Comments by "Curious Crow" (@CuriousCrow-mp4cx) on "Why inheritance tax charges are really good for real farmers – but not for financial whizz kids" video.

  1. Not really, it's not economic. It's financially correct, and stopping land becoming a speculative asset, or a financial instrument is better for farmers and for consumers in the long run. Truth be told, the idea that we can import from everywhere across the planet cheaply is becoming untenable. Would you rather your money went to British gamers or the shipping companies that are hiking their transportation costs? Simply, food is going to cost more due to a. Climate change, b. Geopolitical tensions, c. Globalisation failing. So, we need food production to increase, and not land being used as tax avoidance schemes. So, getting the asset wealthy to stop buying land and forcing up prices, would be a bet benefit.
    2
  2. Sorry, but his analysis is correct. If the land is an input into a farmers business which makes no return, there will be no inheritance tax burden. Moreover, a good accountant would be able to advise on how to structure the business to avoid tax liability. Not so the investors trying to exploit tax loopholes.
    2
  3. Unfortunately, if you understood the example illustrated, you realise it describes the position of marginal farmers too. So the principle still applies.
    1
  4. How come? Please explain.
    1