Another one from the no shıt sherlock department. What will be the next target for the "lifestyle buyers" now that the farmland loophole is no longer available?
The latest figures therefore offer an interesting counterpoint to the political campaign against the policy. They do not, on their own, prove that the tax change caused the shift in buying patterns — Strutt & Parker notes that other economic factors are at play — but they are consistent with the argument that removing some of the tax advantage attached to farmland can make it less attractive to non-farming investors.
Meanwhile, Private Eye notes that the CLA and the NFU are still campaigning to remove IHT again.
Farmers have been known to shoot themselves in the foot (vide Brexit).
Urban myth. Farmers did not vote leave any more than the average of the population.
Depends on who you ask (below is Gemini's answer), but given the level of support from the EU for farming (see also fishermen), the fact that they had a (maybe not huge) majority for Brexit was still shooting themselves in the collective foot (I'd level the same accusation for geographical areas that had received a lot of EU funding yet sill voted 'leave').
View attachment 17285
Wow. You gave Starmer a run for his money with the speed of that U-Turn!Urban myth. Farmers did not vote leave any more than the average of the population.
Edit: Just looked it up to be sure, farmers voted roughly 56% vs the population of 52%.
Urban myth. Farmers did not vote leave any more than the average of the population.
Edit: Just looked it up to be sure, farmers voted roughly 56% vs the population of 52%.
I wouldn't be surprised if there are industries that voted way higher, but we like to punch down on farmers for some reason.
FYI, I used to be in dairy farming, and I've got extremely close friends who are farmers. That doesn't stop me from thinking the 56% who voted for Brexit were (mostly) idiots shooting themselves in their feet.