Farming families hit by stealth Tax

8 messages

Originally from: Farmtalking

From: ...

Originally from The Times on line – January 27, 2003

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2–556337,00.html

Farming families hit by 'stealth tax' on their houses
By Valerie Elliott, Countryside Editor

THE Inland Revenue is to levy a 40 per cent inheritance tax on some farmhouses, farming land and other farm buildings. At present, people who inherit agricultural property, including the land, can claim up to 100 per cent inheritance tax relief. The Revenue is challenging that relief on the basis that many farmhouses are no longer “character-appropriate” to the farm business.

Tax officials also believe that many farmhouses are no longer an integral part of farming as farmers move into other money-making ventures to boost their income.

The Country Land and Business Association and the National Farmers’ Union want ministers to clarify the position. Rural campaigners believe that at a time when the Government is encouraging farmers to embark on business projects to help to revive the rural economy, people could find their children unable to inherit the family farm.

Some farmers have given up farming and rent their land. Others have diversified so much that their income from farming is only a tiny proportion of their turnover. Former farm buildings have also been converted into offices and craft workshops.

In those cases, the Inland Revenue may insist that the house is no longer an integral part of the farm business because the farmer is no longer involved in farming. Receiving rental income for land worked by another farmer does not count as agricultural income for tax relief purposes.

Lord Haskins, the Government’s Rural Policy Adviser, said: “This must be an attempt by the Inland Revenue to stamp out bogus farming where someone from the City snaps up a big farm, lives in the house and rents out the land. I see nothing wrong with that, but if the Revenue is targeting bona fide farming families and penalising them with more tax, then I think this should be looked at urgently.”

Sir Donald Curry, chairman of the Policy Commission on the Future of Farming and Food, said: “This could lead to the discouragement of diversification. Anything that obstructs structural change would present a problem in delivering the innovative countryside we need.”

Concern has been raised after an attempt by the Inland Revenue to deny agricultural property relief on the 127-acre estate of Rosemary Antrobus, who owned and farmed Cookhill Priory at Inkberrow, Worcestershire, all her life. The Inland Revenue considered that the 18th-century house, which had been extended over the years, was not of a character appropriate to the farm.

Even though the Revenue lost the case because lawyers proved that the house was used as farm office and canteen, and that the owner was involved in all aspects of the farm business, property experts believe that it will be difficult for other farmers to win exemption from inheritance tax because many have set up projects unrelated to farming.

Andrew Grant, head of the Country Land and Business Association in Worcester, and the agent who acted for the Antrobus estate, said: “This is just another backdoor tax, a tax by stealth.”

Jim Quinn, of Morton Fisher solicitors in Worcester, said that the Inland Revenue was “targeting the largest houses that are gentrified or have some historical importance”.

The Revenue said: “Agricultural property relief is available for buildings when they are used as farmhouses so long as they are of a character appropriate to the farm they are part of. That helps target the benefit of agriculture by denying relief for cases where there is no real farming going on or the residential aspect is out of balance with the farming.”

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2–556337,00.html

Originally from: Burkie

Dear Jane: Why quote Valerie Elliott? She's done as much or more to destroy the general farming community in England as anyone.

Burkie in Kansas

P.S. not a good reporter

Author wrote:
From The Times on line – January 27, 2003
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2–556337,00.html
Farming families hit by 'stealth tax' on their houses
By Valerie Elliott, Countryside Editor
THE Inland Revenue is to levy a 40 per cent inheritance tax on some farmhouses, farming land and other farm buildings.
At present, people who inherit agricultural property, including the land, can claim up to 100 per cent inheritance tax relief. The Revenue is challenging that relief on the basis that many farmhouses are no longer “character-appropriate” to the farm business.
Tax officials also believe that many farmhouses are no longer an integral part of farming as farmers move into other money-making ventures to boost their income.
The Country Land and Business Association and the National Farmers’ Union want ministers to clarify the position. Rural campaigners believe that at a time when the Government is encouraging farmers to embark on business projects to help to revive the rural economy, people could find their children unable to inherit the family farm.
Some farmers have given up farming and rent their land. Others have diversified so much that their income from farming is only a tiny proportion of their turnover. Former farm buildings have also been converted into offices and craft workshops.
In those cases, the Inland Revenue may insist that the house is no longer an integral part of the farm business because the farmer is no longer involved in farming. Receiving rental income for land worked by another farmer does not count as agricultural income for tax relief purposes.
Lord Haskins, the Government’s Rural Policy Adviser, said: “This must be an attempt by the Inland Revenue to stamp out bogus farming where someone from the City snaps up a big farm, lives in the house and rents out the land. I see nothing wrong with that, but if the Revenue is targeting bona fide farming families and penalising them with more tax, then I think this should be looked at urgently.”
Sir Donald Curry, chairman of the Policy Commission on the Future of Farming and Food, said: “This could lead to the discouragement of diversification. Anything that obstructs structural change would present a problem in delivering the innovative countryside we need.”
Concern has been raised after an attempt by the Inland Revenue to deny agricultural property relief on the 127-acre estate of Rosemary Antrobus, who owned and farmed Cookhill Priory at Inkberrow, Worcestershire, all her life. The Inland Revenue considered that the 18th-century house, which had been extended over the years, was not of a character appropriate to the farm.
Even though the Revenue lost the case because lawyers proved that the house was used as farm office and canteen, and that the owner was involved in all aspects of the farm business, property experts believe that it will be difficult for other farmers to win exemption from inheritance tax because many have set up projects unrelated to farming.
Andrew Grant, head of the Country Land and Business Association in Worcester, and the agent who acted for the Antrobus estate, said: “This is just another backdoor tax, a tax by stealth.”
Jim Quinn, of Morton Fisher solicitors in Worcester, said that the Inland Revenue was “targeting the largest houses that are gentrified or have some historical importance”.
The Revenue said: “Agricultural property relief is available for buildings when they are used as farmhouses so long as they are of a character appropriate to the farm they are part of. That helps target the benefit of agriculture by denying relief for cases where there is no real farming going on or the residential aspect is out of balance with the farming.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2–556337,00.html

Originally from: Farmtalking

Hi Gary!

I have to say in answer to your message – 'Why not?'

Farmtalking has, and continues to try to 'provide informtion, help and advice for farming families in the UK' (See http://www.farmtalking.org).

Therefore I quote and report items of interest and information from many sources.

If we are 'informed' we have a chance to make our own decisions and act accordingly. There is no doubt that the speedy exchange of such information, as well as ideas and opinions via the web, gives us great a advantage and we should be grateful for it even if at times we may not agree with or like what we learn as a result!

Best wishes – Jane

Author wrote:
Dear Jane: Why quote Valerie Elliott? She's done as much or more to destroy the general farming community in England as anyone.
Burkie in Kansas
P.S. not a good reporter
Author wrote:
From The Times on line – January 27, 2003
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2–556337,00.html
Farming families hit by 'stealth tax' on their houses
By Valerie Elliott, Countryside Editor
THE Inland Revenue is to levy a 40 per cent inheritance tax on some farmhouses, farming land and other farm buildings.
At present, people who inherit agricultural property, including the land, can claim up to 100 per cent inheritance tax relief. The Revenue is challenging that relief on the basis that many farmhouses are no longer “character-appropriate” to the farm business.
Tax officials also believe that many farmhouses are no longer an integral part of farming as farmers move into other money-making ventures to boost their income.
The Country Land and Business Association and the National Farmers’ Union want ministers to clarify the position. Rural campaigners believe that at a time when the Government is encouraging farmers to embark on business projects to help to revive the rural economy, people could find their children unable to inherit the family farm.
Some farmers have given up farming and rent their land. Others have diversified so much that their income from farming is only a tiny proportion of their turnover. Former farm buildings have also been converted into offices and craft workshops.
In those cases, the Inland Revenue may insist that the house is no longer an integral part of the farm business because the farmer is no longer involved in farming. Receiving rental income for land worked by another farmer does not count as agricultural income for tax relief purposes.
Lord Haskins, the Government’s Rural Policy Adviser, said: “This must be an attempt by the Inland Revenue to stamp out bogus farming where someone from the City snaps up a big farm, lives in the house and rents out the land. I see nothing wrong with that, but if the Revenue is targeting bona fide farming families and penalising them with more tax, then I think this should be looked at urgently.”
Sir Donald Curry, chairman of the Policy Commission on the Future of Farming and Food, said: “This could lead to the discouragement of diversification. Anything that obstructs structural change would present a problem in delivering the innovative countryside we need.”
Concern has been raised after an attempt by the Inland Revenue to deny agricultural property relief on the 127-acre estate of Rosemary Antrobus, who owned and farmed Cookhill Priory at Inkberrow, Worcestershire, all her life. The Inland Revenue considered that the 18th-century house, which had been extended over the years, was not of a character appropriate to the farm.
Even though the Revenue lost the case because lawyers proved that the house was used as farm office and canteen, and that the owner was involved in all aspects of the farm business, property experts believe that it will be difficult for other farmers to win exemption from inheritance tax because many have set up projects unrelated to farming.
Andrew Grant, head of the Country Land and Business Association in Worcester, and the agent who acted for the Antrobus estate, said: “This is just another backdoor tax, a tax by stealth.”
Jim Quinn, of Morton Fisher solicitors in Worcester, said that the Inland Revenue was “targeting the largest houses that are gentrified or have some historical importance”.
The Revenue said: “Agricultural property relief is available for buildings when they are used as farmhouses so long as they are of a character appropriate to the farm they are part of. That helps target the benefit of agriculture by denying relief for cases where there is no real farming going on or the residential aspect is out of balance with the farming.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2–556337,00.html

Originally from: Burkie

Dear Friends: Farming, as you've known it to be in the U.K, is doomed, as long as your crew at #10 Downing Street calls the shots. Be prepared....you're gonna start sending a higher proportion of your income to #10.

Burkie in Kansas

Author wrote:
Dear Jane: Why quote Valerie Elliott? She's done as much or more to destroy the general farming community in England as anyone.
Burkie in Kansas
P.S. not a good reporter
Author wrote:
From The Times on line – January 27, 2003
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2–556337,00.html
Farming families hit by 'stealth tax' on their houses
By Valerie Elliott, Countryside Editor
THE Inland Revenue is to levy a 40 per cent inheritance tax on some farmhouses, farming land and other farm buildings.
At present, people who inherit agricultural property, including the land, can claim up to 100 per cent inheritance tax relief. The Revenue is challenging that relief on the basis that many farmhouses are no longer “character-appropriate” to the farm business.
Tax officials also believe that many farmhouses are no longer an integral part of farming as farmers move into other money-making ventures to boost their income.
The Country Land and Business Association and the National Farmers’ Union want ministers to clarify the position. Rural campaigners believe that at a time when the Government is encouraging farmers to embark on business projects to help to revive the rural economy, people could find their children unable to inherit the family farm.
Some farmers have given up farming and rent their land. Others have diversified so much that their income from farming is only a tiny proportion of their turnover. Former farm buildings have also been converted into offices and craft workshops.
In those cases, the Inland Revenue may insist that the house is no longer an integral part of the farm business because the farmer is no longer involved in farming. Receiving rental income for land worked by another farmer does not count as agricultural income for tax relief purposes.
Lord Haskins, the Government’s Rural Policy Adviser, said: “This must be an attempt by the Inland Revenue to stamp out bogus farming where someone from the City snaps up a big farm, lives in the house and rents out the land. I see nothing wrong with that, but if the Revenue is targeting bona fide farming families and penalising them with more tax, then I think this should be looked at urgently.”
Sir Donald Curry, chairman of the Policy Commission on the Future of Farming and Food, said: “This could lead to the discouragement of diversification. Anything that obstructs structural change would present a problem in delivering the innovative countryside we need.”
Concern has been raised after an attempt by the Inland Revenue to deny agricultural property relief on the 127-acre estate of Rosemary Antrobus, who owned and farmed Cookhill Priory at Inkberrow, Worcestershire, all her life. The Inland Revenue considered that the 18th-century house, which had been extended over the years, was not of a character appropriate to the farm.
Even though the Revenue lost the case because lawyers proved that the house was used as farm office and canteen, and that the owner was involved in all aspects of the farm business, property experts believe that it will be difficult for other farmers to win exemption from inheritance tax because many have set up projects unrelated to farming.
Andrew Grant, head of the Country Land and Business Association in Worcester, and the agent who acted for the Antrobus estate, said: “This is just another backdoor tax, a tax by stealth.”
Jim Quinn, of Morton Fisher solicitors in Worcester, said that the Inland Revenue was “targeting the largest houses that are gentrified or have some historical importance”.
The Revenue said: “Agricultural property relief is available for buildings when they are used as farmhouses so long as they are of a character appropriate to the farm they are part of. That helps target the benefit of agriculture by denying relief for cases where there is no real farming going on or the residential aspect is out of balance with the farming.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2–556337,00.html

Originally from: brentns

Subject: Re: [farmtalking] RE: Farming families hit by stealth Tax
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 06:54:12 EST
Dear All,
Our problem is that we really believe a Minister has special knowledge and
a
strong, dedicated character. IE that he really KNOWS.
The fact is that an ambitious fella on the make goes to uni' and gets a
degree, then he looks for a suitable career in politics.
Quite often this bod has far less wisdom or practical knowledge than the
poor
b*****ds whose businesses he can ruin by the stroke of a pen, because many
of
his ilk have never really done anything in the real world.
I should know; mine and hundreds of other small businesses in Australia got
wiped out by "The World's Greatest Treasurer", AKA Paul Keating. Fair goes
to
Paul (the arrogant bastard), he's a clever bloke, he collected antique
silver
and Bob Hawke's scalp, then he cut off our tariffs and our businesses in
one
stroke.
ANYWAY, the purpose of this rant is to remind all of us that our glorious
leadership is even more human and fallible than us poor bloody battlers. We
only do the flamin' work, figure our overheads and try to pay the
wage-bill,
but they have Visions and Over-views. From which Heaven preserve us.
David in Wimborne

"The government consists of a gang of men exactly like you and me. They have, taking one with another, no special talent for the business of government; they have only a talent for getting and holding office. Their principal device to that end is to search out groups who pant and pine for something they can't get and to promise to give it to them. Nine times out of ten that promise is worth nothing. The tenth time is made good by looting A to satisfy B. In other words, government is a broker in pillage, and every election is sort of an advance auction sale of stolen goods." -- H.L. Mencken"

The natural tendency of every government is to grow steadily worse --that is, to grow more satisfactory to those who constitute it and less satisfactory to those who support it.
--H.L. Mencken

All government, in its essence, is organized exploitation, and in virtually all of its existing forms it is the implacable enemy of every industrious and well-disposed man.
--H. L. Mencken

"There is nothing government can give you that it hasn't taken from you in the first place." -- Winston Churchill

In general the art of government consists of taking as much money as possible from one class of citizens to give to the other."---Voltaire--1764

Originally from: David Burnett

Dear All,
Our problem is that we really believe a Minister has special knowledge and a strong, dedicated character. IE that he really KNOWS.
The fact is that an ambitious fella on the make goes to uni' and gets a degree, then he looks for a suitable career in politics.
Quite often this bod has far less wisdom or practical knowledge than the poor b*****ds whose businesses he can ruin by the stroke of a pen, because many of his ilk have never really done anything in the real world.
I should know; mine and hundreds of other small businesses in Australia got wiped out by "The World's Greatest Treasurer", AKA Paul Keating. Fair goes to Paul (the arrogant bastard), he's a clever bloke, he collected antique silver and Bob Hawke's scalp, then he cut off our tariffs and our businesses in one stroke.
ANYWAY, the purpose of this rant is to remind all of us that our glorious leadership is even more human and fallible than us poor bloody battlers. We only do the flamin' work, figure our overheads and try to pay the wage-bill, but they have Visions and Over-views. From which Heaven preserve us. David in Wimborne

Originally from: Burkie

Dear Jane: I am going to reply to your comment as it's been read...without moving forward to this thread.

I agree with you 100%. You cannot have a debate without hearing both sides of an issue. But Valerie Elliott's past history of reporting is undeniably biased as anti-farming. I suggest she go to her store and buy nothing but non-agricultural products in the future. She obviously does not appreciate her own diet.

In other words, she bites the hands that "feed her" and I for one wouldn't give her a cracker...unless she can be a little bit thankful for the food she eats.

Burkie in Kansas

Author wrote:
Hi Gary!
I have to say in answer to your message – 'Why not?'
Farmtalking has, and continues to try to 'provide informtion, help and advice for farming families in the UK' (See http://www.farmtalking.org).
Therefore I quote and report items of interest and information from many sources.
If we are 'informed' we have a chance to make our own decisions and act accordingly. There is no doubt that the speedy exchange of such information, as well as ideas and opinions via the web, gives us great a advantage and we should be grateful for it even if at times we may not agree with or like what we learn as a result!
Best wishes – Jane
Author wrote:
Dear Jane: Why quote Valerie Elliott? She's done as much or more to destroy the general farming community in England as anyone.
Burkie in Kansas
P.S. not a good reporter
Author wrote:
From The Times on line – January 27, 2003
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2–556337,00.html
Farming families hit by 'stealth tax' on their houses
By Valerie Elliott, Countryside Editor
THE Inland Revenue is to levy a 40 per cent inheritance tax on some farmhouses, farming land and other farm buildings.
At present, people who inherit agricultural property, including the land, can claim up to 100 per cent inheritance tax relief. The Revenue is challenging that relief on the basis that many farmhouses are no longer “character-appropriate” to the farm business.
Tax officials also believe that many farmhouses are no longer an integral part of farming as farmers move into other money-making ventures to boost their income.
The Country Land and Business Association and the National Farmers’ Union want ministers to clarify the position. Rural campaigners believe that at a time when the Government is encouraging farmers to embark on business projects to help to revive the rural economy, people could find their children unable to inherit the family farm.
Some farmers have given up farming and rent their land. Others have diversified so much that their income from farming is only a tiny proportion of their turnover. Former farm buildings have also been converted into offices and craft workshops.
In those cases, the Inland Revenue may insist that the house is no longer an integral part of the farm business because the farmer is no longer involved in farming. Receiving rental income for land worked by another farmer does not count as agricultural income for tax relief purposes.
Lord Haskins, the Government’s Rural Policy Adviser, said: “This must be an attempt by the Inland Revenue to stamp out bogus farming where someone from the City snaps up a big farm, lives in the house and rents out the land. I see nothing wrong with that, but if the Revenue is targeting bona fide farming families and penalising them with more tax, then I think this should be looked at urgently.”
Sir Donald Curry, chairman of the Policy Commission on the Future of Farming and Food, said: “This could lead to the discouragement of diversification. Anything that obstructs structural change would present a problem in delivering the innovative countryside we need.”
Concern has been raised after an attempt by the Inland Revenue to deny agricultural property relief on the 127-acre estate of Rosemary Antrobus, who owned and farmed Cookhill Priory at Inkberrow, Worcestershire, all her life. The Inland Revenue considered that the 18th-century house, which had been extended over the years, was not of a character appropriate to the farm.
Even though the Revenue lost the case because lawyers proved that the house was used as farm office and canteen, and that the owner was involved in all aspects of the farm business, property experts believe that it will be difficult for other farmers to win exemption from inheritance tax because many have set up projects unrelated to farming.
Andrew Grant, head of the Country Land and Business Association in Worcester, and the agent who acted for the Antrobus estate, said: “This is just another backdoor tax, a tax by stealth.”
Jim Quinn, of Morton Fisher solicitors in Worcester, said that the Inland Revenue was “targeting the largest houses that are gentrified or have some historical importance”.
The Revenue said: “Agricultural property relief is available for buildings when they are used as farmhouses so long as they are of a character appropriate to the farm they are part of. That helps target the benefit of agriculture by denying relief for cases where there is no real farming going on or the residential aspect is out of balance with the farming.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2–556337,00.html

Originally from: Burkie

Dear Jane: I am going to reply to your comment as it's been read...without moving forward to this thread.

In other words, she bites the hands that "feed her" and I for one wouldn't give her a cracker...unless she can be a little bit thankful for the food she eats.

Burkie in Kansas

Author wrote:
Hi Gary!
I have to say in answer to your message – 'Why not?'
Farmtalking has, and continues to try to 'provide informtion, help and advice for farming families in the UK' (See http://www.farmtalking.org).
Therefore I quote and report items of interest and information from many sources.
If we are 'informed' we have a chance to make our own decisions and act accordingly. There is no doubt that the speedy exchange of such information, as well as ideas and opinions via the web, gives us great a advantage and we should be grateful for it even if at times we may not agree with or like what we learn as a result!
Best wishes – Jane
Author wrote:
Dear Jane: Why quote Valerie Elliott? She's done as much or more to destroy the general farming community in England as anyone.
Burkie in Kansas
P.S. not a good reporter
Author wrote:
From The Times on line – January 27, 2003
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2–556337,00.html
Farming families hit by 'stealth tax' on their houses
By Valerie Elliott, Countryside Editor
THE Inland Revenue is to levy a 40 per cent inheritance tax on some farmhouses, farming land and other farm buildings.
At present, people who inherit agricultural property, including the land, can claim up to 100 per cent inheritance tax relief. The Revenue is challenging that relief on the basis that many farmhouses are no longer “character-appropriate” to the farm business.
Tax officials also believe that many farmhouses are no longer an integral part of farming as farmers move into other money-making ventures to boost their income.
The Country Land and Business Association and the National Farmers’ Union want ministers to clarify the position. Rural campaigners believe that at a time when the Government is encouraging farmers to embark on business projects to help to revive the rural economy, people could find their children unable to inherit the family farm.
Some farmers have given up farming and rent their land. Others have diversified so much that their income from farming is only a tiny proportion of their turnover. Former farm buildings have also been converted into offices and craft workshops.
In those cases, the Inland Revenue may insist that the house is no longer an integral part of the farm business because the farmer is no longer involved in farming. Receiving rental income for land worked by another farmer does not count as agricultural income for tax relief purposes.
Lord Haskins, the Government’s Rural Policy Adviser, said: “This must be an attempt by the Inland Revenue to stamp out bogus farming where someone from the City snaps up a big farm, lives in the house and rents out the land. I see nothing wrong with that, but if the Revenue is targeting bona fide farming families and penalising them with more tax, then I think this should be looked at urgently.”
Sir Donald Curry, chairman of the Policy Commission on the Future of Farming and Food, said: “This could lead to the discouragement of diversification. Anything that obstructs structural change would present a problem in delivering the innovative countryside we need.”
Concern has been raised after an attempt by the Inland Revenue to deny agricultural property relief on the 127-acre estate of Rosemary Antrobus, who owned and farmed Cookhill Priory at Inkberrow, Worcestershire, all her life. The Inland Revenue considered that the 18th-century house, which had been extended over the years, was not of a character appropriate to the farm.
Even though the Revenue lost the case because lawyers proved that the house was used as farm office and canteen, and that the owner was involved in all aspects of the farm business, property experts believe that it will be difficult for other farmers to win exemption from inheritance tax because many have set up projects unrelated to farming.
Andrew Grant, head of the Country Land and Business Association in Worcester, and the agent who acted for the Antrobus estate, said: “This is just another backdoor tax, a tax by stealth.”
Jim Quinn, of Morton Fisher solicitors in Worcester, said that the Inland Revenue was “targeting the largest houses that are gentrified or have some historical importance”.
The Revenue said: “Agricultural property relief is available for buildings when they are used as farmhouses so long as they are of a character appropriate to the farm they are part of. That helps target the benefit of agriculture by denying relief for cases where there is no real farming going on or the residential aspect is out of balance with the farming.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2–556337,00.html