Starmer's vision quest

[briantrumpet]

Thixotropic behaviour is fascinating, and not straightforward.

Slightly off topic but I did some work on dense phase conveying, whereby powders and particulates are moved along a pipe by carefully injecting compressed air. It has to get into the hopper to be transported somehow. Again, quite interesting.

The great thing about a forum is you can sit quietly and wait for someone to mention something you can pretend to be an expert in and then just make unchallenged definitive statements

Apologies for not having any views on dense phase conveying, even though I use pipes.

 

[First Aspect]

Is the plug effect thixotropic or simply non newtonian? I always thought those were not necessarily synonyms.

No idea. We didn't actually study this, which I think was a fairly big omission. I think non Newtonian is the genus and thixotropes a species.

 

[Psamathe]

As far as I am concerned IHT is completely separate from operating profit. I appreciate that farming is hard and they deserve to make money but to not mitigate against IHT is just silly.

Maybe part of the problem is just how daft our economic system has become. Something is worth what somebody will pay for it. The value of a business is often related to its earning potential (which can include things like growth and future potential). Ignoring the exceptions like land sale with planning permission for developments that means the value of farm land should be in relation to it's earning potential.

One of the main arguments against the initial IHT budget changes that farmers were using is that their businesses have high asset values in relation to their earnings potential which to me suggests their land is over-valued.

When you can sell an asset and get higher income from bank interest than working the asset I suspect that asset is over-valued.

But: sometimes people retain emotional links to assets eg I know somebody who rents out their house and they could get higher income (and less work) if they sold the house and put the money in a bank savings account. But they believe the house has capital value growth potential long term.

 

[Ian H]

One of the main arguments against the initial IHT budget changes that farmers were using is that their businesses have high asset values in relation to their earnings potential which to me suggests their land is over-valued

The removal of inheritance tax is the reason land became so expensive. It became a tax-dodge for the wealthy.

 

[First Aspect]

Maybe part of the problem is just how daft our economic system has become. Something is worth what somebody will pay for it. The value of a business is often related to its earning potential (which can include things like growth and future potential). Ignoring the exceptions like land sale with planning permission for developments that means the value of farm land should be in relation to it's earning potential.

One of the main arguments against the initial IHT budget changes that farmers were using is that their businesses have high asset values in relation to their earnings potential which to me suggests their land is over-valued.

When you can sell an asset and get higher income from bank interest than working the asset I suspect that asset is over-valued.

But: sometimes people retain emotional links to assets eg I know somebody who rents out their house and they could get higher income (and less work) if they sold the house and put the money in a bank savings account. But they believe the house has capital value growth potential long term.

I'm not a fan of IHT in the first place, but what you've just laid out is a good argument for setting the thresholds and rates differently for farms, which is exactly what they are.

The main problem is implementing a change that needs 5-10 years to adapt plans for, in under 12 months, so much as the change itself.

 

[C R]

No idea. We didn't actually study this, which I think was a fairly big omission. I think non Newtonian is the genus and thixotropes a species.

Sorry, you are right. I got it back to front.

 

[Pblakeney]

But: sometimes people retain emotional links to assets eg I know somebody who rents out their house and they could get higher income (and less work) if they sold the house and put the money in a bank savings account. But they believe the house has capital value growth potential long term.

Another anecdotal story. My Dad has been renting out his shop since he retired. After all expenses and taxes he has had an income of much more than the property value, and still owns the property. I cannot see a downside.

 

[BoldonLad]

Maybe part of the problem is just how daft our economic system has become. Something is worth what somebody will pay for it. The value of a business is often related to its earning potential (which can include things like growth and future potential). Ignoring the exceptions like land sale with planning permission for developments that means the value of farm land should be in relation to it's earning potential.

One of the main arguments against the initial IHT budget changes that farmers were using is that their businesses have high asset values in relation to their earnings potential which to me suggests their land is over-valued.

When you can sell an asset and get higher income from bank interest than working the asset I suspect that asset is over-valued.

But: sometimes people retain emotional links to assets eg I know somebody who rents out their house and they could get higher income (and less work) if they sold the house and put the money in a bank savings account. But they believe the house has capital value growth potential long term.

Not sure I understand the last paragraph?, are the considerations quoted business decisions, rather than emotional?