect and enhance our farmed environment. The government recently announced that land managed under environmental agreements will qualify for APR. This important decision would clearly be undermined by any changes to IHT reliefs.
Your government has consistently made the case for policies that can drive investment and growth across the economy, something farmers and growers have been delighted to hear. Nevertheless, poorly designed reforms to IHT reliefs on farmland will certainly do the opposite – drying up investment in farming, reducing our capacity to produce food, reducing the availability of land for farm businesses, and making many family farms – whether owner-occupied or tenanted – no longer viable.
Last year the Prime Minister stated that “losing a farm is not like losing any other business. It can’t come back”. This profound insight into the nature of farm businesses demonstrated a keen and very welcome understanding of our sector. And, put simply, the impact of ending or curtailing IHT reliefs on farmland will last not for quarters but for generations. In many cases farms and farmland could be lost to food production forever.
We urge you to consider, as a matter of priority, the impact of any decision you take on APR and BPR on family farms, broader rural businesses, our environmental ambitions and on food security. Farmers have been exasperated over recent years by a tendency for government to introduce and implement policies that have a negative impact on domestic food production in the absence of any impact assessment, and we are hugely concerned that your approach to IHT reliefs will simply be another example of this.
Yours sincerely,
NFU President Tom Bradshaw
NFU Cymru President Aled Jones
President of NFU Scotland Martin Kennedy
President of the Ulster Farmers’ Union William Irvine