The new inheritance tax policy could affect up to five times more farms than the Treasury initially said, according to new analysis.
The government said its plan to impose 20% inheritance tax on farms worth more than £1m will affect 500 farms in the 2026-2027 financial year, based on analysis of past claims.
However, the Central Association of Agricultural Valuers (CAAV) has looked at the numbers and found 2,500 farms could be affected each year.
The group, which represents businesses across UK agriculture, found up to 75,000 individual farms over a generation – which they define as 30 years – could be affected by the tax.
Jeremy Moody, author of the report and secretary and adviser at CAAV, told Sky News the government figures had not taken into account farmers who only claim Business Property Relief (BPR).
Image: Farmers’ children rode mini tractors at the protest. Pic Reuters
Farmers protested last week, saying the tax would mean the end of many family farms because they would have to sell off land to pay it.
Many have said the government’s figures were incorrect and more than 500 family farms would be affected a year.
The National Farmers’ Union (NFU) said the real number is two thirds of farms of the UK’s 209,000 farms, while the Country Land and Business Association (CLA) said 70,000 farms would be affected.
The Treasury said its figures came from data on farms that had claimed Agricultural Property Relief (APR), as well as those who claimed both APR and BPR – but not solely BPR.
Currently, to get 100% inheritance tax relief farmers have to claim APR for farmhouses, land and buildings, and BPR for machinery and livestock – but this can also be claimed for land and buildings.
Agricultural Property Relief (APR) and Business Property Relief (BPR) are mechanisms farmers currently use to claim 100% inheritance tax relief.
Different aspects of farms come under the two schemes, with some aspects able to be claimed under either.
APR:
Farmhouses used by farmers
Buildings used for agricultural purposes such as grain storage or to house livestock
Land used for farming and growing as well as woodland to help farming, such as woodland shelter belts
BPR:
Machinery, such as tractors
Livestock
Farmshops
Holiday and industrial lets on farms
Buildings used for agricultural purposes
Land used for farming
Not all farms have to claim BPR
Mr Moody explained some farms have to have farmhouses to be close to their livestock, so must claim APR for the farmhouse and BPR for machinery.
But, not all have to claim APR as not every farm includes a farmhouse. That’s because some farmers, mostly those who grow crops, do not live on the property – so they can just claim BPR.
“The Treasury didn’t look at BPR claims sitting there on their own,” he told Sky News.
“Unless you’re trying to argue the value of a farmhouse, which these days can be quite high, it’s just convenient to claim BPR on the land and machinery.
“A landowner might place the farm under BPR purely for simplicity because whether you claimed under APR or BPR has never mattered before.
“If a family farm is structured as a company then they also would only claim BPR, which isn’t wrong to do.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:30
‘Jeremy Clarkson is listening to wrong data’
How long is a generation?
Mr Moody added government figures fail to consider that farms are typically handed down every 30 years, for example from an 85-year-old who dies to their 55-year-old son or daughter.
“The government’s figures accept that the effect from introducing inheritance tax is over 75 years, they didn’t think about how long a generation is,” Mr Moody said.
Because of spousal inheritance tax relief, the government has said a couple would be able to pass on a farm worth up to £3m before paying any inheritance tax. They said as it is payable over 10 years it will not be a big hit – something farmers disagree with.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:59
Farmer explains how tax will hit him
A government spokesman told Sky News: “Our commitment to our farmers is steadfast – we have committed £5bn to the farming budget over two years, including more money than ever for sustainable food production, and we are developing a 25-year farming roadmap, focusing on how to make the sector more profitable in the decades to come.
“We have been clear since this change was announced that around 500 claims of Agricultural and Business Property Relief each year will be impacted – this is based off actual claims data – and even when inheritance tax does kick in, it is effectively at half the rate paid by others.
“It is not possible to accurately infer inheritance tax liability from farm net worth figures as there are different circumstances affecting each farm, such as who owns it, the nature of ownership, how many people own it and how affairs are planned.”
The prime minister has refused to say whether further tax rises will be imposed in the spring statement.
Sir Keir Starmer said the government was in the “early stages” of looking at whether tax rises or spending cuts were needed to meet Labour’s self-imposed fiscal rules.
He would not say if Ms Reeves is looking at further tax cuts to give her more headroom after months of economic downturn, and said the “big decisions” on tax were made in the October budget.
Speaking to reporters on the plane to Washington DC to meet Donald Trump, he said: “Obviously I am not going to get ahead of myself until we have made decisions.
“But as I have said before, in terms of the big decisions on tax obviously the budget was the place that we took those decisions – but as ever, going into a statement I am not going to say in advance what we might do and what we might not do.
“But let me not set hares running, the big decisions were in the budget of last year and that’s the way we are approaching this spring statement.”
More on Rachel Reeves
Related Topics:
What are the UK’s fiscal rules?
In October, Rachel Reeves set out new fiscal rules – restrictions on fiscal policy the government sets to constrain its own decisions on spending and taxes.
They are:
The stability rule: The current budget should be on course to be in balance or surplus by 2029/30
The investment rule: Net financial debt should fall as a share of the economy in 2029/30
The welfare cap: Some types of welfare spending must remain below a pre-specified level
It is less than a month away from the spring statement on 26 March, when the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) will publish its forecast on the UK economy.
Chancellor Rachel Reeves will set out the fiscal watchdog’s toplines, which are widely expected to be a reduction in growth outlook and will warn the chancellor is at risk of breaching her fiscal rules.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:13
‘Income taxes will have to rise’
Former Bank of England governor Lord Mervyn King told Sophy Ridge’s Politics Hub programme on Wednesday that income taxes will have to rise to plug the UK’s financial blackhole.
“The obvious tax to raise is the basic rate of income tax, we will all contribute to it,” he said.
Lord King added he would not have raised employers’ national insurance contributions, as Ms Reeves did in October, but would instead have increased employees’ income tax.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:57
Starmer: ‘We want to strike a new partnership’
The OBR is required to produce two economic forecasts a year, but, the chancellor said she would only give one budget a year to provide stability and certainty on upcoming tax changes.
However, there is speculation about tax changes due to the poor economic climate since the autumn budget.
Inflation has risen to its highest level in 10 months to 3%, there has been a sharp rise in government bond yields and growth has not been as high as expected.
This has led to the chancellor’s £9.9bn headroom against her fiscal rules being all but wiped out.
Ms Reeves could extend a freeze on income tax bands and allowances beyond April 2028, dragging more people into paying more tax as their pay rises.
She is reportedly considering lowering the annual limit on how much people can put into cash ISAs from £20,000 to £4,000.
Honorary Recorder of Chester Judge Steven Everett, sitting with two magistrates, also ordered Amesbury to carry out 200 hours of unpaid work, undertake a 120-day alcohol monitoring requirement, go on an anger management course and carry out 20 days of rehabilitation work.
Amesbury, 55, pleaded guilty in January to beating by assault after punching Paul Fellows, 45, in Main Street, Frodsham, Cheshire, in the early hours of 26 October after his constituent asked him about a bridge closure.
He had been set to serve 40% of his sentence – four weeks – in prison followed by a year on licence.
More from Politics
However, his lawyer launched an appeal shortly after he was sentenced and after the appeal was heard at Chester Crown Court on Thursday, the judge said his jail time should be suspended.
Amesbury arrived at the court in a prison van, having spent three nights in prison, and was led into the building in handcuffs by an officer.
The judge initially ordered a 12-month alcohol monitoring requirement, but changed his mind and said it should be 120 days.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:19
CCTV shows Labour MP punch man
The Labour Party, which suspended Amesbury shortly after the incident, said he would not be allowed back into the party after his original sentencing.
However, he remains an independent MP and will continue to receive his £91,000 salary under parliamentary rules, which state an MP only has their salary removed when they are no longer an MP.
Amesbury has been urged to resign by Labour and Reform but has not done so and a recall petition cannot be issued until he has exhausted any appeals. He has not yet indicated if he will appeal his latest sentence.
A recall petition kickstarts a by-election if 10% of an MP’s constituents sign it.
Footage replayed in court on Thursday, showed Amesbury punching Mr Fellows in the head, knocking him to the ground then punching him five more times.
He was heard saying: “You won’t threaten your MP again will you, you f****** soft lad?”
The hearing was told Amesbury gave a prepared statement in a police interview where he initially claimed he had been approached by a man “shouting and screaming” about local and national matters, including a local swing bridge and immigration.
In the statement, he told police: “I thought I was about to be physically assaulted by this male. I was terrified and felt vulnerable and cornered by the male and others in the group.”
He said the man’s “arms were swinging” and he thought there was no option but to “defend” himself.
Judge Everett said: “What he said to police doesn’t seem to fit in with the CCTV in pretty well any respect.”
Amesbury’s barrister told the court he had spent three nights in prison, “an experience he will never forget, certainly”.
He said the “public shaming” and “embarrassment” had a huge impact on Amesbury, who he said “will learn a painful lesson”.
I’ve been on quite a few trips now to the White House with successive prime ministers, but I can’t remember one that mattered as much as this.
As Keir Starmer himself puts it, “everything has changed” and the prime minister finds himself negotiating with an old ally that is looking at the post-war world order afresh and doesn’t much like what it sees.
As Donald Trump appears to abandon the role the US took in the world during the Second World War and is now looking away from Europe and Ukraine, Starmer’s task is to try to win his attention, and support, once more.
The prime minister’s two goals when he meets President Trump on Thursday are to help persuade him to put in place US security guarantees for Ukraine to deter Russian aggression post any peace deal, and dissuade President Trump from imposing tariffs on the UK.
That’s why, when it comes to UK security and economy – the two principal foundations of the Starmer administration – this meeting, this relationship, really matters.
It might be too much to say President Trump has the power to derail the Starmer project, but he does have in his gift the power to make Starmer’s twin task of guaranteeing British security and delivering economic growth far more challenging.
So the stakes are high for Britain and on the plane over to Washington that jeopardy was obvious to see.
When the prime minister came down to the back of the plane to answer questions from journalists travelling with him, he began the session with us by saying he had a lot of important things to discuss and was going to keep his answers short.
He then assiduously stuck to an agreed script, weighing each answer carefully as he swerved a number of questions on Ukraine and trade by saying he “wasn’t going to get ahead of discussions”, as he praised President Trump, referenced the special relationship as often as he could and insisted again the UK would not pick between the US and Europe.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:04
Can Starmer ‘win’ in Washington?
From the PM’s trip to Ukraine in January when he all but confirmed to Sky News that he was prepared to put British boots on the ground in a peacekeeping force, to his language around Europe stepping up at NATO in February, the European summit last week in Paris and then this week’s big commitment to accelerate the UK’s defence spending, the Number 10 team have been building up to this meeting, step by step.
But they are also all too aware that a positive outcome isn’t guaranteed when it comes to President Trump – and much will rest on what they find when Keir Starmer and Donald Trump meet in the room.
“We honestly don’t know what’s in his mind,” said one senior figure who has been war gaming the trip.
There were already bumps before the prime minister even landed. As Keir Starmer told reporters on the plane over that the security guarantees around any Ukraine peace deal “had to be sufficient to deter Putin from coming again” (and that requires a US military backstop in the minds of the Europeans), President Trump told reporters he was “not going to make security guarantees beyond very much”. “We’re gonna have Europe do that…Europe is their next door neighbour.”
Those remarks are perhaps not the ones the Number 10 team were hoping to hear, but they have a rule now to focus not on what Trump says, but what he actually does.
Much of what happens in the next 24 hours will be beyond the control of Sir Keir Starmer, but he has at least prepared the ground as best he can with a president who hates criticism, loves flattery and is very transactional.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
Starmer goes to Washington full of praise of President Trump – a leader he said on the plane over that he trusts – and a concrete pledge to put British troops into a peacekeeping force and lift UK defence spending, a key Trump ask of all NATO allies.
He has done the groundwork, now it comes down to the art of the deal.