Dan Neidle has changed his mind on IHT for Farmers

Why does anyone care/think what an extremely wealthy unelected Labour activist suggests in his pursuit of a new type of society? I am sure there will be other tax lawyers advising wealthy clients on gifting arrangements to stay within the 7 year rule. What does Reeves want to do about this loophole?
I wonder how long the Uk can survive without farmers?

Errr, what evidence do you have to claim that Neidle is a Labour activist, ronib?

Or do you see reds under the bed at every turn?

^Farm subsidies paid for how the land is used, not simply for owning it would be a start.*

Farm subsidies are paid for how the land is used. They can only be claimed for productive land. Pre Brexit a great many farmers depended on the subsidies to keep their business afloat. Post Brexit subsidies have been greatly reduced.

eddiecat78

The point is that many people were quoting his initial comments assuming they were true - and they weren't

I saw plenty of criticism of his initial comments. Well done to him for listening to his critics, going over the figures again and suggesting mitigations to the damage it would cause genuine farmers. He hasn't changed his stance that buying farmland is a way of avoiding IHT for some. He's come up with a solution which wouldn't penalise real farmers and might have some other advantages.

MaizieD

He does 'know something about taxes', he made a great deal of money from 'knowing something about taxes'. He has just revised his initial analysis after looking into it more deeply.

What a pity he didn't look into it more deeply before making his pronouncements that are still quoted. He was very quick to decry the farmers who said how badly affected they were going to be, and many on here took his word as absolute gospel.

Rosie51

MaizieD

He does 'know something about taxes', he made a great deal of money from 'knowing something about taxes'. He has just revised his initial analysis after looking into it more deeply.

What a pity he didn't look into it more deeply before making his pronouncements that are still quoted. He was very quick to decry the farmers who said how badly affected they were going to be, and many on here took his word as absolute gospel.

The moral of that is not to take anything people say as gospel. Plenty of people did take a little more time to delve a bit deeper and were critical at the time.

If you're looking for 'blame', the people to blame are the journalists, who would have been looking for a story when Reeves made her announcement. Unfortunately, they contact the 'experts' on their contact list and don't take the time (or have the expertise) to analyse what the experts say, so they just parrot them regardless.

NotSpaghetti

PoliticsNerd - it would help true farmers if the supermarkets weren't so very greedy.

That happened (or started to) at the end of the '60s when the abandoned Resale Price Maintenance. I'm pretty sure the majority would not want it back.

One area worth looking at is the processing or rather ultra-processing of our food. Only two countries eat more of this than the UK. Processing is seen as added value or for the buyer, added costs.

Everyone but everyone knows that Dan Neidle is very closely involved with the Labour Party. MaizieD

ronib

Everyone but everyone knows that Dan Neidle is very closely involved with the Labour Party. MaizieD

I bet they don't! I bet most people in the country have never even heard of Dan Neidle.

In any case, Neidle was most closely associated with Blair, whom many people in the Labour Party think was an undercover Tory.

growstuff^Plenty of people did take a little more time to delve a bit deeper and were critical at the time.^

Happy that I can be counted amongst them! I heavily criticised him on here and elsewhere, for his very simplistic, almost uneducated, assumptions.

Yes it’s very shocking that the simples have taken over in this country!

Rosie51

*growstuff*^Plenty of people did take a little more time to delve a bit deeper and were critical at the time.^

Happy that I can be counted amongst them! I heavily criticised him on here and elsewhere, for his very simplistic, almost uneducated, assumptions.

Exactly! People took note of what he said/wrote and criticised it. It would be good if everybody did that and didn't take everything they read at face value.

I've read his latest article. He hasn't changed his stance on people buying agricultural land to avoid IHT - I expect he has first-hand experience of that.

Where he has shifted is in accepting that some farms and families will be very badly affected and he's made some suggestions for solutions, which might stop the IHT loophole for non-farmers, while keeping small family farms in the family.

ronib

Yes it’s very shocking that the simples have taken over in this country!

It certainly is shocking. How on earth did so many people get taken in by the not political party?

growstuff didn’t the country sleepwalk in despair to Labour?

growstuff

petal53

I wasn’t saying anything about Syria. I was talking about the farmers and IHT, which is what the thread is about.

I didn't watch the BBC News, but I agree with their priorities.

You're not worried about food production and air miles then?

ronib

growstuff didn’t the country sleepwalk in despair to Labour?

I haven't a clue. What I do know is that there is a significant percentage of the population which is taken in by snake oil salespeople. I wouldn't dare call the 'simples'.

Allira

growstuff

petal53

I wasn’t saying anything about Syria. I was talking about the farmers and IHT, which is what the thread is about.

I didn't watch the BBC News, but I agree with their priorities.

You're not worried about food production and air miles then?

Of course, but it's hardly breaking news. What's happening in Syria is.

growstuff

Allira

growstuff

petal53

I wasn’t saying anything about Syria. I was talking about the farmers and IHT, which is what the thread is about.

I didn't watch the BBC News, but I agree with their priorities.

You're not worried about food production and air miles then?

Of course, but it's hardly breaking news. What's happening in Syria is.

I think the problem with BBC News is that they'll spend 20 minutes on one news item and skip briefly through others they think might need a nod.

"I've read his latest article. He hasn't changed his stance on people buying agricultural land to avoid IHT - I expect he has first-hand experience of that.

Where he has shifted is in accepting that some farms and families will be very badly affected and he's made some suggestions for solutions, which might stop the IHT loophole for non-farmers, while keeping small family farms in the family."

Sounds good to me.

Rosie51 apparently more detailed info has just come to light.
It was info he didn't have first time.

NotSpaghetti

Rosie51 apparently more detailed info has just come to light.
It was info he didn't have first time.

The information was available, he didn't bother to find it because it didn't fit his agenda. It's often the way. There were so many on this site who just said if their heirs had to pay IHT why shouldn't farmers' heirs. There was nil understanding of how farms and farming works, and how different it is to leaving a big house that will be sold to benefit one or more heirs, whereas small farms pass from farmer parent to farmer child to continue to be farmed.

Rosie51

NotSpaghetti

Rosie51 apparently more detailed info has just come to light.
It was info he didn't have first time.

The information was available, he didn't bother to find it because it didn't fit his agenda. It's often the way. There were so many on this site who just said if their heirs had to pay IHT why shouldn't farmers' heirs. There was nil understanding of how farms and farming works, and how different it is to leaving a big house that will be sold to benefit one or more heirs, whereas small farms pass from farmer parent to farmer child to continue to be farmed.

So what do you think of his and the IFT's recent suggestions?

I haven't studied them in detail so I'm reluctant to make any solid pronouncements, but I 'think' in principle I agree. Certainly with the proposal that working farms should pass without inheritance tax, if I've understood that correctly. (As I say I've not had time to study the detail)

Rosie51 I don’t wish to sound disrespectful but we can study proposals until the cows come home. There are no signs at all that this government will budge on the path it first steps itself on. Private schools have now employed Lord Panick (good name) so instead of tractors on the lawn, legal experts might be more effective for farmers.

Wyllow3

"I've read his latest article. He hasn't changed his stance on people buying agricultural land to avoid IHT - I expect he has first-hand experience of that.

Where he has shifted is in accepting that some farms and families will be very badly affected and he's made some suggestions for solutions, which might stop the IHT loophole for non-farmers, while keeping small family farms in the family."

Sounds good to me.

It’s not so much the “small” family farms that are worst hit its the larger commercial family farms, they produce most of the food in the UK. The profitability of food production is just not enough to pay back loans to cover IHT