Over the previous months, a simmering conflict in the English countryside has boiled over into an open feud between farmers and politicians, culminating in thousands of farmers rallying in London to protest policies they say threaten their livelihoods. The flashpoint issue was a proposed tax on inherited farmland, with the Government moving to levy inheritance tax at 20% on farms valued above £1 million, describing it as a modest measure affecting only the wealthiest estates. However, this row encapsulates a deeper rift between rural England and Westminster, as shrinking subsidies and thin margins have meant that this policy is seen as yet another potentially devastating blow to family-run farms.
The backdrop to this crisis has stemmed from years of mounting pressure, as following Brexit, the UK began replacing the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy subsidies with its own system, resulting in a bumpy transition and continued uncertainty for farmers. The Government had promised to keep farm support at roughly £2.4 billion a year, in line with the former EU level, yet significant funds have gone unspent, with over £300 million of the farm budget not paid out over the last three years. Compounding these issues, production costs have surged, with global inflationary pressures and global instability resulting in the prices for fuel, fertiliser and animal feed rising. This has understandably squeezed farm margins considerably, with figures showing that the average farm business income plunged by over 50% between 2023 and 2024, the lowest in nearly a decade. It is this freefall in profitability that has left many farmers effectively operating at break-even or worse, and is at the heart of their grievances towards the prospect of new taxes on farmland assets.
The fate of the agricultural sector is inextricably linked to that of the wider economy, with the financial squeeze on farms reverberating through the broader food supply chain and resulting in a spike in food prices rivalling the 1970s. Yet, many producers feel caught between surging costs and powerful supermarket buyers, with retailers’ relentless focus on low consumer prices leaving farmers underpaid for their goods. This comes at a time where food insecurity is still a real issue, as the UK produces roughly 60% of its own food, down from 78% in the 1980s, and is heavily import-reliant for fresh produce, leaving the nation vulnerable. An over-reliance on imports for staple goods can leave the UK exposed to external shocks, a lesson driven home by recent global supply chain disruptions and the war in Ukraine’s impact on food prices.
Unsurprisingly, the feasibility of dramatically renegotiating post-Brexit deals remains limited by diplomatic and economic realities. However, more tactical tweaks, such as leveraging safeguard provisions, doubling down on promoting British produce and coordinating with like-minded countries on production standards, could be the first step in rebuilding. Policymakers are increasingly framing trade in terms of resilience, as deals must not only pursue efficiency and consumer price benefits, but also ensure domestic farming capacity is maintained as a hedge against global volatility. Therefore, renegotiating terms to favour domestic producers could be a way to bolster the UK’s self-sufficiency in agriculture and give UK farmers a fair chance. There is also a global competitiveness angle, as UK farm exports could gain better access abroad if trade deals are negotiated with strategic focus on agriculture and by branding Britain as a source of premium, high-welfare produce.
The Government, for its part, insists it must balance farmers’ concerns with fiscal needs, environmental goals and trade obligations, arguing that a 20% inheritance tax on farm estates closes a loophole exploited by the ultra-wealthy and will raise funds for rural public services. However, for many family-run operations, farmland values are so high that many ordinary family farms, with extremely modest incomes, could own land easily exceeding £1 million and thus find themselves ensnared by the policy. The dilemma of being land rich but cash poor is now at the heart of their grievances, as heirs of family-run farms may be forced to sell land to meet tax bills, imperilling businesses passed down for generations. Consequently, the structure of UK farming might also be forced to change, with larger agricultural businesses likely to buy up land to benefit from scale in purchasing and production efficiency.
Ultimately, how this standoff ends will shape the future of British farming, and by extension the trajectory of the wider economy. A prolonged deadlock risks more farm closures and heavier reliance on imports, undermining the nation’s food resilience and leaving the agricultural sector exposed to global price swings with less subsidy support. Against this backdrop, many in the sector predict a patchwork compromise, with a higher inheritance-tax threshold for active farms, extended payment instalment plans or conditional exemptions if the inheritors continue farming. Yet, this issue is less about policy nuance and more about a reframing of the narrative around domestic production and the importance of supporting British industry.
The same tensions seen in agriculture are playing out across the economy, as domestic producers from advanced manufacturers to high-growth technology firms are having to contend with supply chain disruptions, labour shortages and the relentless pressure of international competition. The Government must decide whether to continue championing open markets at any cost, or to pivot towards a more strategic approach that ensures key British industries can compete on fairer terms. If policymakers fail to act, the risk is not just a further erosion of British farming but a more profound weakening of the UK’s economic base that could leave the country more exposed to global shocks and dependent on external suppliers for critical goods and services. Without a clearer vision for how domestic businesses can compete on fairer terms, policymakers risk not only driving family farms into extinction, but accelerating the decline of industries vital to Britain’s economic future.
Find Gabriel McKeown on Substack.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
I’d sooner have 1000 farmers than one puppetician!
(Happy Paddy’s day everyone
)
I’d sooner have 1 farmer than 1000 politicians….better exchange rate!
“Whoever could make two ears of corn, or two blades of grass, to grow upon a spot of ground where only one grew before, would deserve better of mankind, and do more essential service to his country, than the whole race of politicians put together.”― Jonathan Swift, Gulliver’s Travels
Thanks for that.
Also manifest for over a hundred years as the Haber-Bosch process for manufacture of the ammonia that goes into fertilisers – main reason the world sustains 8 billion people when a century ago it fed only 2 billion.
Yes Sri Lanka had that problem and resulted in the Government deposed, how long will it take to depose this Libour Government, surely lying should result in impeachment by default.
Dinger64 would get us 650,000 farmers in exchange for the House of Commons and you only 0.65. I think I like his exchange rate better.
The money that they would rake in is the same as what they’re paying out to foreign farmers. So the real reason is not financial because that is NHS funding for about a day. What were those meetings between the PM and Gates, and on another occasion Blackrock. There is a common pattern in the Five Eyes with agriculture being attacked.
I assume most on here are aware of David Betz and his civil war interview.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gid48FgiHho&t=3s
All consistent with Sir Two-Tier’s self-admitted preference for Davos over Westminster, corporate land-monopolisation and North-London pig-ignorance of how those 12-quid Dine-In-For-Two options manifest in M&S and Waitrose in the first place.
Take a look at the CV of the DEFRA Kommissar and draw your own conclusions.
Inspirational.
A non-job in educational publishing and seated in Croydon. Just what the farmers need. I doubt he knows one end of a spade from another or even the difference between a spade and a shovel.
420-Quid welly-boots in mouth at every available opportunity…
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/11/01/steve-reed-420-boot-farming-crisis-rachel-reeves-budget/
…Reportedly a freebie from Lord Alli:
“They say you can tell a lot about a man by his shoes. This week, Britain’s angry farmers are judging Steve Reed by his. The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs is not a mucky gumboots kind of man. Instead, according to reports this week, Reed favours leather-lined Le Chameau “Chasseur” boots, “hand crafted by one single master boot maker”, or so says their blurb, and priced at a whopping £420.”
For Steve Reed…
A wafer thin mint?
Master bootmakers since 1927
“In 1927, in a seaside village in Normandy, France, Claude Chamot had a desire to create the most comfortable and best-fitting rubber boots. He had listened to farmers, hunters and fishermen who all yearned for boots that would withstand the rigours of their respective activities. Now, almost 100 years later, Monsieur Chamot’s vision continues. Heritage and history imbues each and every pair of Le Chameau boots that pass through the hands of time-served craftsmen.”
So the hard-faced bar steward can’t even support British bookmakers such as Trickers or Cheaney’s.
What a surprise.
Typical of the Enemy Within.
This article touches on but fails to acknowledge the real issue – the destruction of Britain and British people and their way of life.
Take away our farmers and their lands and what do we become, a nation of beggars. A soulless, poverty-racked state of aimless vagrants. Farming and farmers are the backbone of any country and without them we will die. Kneel wants the farms probably in order to fulfill some grand Davos Deviant vision. This is not about raising tax it is about decimation. Our government has declared war on the people of this country. Only a few can see this. The author is not one of them.
“To destroy a people, you must first sever their roots.”
Aleksandyr Solzenhytsin (1918 – 2008)
Always plenty of money for Death and destruction, but none for Life and Creation.
https://youtu.be/XR0-6OWXCzE?si=DsqtjVx2rIJ-MUKx
Thebowlerhatfarmer
Rocketing food prices on the way.
I know I am boring about the microbiome but it is important. The only practical way to maintain our microbiome is to drink more milk and eat more yoghurt. That would lead to less inflammation and less mental and physical disease at all ages. It would save a fortune on the benefits bill and the NHS.
Our modern globalised diet is too calorie dense, too low in nutrients and fibre, and virtually sterile with no bacteria to maintain the microbiome. I do not want punitive taxes on global food producers, or bans on crisps and alcohol. I just want the opportunity to have a daily delivery of milk in glass bottles, and the opportunity to buy good quality farm produce in shops.
So bring back school milk, and the milk marketing board. When people realise the health benefits, and they will, eventually, then the price will rise to a level which will be good for the consumer, the middle men and the farmer i.e. capitalism at its best.
This article, a bit heavy perhaps, makes the case:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/379311083_The_Microbiome_and_the_Entropy_Paradox_An_Evolutionary_Perspective_Food_Nutrition_Journal
School milk; I’m just old enough to remember it – I didn’t like it, but I did grow up with ultra local milk from a nearby farmer’s little herd of cows. It was raw milk, not treated at all much, with daily (except Sundays) in glass bottles that were collected and used again indefinitely, That was renewables in those days. With the milk not being processed, the cream would settle on top quite quickly automatically.
Town versus country and ultimately peasant versus city dweller. It will move into something like this in the not too distant future. TS Eliot remarked in the 1950s that western culture would have to retreat back into the monasteries in the near future. One wonders about how the guardians of the faith will fare and how committed they will be.
NO. These are the End Times, when all that was hidden shall be revealed, especially the truth that Christians have been deceived for 2000 years into worshipping the Impostor Baby Thief Mary and her Stolen Child Jesus.
JOHN THE BAPTIST IS THE TRUE CHRIST, and paid the price of our REDEMPTION 2000 YEARS AGO.
Jesus the Forerunner shall proclaim his non-identical TWIN BROTHER JOHN THE BAPTIST as the True Christ to all the world, especially the Christians who have been deceived for so long. Because THE TIME OF EVIL IS OVER.
E-ah-weh in His wisdom sent not one, but TWO SONS into the world through the womb of their mother E-lizabeth at Ein Karem where they were born, before newborn E-zus (there was no “J” in ancient Hebrew) was kidnapped by the Impostor Baby Thief calling herself the Virgin Mary, only the beginning of her long list of heinous atrocities, as one of the most Evil Women Ever to have Walked the Earth.
There is no pint using arguments about economics, security or fairness with the elites. They are driven by intense political objectives.
They are determined to destroy independent small businesses and farming in particular. They want to drive out the wealthy and create a socialist society regardless of the social and economic consequences.
They are thoroughly unpleasant people.
Blair did the constitutional wrecking, Tories bedded that in and developed globalisation which destroyed our economic viability and trashed the forces. The Tories tolerated lawfare and continued to appoint left wingers to run quangos and agencies.
Now Starmer is continuing attacks at both levels.
I’m not on my own then.
Unfortunately you’re exactly right.
Still, I don’t think the bastards will win. Remember charles I.
As the Scots rather tediously sing , we’ll be the nation again.
We really will. Our nation didn’t become great by being nice.
We should support them regardless. No farmers no food. How long would you last without food being funnelled into your mouth? You would last less than three days.
Excellent article by Gabriel McKeown. I hope he and the farmers realise that this is all part of the Globalist Depopulation Agenda.
The goal is FAMINE.
I think the inevitable end point if these stupid f&ckers don’t roll back on their idiotic policy is a line of crucifixes from london to Manchester with a socialist nailed up every 10 yards.
I don’t particularly want to see that, ugly bastards are hardly an adornment to our beautiful country but it’s a price I’m prepared to pay.