The UK’s food security and the future of farming lies in Rachel Reeves’ hands, a leading MP has said as a committee called on the government to delay farm inheritance tax changes.
The environment, food and rural affairs (EFRA) committee has released a report calling on the government to delay the reforms for a year until April 2027.
Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced in the October budget farmers would no longer be allowed to claim inheritance tax relief for farms worth more than £1m from April 2026.
The move prompted multiple protests in Westminster by farmers who said it will threaten the future of thousands of multi-generational family farms.
The EFRA committee, made up of seven Labour MPs and four Lib Dem and Tory MPs, said a pause in the implementation would “allow for better formulation of tax policy and provide the government with an opportunity to convey a positive long-term vision for farming”.
A delay would also protect vulnerable farmers who would have “more time to seek appropriate professional advice”, the MPs said.
Image: There have been multiple protests
The MPs raised concerns the change was announced “without adequate consultation, impact assessment or affordability assessment”, leaving the impact on farms and food security “disputed and unclear”.
More on Inheritance Tax
Related Topics:
They said it risks producing “unintended consequences” and threatens to “affect the most vulnerable”.
The MPs have called on the government to consider alternative reforms.
Image: Chair of the EFRA Committee Alistair Carmichael said the government should pause and reconsider the farmers’ inheritance tax changes
Alistair Carmichael, the Lib Dem chair of the committee, told Sky News: “There is a need for inheritance tax to be reformed.
“The use of land purchase by the super rich as a means of sheltering their wealth is something which is not in the public interest or farmers.
“But this is not the way to go about reform.
“The risk is you see farmers selling out, they will sell out to people who are not going to use land for food production then we risk losing food security – we’ve seen how foolish relying on exports is after Putin’s invasion.”
Image: Celebrities such as Jeremy Clarkson have drawn attention to the outrage
He added “as an outsider looking in”, the way in which the Treasury handled the inheritance tax announcement, after Labour said in opposition they would not change it, “has created a real problem of political authority” for Environment Secretary Steve Reed.
“It’s a problem the Treasury themselves can solve,” he said.
“Their own backbenchers increasingly think they should solve this and our report today gives them an opportunity to do that if they choose to take it.
“It really is up to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. It is over to her now.”
The committee report says before the autumn budget 70% of farmers felt optimistic about their futures, but that fell to 12% after the budget.
The survey, by the Farmers Guardian in March, also found 84% of farmers felt their mental health has been affected by the announcement.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:05
Key points from the budget
Farmers said the government announcing the closure of applications to this year’s sustainable farming incentive with just hours to go, was also a cause.
The committee said there are other ways to achieve reform, and called on the government to publish its evaluation and rationale for not following alternative policy measures.
They also said the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has a pattern of “poor communication and last-minute decision-making following rumours and departmental leaks”.
WazirX has been trying to get a restructuring plan through the Singapore High Court to start returning funds to users impacted by the $234 million hack in 2024.
“It’s an interesting moment,” was how one government source described the High Court ruling that will force an Essex hotel to be emptied of asylum seekers within weeks.
That may prove to be the understatement of the summer.
For clues as to why, just take a glance at what the Home Office’s own lawyer told the court on Tuesday.
Granting the injunction “runs the risk of acting as an impetus for further violent protests”, the barrister said – pointing out that similar legal claims by other councils would “aggravate pressures on the asylum estate”.
Right on cue and just hours after the ruling came in, Broxbourne Council – over the border in Hertfordshire – posted online that it was urgently seeking legal advice with a view to taking similar court action.
The risks here are clear.
Image: Police officers ahead of a demonstration outside The Bell Hotel. Pic: PA
Recent figures show just over 30,000 asylum seekers being housed in hotels across the country.
If they start to empty out following a string of court claims, the Home Office will struggle to find alternative options.
After all, they are only in hotels because of a lack of other types of accommodation.
There are several caveats though.
This is just an interim injunction that will be heard in full in the autumn.
So the court could swing back in favour of the hotel chain – and by extension the Home Office.
Image: Protesters in Epping on 8 August. Pic: Reuters
We have been here before
Remember, this isn’t the first legal claim of this kind.
Other councils have tried to leverage the power of the courts to shut down asylum hotels, with varying degrees of success.
In 2022, Ipswich Borough Council failed to get an extension to an interim injunction to prevent migrants being sent to a Novotel in the town.
As in Epping, lawyers argued there had been a change in use under planning rules.
Image: The hotel has been the scene of regular protests. Pic: PA
But the judge eventually decided that the legal duty the Home Office has to provide accommodation for asylum seekers was more important.
So there may not be a direct read across from this case to other councils.
Home Office officials are emphasising this injunction was won on the grounds of planning laws rather than national issues such as public order, and as such, each case will be different.
Spotify
This content is provided by Spotify, 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 Spotify 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 Spotify cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spotify cookies for this session only.
But government sources also smell dirty tricks from Epping Council and are suggesting that the Tory-led local authority made the legal claim for political reasons.
Pointing to the presence of several prominent Tory MPs in the Essex area – as well as the threat posed by Reform in the county – the question being posed is why this legal challenge was not brought when asylum seekers first started being sent to the hotel in 2020 during the Conservatives‘ time in government.
Epping Council would no doubt reject that and say recent disorder prompted them to act.
But that won’t stop the Tories and Reform of seizing on this as evidence of a failing approach from Labour.
So there are political risks for the government, yes, but it’s the practicalities that could flow from this ruling that pose the bigger danger.