| Farmers 15:36 - Nov 21 with 3661 views | controversial_jack |
Getting on my nerves with their whinging, and they are the only ones that do any work attitude |  | | |  |
| Farmers on 09:39 - Nov 30 with 493 views | onehunglow |
| Farmers on 08:50 - Nov 30 by Boundy |
Do you agree with peaceful protesting because that's what that was. |
But it’s against a Labour administration
That’s the point
What is cutting people up now is the sheer lunacy and incompetence and sheer hypocrisy of this government . They’ve been rumbled in months
At least the Tories didn’t really make out they gave a toss | |
| |
| Farmers on 11:54 - Nov 30 with 443 views | controversial_jack |
Blocking ports could be seen as a serious criminal offence. It's also picketing which is illegal if there are more than 6 involved. Thatchers laws [Post edited 30 Nov 11:55]
| | | |
| Farmers on 12:20 - Nov 30 with 412 views | Gwyn737 |
| Farmers on 11:54 - Nov 30 by controversial_jack |
Blocking ports could be seen as a serious criminal offence. It's also picketing which is illegal if there are more than 6 involved. Thatchers laws [Post edited 30 Nov 11:55]
|
While I totally accept that a small percentage of farmers are going to me hit by IHT and and a relatively small number of pensioners are going to be adversely affected by the WFA cut, I am surprised the level of sympathy given to some of the most well off members of society while others get the short shrift. | | | |
| Farmers on 14:52 - Nov 30 with 382 views | Luther27 |
| Farmers on 12:20 - Nov 30 by Gwyn737 |
While I totally accept that a small percentage of farmers are going to me hit by IHT and and a relatively small number of pensioners are going to be adversely affected by the WFA cut, I am surprised the level of sympathy given to some of the most well off members of society while others get the short shrift. |
It’s because they provide a basic necessity and in Wales at least the farmers people know aren’t multinational type operators.
I still find it miraculous that this Govt has put so much effort into raising a relatively small amount of projected funds through IHT yet manage to pee of so many people in such a short space of time. | | | |
| Farmers on 17:56 - Nov 30 with 340 views | JACKMANANDBOY |
| Farmers on 14:52 - Nov 30 by Luther27 |
It’s because they provide a basic necessity and in Wales at least the farmers people know aren’t multinational type operators.
I still find it miraculous that this Govt has put so much effort into raising a relatively small amount of projected funds through IHT yet manage to pee of so many people in such a short space of time. |
Smells of political motivation. |  |
| |
| Farmers on 17:58 - Nov 30 with 337 views | Gwyn737 |
| Farmers on 14:52 - Nov 30 by Luther27 |
It’s because they provide a basic necessity and in Wales at least the farmers people know aren’t multinational type operators.
I still find it miraculous that this Govt has put so much effort into raising a relatively small amount of projected funds through IHT yet manage to pee of so many people in such a short space of time. |
I don’t think it’s really about what will be raised.
It’s more about preventing losses in the future. Clarkson and Dyson are good examples of this. | | | |
| Farmers on 18:35 - Nov 30 with 326 views | Scotia |
| Farmers on 14:52 - Nov 30 by Luther27 |
It’s because they provide a basic necessity and in Wales at least the farmers people know aren’t multinational type operators.
I still find it miraculous that this Govt has put so much effort into raising a relatively small amount of projected funds through IHT yet manage to pee of so many people in such a short space of time. |
It's about closing a loop hole and that's why Clarkson is going loopy. He (and plenty of others) bought land to avoid IHT and now they have only avoided 20% of it.
It would be nice if there was a way to claw the other 20% back too. | | | |
| Farmers on 19:13 - Nov 30 with 305 views | Luther27 |
| Farmers on 17:58 - Nov 30 by Gwyn737 |
I don’t think it’s really about what will be raised.
It’s more about preventing losses in the future. Clarkson and Dyson are good examples of this. |
Yes but if land or farm have to be sold to settle IHT who do you think will buy it? | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Farmers on 19:30 - Nov 30 with 294 views | Gwyn737 |
| Farmers on 19:13 - Nov 30 by Luther27 |
Yes but if land or farm have to be sold to settle IHT who do you think will buy it? |
I think (and hope) that by the time the number of farms affected take on financial advice to final number should be quite small. The knock on effect should be that farmland prices fall and become less attractive to those wanting to use it as a tax break.
The upsides of not means testing taxes are that it’s hard to evade and is easier to administer.
The downside is that there will be some at the lower end who are really hit hard.
See also the removal of the winter fuel allowance. | | | |
| Farmers on 20:12 - Nov 30 with 273 views | Scotia |
| Farmers on 19:30 - Nov 30 by Gwyn737 |
I think (and hope) that by the time the number of farms affected take on financial advice to final number should be quite small. The knock on effect should be that farmland prices fall and become less attractive to those wanting to use it as a tax break.
The upsides of not means testing taxes are that it’s hard to evade and is easier to administer.
The downside is that there will be some at the lower end who are really hit hard.
See also the removal of the winter fuel allowance. |
The number is already very small. Farmland isn't worth much if if house can't be built on it.
As I understand should inherited farmland be subject to IHT it can be paid over several years interest free. That doesn't apply to other forms of IHT. No farm land needs to be sold to cover the cost.
The uproar against farmers IHT stinks of misinformation. To me it seems a sound and fair policy. [Post edited 30 Nov 20:16]
| | | |
| Farmers on 20:16 - Nov 30 with 265 views | Luther27 |
| Farmers on 11:54 - Nov 30 by controversial_jack |
Blocking ports could be seen as a serious criminal offence. It's also picketing which is illegal if there are more than 6 involved. Thatchers laws [Post edited 30 Nov 11:55]
|
Tbh if Drs and nurses can go on strike then why not farmers? A lot more damage done to the public by the medical staff withdrawing their labour. | | | |
| Farmers on 20:24 - Nov 30 with 259 views | Gwyn737 |
| Farmers on 20:12 - Nov 30 by Scotia |
The number is already very small. Farmland isn't worth much if if house can't be built on it.
As I understand should inherited farmland be subject to IHT it can be paid over several years interest free. That doesn't apply to other forms of IHT. No farm land needs to be sold to cover the cost.
The uproar against farmers IHT stinks of misinformation. To me it seems a sound and fair policy. [Post edited 30 Nov 20:16]
|
It seems to be part of a bigger push to try and tell us that during a cost of living crisis, the group who need help the most are those who are wealthy.
Just point to the small (relatively) number in that group who aren’t and ask for sympathy.
New figures out yesterday showing record numbers of children are homeless. Very little about this in the news. | | | |
| Farmers on 20:32 - Nov 30 with 245 views | Luther27 |
| Farmers on 20:12 - Nov 30 by Scotia |
The number is already very small. Farmland isn't worth much if if house can't be built on it.
As I understand should inherited farmland be subject to IHT it can be paid over several years interest free. That doesn't apply to other forms of IHT. No farm land needs to be sold to cover the cost.
The uproar against farmers IHT stinks of misinformation. To me it seems a sound and fair policy. [Post edited 30 Nov 20:16]
|
It stinks of misinformation? Well maybe that’s because it wasn’t a particularly well worded piece of legislation in the first place. Whenever a journalist highlites a get out of jail clause Labour wheel out another clown to paper over the cracks.
Every Labour politician interviewed regarding this tax invariably says it will only affect a small minority. So yet again I ask why do it? | | | |
| Farmers on 20:44 - Nov 30 with 240 views | Gwyn737 |
| Farmers on 20:32 - Nov 30 by Luther27 |
It stinks of misinformation? Well maybe that’s because it wasn’t a particularly well worded piece of legislation in the first place. Whenever a journalist highlites a get out of jail clause Labour wheel out another clown to paper over the cracks.
Every Labour politician interviewed regarding this tax invariably says it will only affect a small minority. So yet again I ask why do it? |
Not sure about the wording of the legislation but it has been clumsily communicated.
Why do it? Some of the small minority are very wealthy and it’ll raise some much needed tax take.
It’ll also do some levelling up as outlined earlier. | | | |
| Farmers on 20:48 - Nov 30 with 233 views | Scotia |
| Farmers on 20:32 - Nov 30 by Luther27 |
It stinks of misinformation? Well maybe that’s because it wasn’t a particularly well worded piece of legislation in the first place. Whenever a journalist highlites a get out of jail clause Labour wheel out another clown to paper over the cracks.
Every Labour politician interviewed regarding this tax invariably says it will only affect a small minority. So yet again I ask why do it? |
It's not legislation yet. And it is misinformation.
It will only effect a small number, it's been done to close a tax avoidance loophole.
Rich people buy farm land so those who inherited it from them didn't pay IHT, Clarkson admitted as much, that inflates the price of farmland to farmers among others.
Now they'll have to pay, I don't think people like sheikh Al Makthoum should be able to avoid IHT.
Now they can't. Some farmers families will have to pay but really not many. | | | |
| Farmers on 20:49 - Nov 30 with 232 views | Luther27 |
| Farmers on 20:44 - Nov 30 by Gwyn737 |
Not sure about the wording of the legislation but it has been clumsily communicated.
Why do it? Some of the small minority are very wealthy and it’ll raise some much needed tax take.
It’ll also do some levelling up as outlined earlier. |
I genuinely don’t see it Gwyn. The relatively wealthy…or large conglomerates are also able to higher very good accountancy firms to swerve any attempt to tax any profit etc | | | |
| Farmers on 20:59 - Nov 30 with 215 views | Gwyn737 |
| Farmers on 20:49 - Nov 30 by Luther27 |
I genuinely don’t see it Gwyn. The relatively wealthy…or large conglomerates are also able to higher very good accountancy firms to swerve any attempt to tax any profit etc |
It if the policy works it should bring the price of land down and it won’t be as much of a temptation to have in the first place,
There will always be ‘losers’ when it comes to tax and choices are always difficult. I see this as less difficult than others is all. | | | |
| Farmers on 21:07 - Nov 30 with 195 views | majorraglan |
| Farmers on 20:16 - Nov 30 by Luther27 |
Tbh if Drs and nurses can go on strike then why not farmers? A lot more damage done to the public by the medical staff withdrawing their labour. |
Who is stopping farmers strike? They are perfectly entitled to strike should they wish to do so, what they can’t do is break the law. Blocking a port would constitute an offence - much like the just stop oil types commit. | | | |
| Farmers on 21:12 - Nov 30 with 178 views | Luther27 |
| Farmers on 20:48 - Nov 30 by Scotia |
It's not legislation yet. And it is misinformation.
It will only effect a small number, it's been done to close a tax avoidance loophole.
Rich people buy farm land so those who inherited it from them didn't pay IHT, Clarkson admitted as much, that inflates the price of farmland to farmers among others.
Now they'll have to pay, I don't think people like sheikh Al Makthoum should be able to avoid IHT.
Now they can't. Some farmers families will have to pay but really not many. |
It’ll be on the statute books soon….unless there’s yet another “we’ve listened to people’s concerns moments” etc.
I genuinely have trouble why this is so popular on here? Imagine a UK where tax avoidance experts are unemployed because our tax laws are simplified to the point the extremely wealthy actually paid tax. Why aren’t Labour doing this? | | | |
| Farmers on 21:18 - Nov 30 with 163 views | Gwyn737 |
| Farmers on 21:12 - Nov 30 by Luther27 |
It’ll be on the statute books soon….unless there’s yet another “we’ve listened to people’s concerns moments” etc.
I genuinely have trouble why this is so popular on here? Imagine a UK where tax avoidance experts are unemployed because our tax laws are simplified to the point the extremely wealthy actually paid tax. Why aren’t Labour doing this? |
This is what they’re trying to do with this one - closing a loophole.
I don’t think it’s popular per se, more one of the less damaging taxes, comparatively. | | | |
| Farmers on 21:49 - Nov 30 with 143 views | Scotia |
| Farmers on 21:12 - Nov 30 by Luther27 |
It’ll be on the statute books soon….unless there’s yet another “we’ve listened to people’s concerns moments” etc.
I genuinely have trouble why this is so popular on here? Imagine a UK where tax avoidance experts are unemployed because our tax laws are simplified to the point the extremely wealthy actually paid tax. Why aren’t Labour doing this? |
It will and it will be clear. In fact it's quite clear now, it's just those jumping up and down about it who are providing all the misinformation and misleading people for various reasons.
It's really not too bad.
I'd be far more cheesed off by losing my inheritance to pay for my family members care, a farmer would never have to do that. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
