[Video] Jeremy Clarkson answers some questions from BBC Newsnight
Posted by FlipStig1@reddit | thegrandtour | View on Reddit | 120 comments
From video description as posted on YouTube:
“Jeremy Clarkson speaks to Victoria Derbyshire as thousands of farmers descended on Westminster to protest against the Labour government’s inheritance tax changes announced in the Autumn budget. From April 2026, inherited agricultural assets worth more than £1m, which were previously exempt, will be liable to the tax at 20% - half the usual rate.
“Mr. Clarkson has called on the government to ‘please back down’ over the plans.”
easy_c0mpany80@reddit
The thing is though, most farmers arent Jeremy Clarkson and dont have anywhere near the wealth he does. Any IHTs would barley affect Jeremy or his family but it would to the average farmer.
Also, even the governments own figures project this to raise something like 520m a year which is pennies especially when they are now talking about using it to fund the NHS which spends 180 BILLION per year!
SpeedflyChris@reddit
Perhaps it would be possible for currently tenant farmers (46% of our farmers) or small operations to buy out their land, were farmland not massively overvalued due to people like Jeremy buying it as a tax dodge?
REDthunderBOAR@reddit
But then the tenant farmers family loses the farm upon their death because of the same tax.
SpeedflyChris@reddit
Do they? The threshold is up to £3m, the amount of tax is 20% of anything above that, payable over 10 years, interest free.
So a farm that has £5m in equipment alone, not counting the land (as they are hypothetically a tenant) would attract a £400,000 bill, £40k per year for 10 years.
For a farm with £5m in equipment alone £40k per year is not a lot of money. What do you think the maintenance and depreciation costs are on £5m of farm equipment?
I find it very hard to see a scenario in which the family of a lot of tenant farmers actually lose the farm as a result of this.
qwzzard@reddit
You are looking at an investment and calling it a profit. Most farmers do not but equipment with cash up front, and have payments to make on it, plus the equipment depreciates. Pretty easy to see a scenario where families lose their farms. You probably know people with more dept than capital, it is not uncommon, especially with businesses.
SpeedflyChris@reddit
In which case the amount financed is deducted for inheritance tax purposes anyway. Say you have a piece of equipment that cost £100k, you owe £50k on it and it's depreciated value is £70k, that's only going to be £20k towards the IHT threshold. So you're even less likely to come anywhere near the inheritance tax threshold as a tenant farmer.
Well if they have more debt than capital then they definitely don't have to worry about inheritance tax, since the value of the inheritance is negative. Personally in that scenario I'd be much more concerned about the legal consequences of trading while insolvent.
qwzzard@reddit
So you find it hard to see how a farm might go under when faced with another expense? Seems like a stupid, roundabout way to tax the rich.
SpeedflyChris@reddit
If a tenant farm is that close to the brink financially, it won't be worth enough to have an IHT liability, so there is no new expense there.
Yeah I do tend to find that when businesses go under it's generally not because of expenses that they aren't liable to pay.
qwzzard@reddit
That is exactly why most businesses go under. More money spent than coming in. Not sure what planet you are on...
SpeedflyChris@reddit
Okay, I'm going to have to tell you to read everything I've written again, because you clearly aren't understanding it.
If a business (like a farm) is close to going under, it will have a low assessed value for the purposes of IHT.
If it has a low assessed value for IHT, there will be no additional costs to pay under the new rules.
If there are no additional costs to pay, that won't make any business go under.
Is that clear enough?
JoeSicko@reddit
40k a year is a good business investment, if you know what you're doing.
Adcan@reddit
Only if they can’t afford to pay the IHT bill. Their free IHT allowance can be up to £3m and furthermore they’d only pay a 20% rate as opposed to the 40% us mere mortals pay over £300k and they can pay this back over 10 years interest free.
JoeSicko@reddit
Break up the farm into more workable pieces? Blasphemy. What would my feudal overlords think?
facelessgymbro@reddit
That’s an interesting point. Clarkson was a landlord until the lockdown. He had farmers work the land for him and I assume he took a share of the profits or charged them rent.
SpeedflyChris@reddit
Yes exactly. Jeremy is precisely the kind of person these changes were brought in to impact. He bought that land to avoid tax and make money off hard working farmers.
Optimaximal@reddit
You've got it backwards. JC is so absurdly wealthy that it would affect his family to the tune of 40% (or 20% in the case of the farm), unless he disinherits his estate now and doesn't die in the next 7 years. Quite why the absurdly rich don't do this is beyond me - just throw it all into a trust for the children.
But this is fundamentally nothing to do with the government slapping a tax on them - It's a combination of rich people hoarding farm land as a tax dodge and the entire industry being one step away from disaster for decades.
The job is anti-social, it doesn't pay well, and it was literally propped up by the EU CAP subsidies up until the UK left the EU and, funnily enough, HMG couldn't afford to replace it.
JustAMemeKid@reddit
He literally said he bought the farm as a way to dodge inheritance tax. I was raised in a farming family and have mixed feelings about the recent changes. I have never agreed with Clarkson politically, and while I do believe he has genuinely changed for the better since starting clarksons farm, I still believe his motivations are less pure than he makes out. I don’t think he makes a good spokesperson for the common people.
bucky-plank-chest@reddit
I kinda feel being able to pass on wealth acquired by increasing property value and so forth isn't ok.
At the same time, things that have already been taxed once shouldn't be taxed a second time.
JustAMemeKid@reddit
You’re right in a sense. The thing is they’re closing this tax loophole to clamp down on billionaires trying to avoid tax by owning land, which I totally agree with. The problem is that some farmers will get caught as collateral damage.
The thing with farmland is it’s totally different to other assets. Most land is only worth millions if you sell it, in which case you would pay capital gains tax anyway. But farmland is only profitable if farmers pour blood sweat and tears into their land for 365 days a year and barely turn a profit. Even Clarkson himself only made something like £140 in his first year. Others in his program said they don’t even take a wage.
I’m no political or economic expert but surely there must be a way to exempt people who’s only income stream is farming and who barely turn a profit each year
Optimaximal@reddit
You need to remember that things like this, along with change to the winter fuel allowance, are the new government setting a direction.
There's nothing stopping them pivoting down the line, but if they immediately walk back their first budget and all policies associated with it, then what's stopping every single group that feels even slightly inconvenienced by government policy from just exerting pressure?
ParitoshD@reddit
As people are entitled to do in a democracy? How else will they make their voices heard? I find it funny how you have a problem with this most basic aspect of democracy.
Optimaximal@reddit
I don't. I didn't say people couldn't raise issues, I said if the government capitulated to the first two instances of it exercising its power, it would just invite everyone else to do the same down the line.
ParitoshD@reddit
There it is. What's wrong with "inviting everyone else to do the same down the line?" If people feel wronged and not represented, let them make their voices heard. Why do you have a problem with that?
Optimaximal@reddit
Fair enough, I think I see where you're coming from - I still didn't once say they couldn't 'raise their issues' or protest as they did yesterday.
ParitoshD@reddit
Yeah you didn't say they couldn't, but you clearly said them being emboldened to do so further is a negative.
Quick-Minute8416@reddit
So you’re suggesting that any new government should press on regardless, even when the facts show them to be wrong, essentially just to save face?
Optimaximal@reddit
But the facts havent shown them to be wrong. There's no facts either way, because both controversial policies are new and untested.
WRM710@reddit
Maybe they should have put some of these plans in their manifesto if they don't want pushback?
Optimaximal@reddit
As if writing something in the manifesto would have any bearing on X aggrieved party.
JustAMemeKid@reddit
You’re absolutely correct that’s a good point, like I said my feelings on this are mixed and I’m open the fact there are perfectly valid points from both sides
35mm-eryri@reddit
Genuine question (I come from North Wales where there is a lot of farming, so have sympathy with the farmers, but am not from a farming family myself so don't understand some of the nuances) - but as I understand it IHT was applied to farmland at a rate of 40% prior to 1992. These changes are re-introducing it with a much higher threshold before it is due, and a rate of 20%. Was there a big issue with farms passing through the generations prior to 1992, or are there other changes that make it much more of an issue now?
Squa1l0g@reddit
The major change is that since then, the land has gained value disproportionately with the profit that agriculture can make.
Its a bit of a catch 22 situation though, since the inherritance exemption is likely part of why the land has gained so much imaginary value
Optimaximal@reddit
It was more than likely a sweetener from the Tories to encourage them to continue to farm in light of the incoming EEC CAP.
Squa1l0g@reddit
Its a really cra situation for farmers
The land has gained artificial value because of its tax advantages - hence why a 4 million pound farm will only produce \~20 million in proffit - which over time will be mended by the policy - but only slowly.
Overall I do agree with the policy, but I think it will take at least 5 years before its benefit begins to show
Quick-Minute8416@reddit
That was suggested to Rachel Reeves, but she turned it down.
Formal_Scarcity_7701@reddit
I think that is a silly rhetoric. You're taxed on your income which you use to buy something then you pay VAT. Nobody minds because they realise services the government provides like the NHS need to be paid for.
At the end of the day, it shouldn't be about arbitrary little quips like "I don't like getting taxed twice on the same thing", it should be about whether or not this policy will benefit the common man.
bucky-plank-chest@reddit
Hey. I don't mind paying taxes at all.
I don't live in the uk, but my hugest annoyance here is property tax.
People buy a house. Property increases in value, as does property tax, people retire, have to move out because the pension doesn't cover. Wish they'd tax the proceeds upon sale instead .
JoeSicko@reddit
When you pay off a house you go from 13 payments to 2 a year. Can't be free.
Optimaximal@reddit
If anyone can suggest an alternative, then i'm sure the government is all ears, but there are so many ways to legitimately avoid it that it's not a problem unless you're in the top 5% of the country anyway, and to be honest, why do we want billionnaires anyway?
Quick-Minute8416@reddit
How about not spending £8 million every day on illegal immigrants? Just a thought.
Froggn_Bullfish@reddit
Things are typically taxed when they change hands. Inheritance is no different.
Washingtonpinot@reddit
I’m 4th generation, and I think I agree with you, but I’m pulling for him to stay the course and be genuine. We have to allow the ability to change.
I really wish we’d see Caleb take the point on this, but that’s not his talent.
Learnformyfam@reddit
I'm shocked at how naive so many of you are. The envy and greed that people who want the government to steal people's inheritance is so ugly. It's disgusting. You think you can trust a government like that to respect your rights? Oh sweet summer child...
Lele_@reddit
How can you function so well with all that boot polish in your system is somewhat of a medical curiosity. I hope you donate your body to science.
alex416416@reddit
I am sorry, I don’t quite understand.. I have been paying a LOT of taxes. I mean a lot, someone who has done better than me in my family (because the have started before I was born) also paid millions in taxes. Now I will have to inherit all that s left(and I am not complaining) and I need to pay tax on this? Fucking communists! Please tell me I am wrong…
Giggalo_Joe@reddit
Many of the posts in this thread are a reminder that a lot of you are too young, too dumb, too uneducated, or just too naive to understand the world. If you really take this much offense to Jeremy's politics, please don't watch the show. Neither he nor the rest of us care. The truth is nor the extreme left nor the extreme right, are right. Both go too far in whatever direction. Your answers are in the middle. As a small example, we probably should have universal healthcare in every first world country. That doesn't mean it should include elective surgery for whatever your personal gender identity may be or whether you want plastic surgery to look like Tom Cruise. This is a fair compromise. You don't like this, I'm sorry. Until people move to the middle we're going to be forced to choose extremes. Right now in America the extreme right is winning again. If you start heavily taxing people for things they already own, then the balance will shift again in England too. Common sense must win out or we all lose.
noirbourboncoffee@reddit
I find it hilarious when governments try to squeeze more revenue to pursue their rotten agendas, which do zero good for its own citizenry.
Wilheimur@reddit
Imagine having inheritance tax. What a scam lol.
KnightsOfCidona@reddit
Jesus that might be the worst I've ever seen Clarkson. Couldn't answer the question straight, knew she had him on the backfoot so tries to play to the crowd and take little digs. She's asking fair questions, quoting his own previous statements but he reacts like a child. Love the man on TV but my god I'd love him more if I didn't know anything of him outside of it because he's a dickhead otherwise
dirtysantchez@reddit
Very interesting to see Clarkson on the ropes.
Aceman1979@reddit
Yup. And he’s a bully. A right wing bully. The likeable clutz thing is all an act.
Sailing-Cyclist@reddit
He’s not. You can’t travel the world and still retain that broad view for everything.
What we seem to have forgotten in recent years is that it’s ok to have multiple political leanings on multiple topics.
Clarkson’s a classic fiscal conservative, but he was also vehemently anti-Brexit and clearly a big fan of helping his backyard ecosystem thrive. I’d call him centre-right at best — he’s hardly been calling for deportations or hotel burnings now, has he?
Giggalo_Joe@reddit
Actually you sound like the bully.
sexyshaytan@reddit
Easy answer. "I am not here protesting about what I have wrote or what I have done and the implications of this tax on me. I have the cash reserves and an amazon TV show to protect my farm and family. This is about the average day farmers who will struggle and suffer the most from this unjust tax".
Sailing-Cyclist@reddit
It’s quite funny because he was so obviously there for the Amazon shoot — no doubt it’ll be a fun episode when it airs.
But as soon as he landed himself in front of actual journalists they totally caught him out. Least to say this won’t make the Clarkson’s Farm cut!
kh250b1@reddit
This is a great answer. So much better than the “i didnt buy it for tax reasons “ BS he fake denied
Chi1dishAlbino@reddit
This whole thing is a practice in entitlement.
Approximately 30% of farmers will be affected by a policy that’s intended to end tax avoidance in the farming sector. The policy itself only adds a 20% inheritance tax on farms worth over £1.5M (half of the average for the same amount of money) - 70% of farms would remain unaffected.
With this, it would discourage rich people from buying farms for tax evasion purposes, bringing down the demand for farmland and therefore value - so even fewer farmers would be affected by this policy. It would largely help poorer farmers as they would no longer have competition from wealthy farmers who buy up large plots of land and do the minimum to qualify as a farmer.
The budget primarily hurts people like Clarkson, who admitted to buying a farm to avoid taxes. Of course he’s upset. He’s used to special allowances for him, and he’s not getting them.
Learnformyfam@reddit
I agree. It is entitled little beareucrats and entitled little people with small minds and envious hearts who covet that which doesn't belong to them out of envy, malice, and jealously. What an ugly mindset. Heaven forbid a family who worked hard to acquire something should be able to keep it!
Chi1dishAlbino@reddit
It’s entitlement to expect to pay nothing when you’re in a modern civil culture with assets measured in millions.
My brother in Christ, £1.5M is a lot of money. And even still, that would mean £30k/year in tax - which is easily doable if you have £1.5M in assets and cash.
The whole scheme is intended on ending tax avoidance by the wealthy - the only people who qualify for this tax. Stop being a mouthpiece for the Daily Heil
Lewinator56@reddit
where is that 30% figure from? the NFU and CLA put the figure at about 2/3 of farmers. the figures the government are using ARE wrong, either intentionally or due to incompetence https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/budget-2024-inheritance-tax-and-family-farms/.
PheIix@reddit
He does a piss poor job arguing here. It shows that she has him figured out on multiple occasions and she corners him with good questions. I'm actually kind of impressed by her knowledge on the follow ups.
Clarksons reasons might not be as pure as he is trying to make them seem here, but it doesn't mean he is wrong for being there. I like the side of Clarkson that defends the farmers and sees the benefit of people working the land like they do. Even if it's more of a hobby for him, it doesn't make the cause less right for the people he is representing.
halcykhan@reddit
I’d hate to be a child of the boot lickers in these threads
Learnformyfam@reddit
Right? Real people are going to lose their family farms to the state and the people in this thread are so full of envy and malice that they're more concerned with one rich guy. It's so ugly. Envy truly is ugly and disgusting.
chrysler-crossfire@reddit
Funny you never see him shooting pheasants on Clarkson farm
facelessgymbro@reddit
Isn’t there also an episode where he learns to shoot, as a means to deal with foxes? I had the impression that he didn’t own firearms until this point. So it really feels like a bad lie.
DraconianDebate@reddit
You hunt birds with an old shotgun, not a rifle.
JoeSicko@reddit
The council would really bitch about that.
EnglishJesus@reddit
Clarkson has been shooting game for a long time. Pheasants, Partridge and Grouse mostly.
undead_dilemma@reddit
He shoots deer
EnglishJesus@reddit
I’ve never been to the area but to make big bucks running a shoot you’d need some very hilly terrain and likely more than his 1000 acres.
RnBrie@reddit
Pretty sure he's even said in the past he bought it so his kids didn't have to pay inheritance tax on it when he dies
JoeSicko@reddit
He's just Boris Johnson with a comb. Same elitist everyday man schtick.
Redhawk911@reddit
Isn’t it well documented that that was the reason he bought the farm? And that’s why he has a problem with a normal argument against her, cause he knows it’s true and he’s puzzled that he has to answer to it.
Either way, Jeremy isn’t really a man of the people, he’s like the polar opposite. So I just assume he’s there for his own good.
Indiethecat246@reddit
Righttttttt sure he did brought the fame in the beginning because of that however that was a long time ago and the reasons he’s kept it have changed he now works on it and is fully invested in it , he now can understand the farming landscape and the struggles that come with it and so is speaking out for himself and others I don’t understand why every single argument against him is that he brought it to avoid taxes yes it is ironic but that was ages ago it didn’t just happen last week
BellendicusMax@reddit
I'm sure he doesn't face the same struggles as other farmers - having substantial wealth, a lucrative TV series and an overpriced farm (merchandising) outlet.
He's clearly struggling so much he's now going to play at being a landlord for a bit too. Until he gets bores of that as well.
He's a bit of a knob.
Aceman1979@reddit
I wonder if the type of poster you are replying to is just a fanboy or genuinely holds these fairly abhorrent right wing views.
Either was, Clarkson is just a bully in that clip.
Lewinator56@reddit
Not everyone has left wing views. Calling right wing views abhorrent just shows you have no ability to accept others opinions. I tend to see most 'average' right wing people are quite accepting of other political viewpoints, but it's certainly not the other way around.
The point I think you're missing here is, yes, Clarkson bought the land to help dodge inheritance tax, but he can obviously do it another way anyway. He originally had nothing to do with the farm, he was effectively just the landowner, but he's changed his mind and now runs the farm himself - NOT getting a profit too. So, if his daughter takes over when he expires, she's going to be doing clarkson's job unless she sells up, and if I'm being honest, I don't see that happening, so Clarkson isn't in it for the money anymore - or at least not as much as he originally was.
Clarkson is there protesting because, of course it will affect him, but the real issue is about 2/3 of farms will be affected too. The numbers the government gave are crap, as multiple independent calculations put it much higher. Farmers get constantly shafted, the bellend running Wales until he resigned (after implementing some disastrous policies) said they have to plant trees on farmable land in order to get subsidies - what a stupid policy. Now we've got a labour government going after them again. And it's not just labour, it's the Tories too. What don't governments get about "no farmers = no food" and surely the protests in Europe over similar things last year should show farmers have just about had enough bullshit from governments.
ConorPMc@reddit
Nice way to twist their words! ‘Right wing views are abhorrent’ and ‘abhorrent right wing views’ do not mean the same thing. But to be expected based on what you’ve said so far.
Lewinator56@reddit
yes, but the poster didnt say anything even remotely abhorrent unless they modified the post
Aceman1979@reddit
Thank you.
KnightsOfCidona@reddit
I feel like an unspoken part of liking Top Gear/Grand Tour is acknowledging the guy is a twat a lot of the time but a lot of people miss this. Worshipping or agreeing with him all the time is weird.
Aceman1979@reddit
Especially about the finer points of UK tax law.
kh250b1@reddit
Its a fanboy. Hes here FFS
6oh7racing@reddit
Not to be rude but have you seen even a single second of the show?
BellendicusMax@reddit
All of it.
You do get that it's a scripted reality show?
F430Scuderia@reddit
Bought, not brought ffs.
Vanadium_V23@reddit
I do believe that he is here to help farmers because he became part of that community that he wants to help and protect.
But that doesn't make him a good spoke person because his initial motivation to buy the farm is questionable and his wealth, and how he obtained it, isn't representative of farmers.
Billionaires and wealthy people in general should pay inheritance taxes while farmers should be exempt but only up to a certain point.
For Jeremy to be credible, he should argue that his family should pay taxes but not regular farmers who'd lose their mean to make a living.
Revolutionary-Ad2355@reddit
The interviewer is a fucking moron, lol.
Gidnik@reddit
inheritance tax affects farms that are worth over 1million pounds right? that seems extrordinarily low. a million pounds isnt what it used to be. a house now days in england averages what 310k pounds? 1 stractor is what 25 grand new? buying all of the other assorted equipment depending on what youre farming probably another hundred to two hundred thousand pounds.
doesnt seem like it would need to be all that large a farm.
is this just a tax grab? charging someone a 40% tax on something a family has owned and paid taxes on for generations seems incredible wrong to me.
DrBorisGobshite@reddit
It's effectively £3m for most farmers. The people making the noise right now are disingenuously taking the worst case scenario and suggesting it applies to most farmers.
Gidnik@reddit
Knowing what I know about politics, it will be for all farmers.
Optimaximal@reddit
Using your example, assuming the farmer intended to gift the farm to their children, then average farmer wouldn't be liable for the tax, because the estate is under £3 million.
CONSIDER_A_KEBAB@reddit
Rich people don't want to pay taxes, shocker.
bananas500@reddit
Inherence tax is a robbery no matter where you live and how much wealth you have.
spacestationkru@reddit
How so?
dprophet32@reddit
No OP and not Right Wing before I get mauled like everyone else here but to play devil's advocate: "If I work hard to build up an estate that has value I would like to pass that on to my children when I die. I don't think it's fair the government can come and take a sizeable percentage of it for no apparent reason. I paid tax earning it, I paid tax maintaining it, why do my children now need to give a big percentage of it away because I died?"
SpeedflyChris@reddit
That's a totally fair argument, but the important thing to me is that if we're going to have inheritance tax it should apply equally regardless of the asset. If other wealthy people have to pay it, so should farmers and landowners.
dprophet32@reddit
The difference is farmers make so little money, the only way to pay the tax is to sell the farm. Which means it's impossible to pass the farm down through a family. It's slightly different to having to sell a property you likely didn't live in anyway. That's not your entire lifestyle and living being taken away.
SpeedflyChris@reddit
The absolute maximum rate at which you would have to pay this tax is 2% of the value per year, interest free over 10 years, if you had a farm worth hundreds of millions.
If an asset cannot generate a 2% ROI then something (like, say, the super wealthy buying farmland as a tax dodge) is driving up the price of the asset, and doing something about that will make the pricing more realistic with respect to the expected returns.
PRSArchon@reddit
And for a house we consider 30 years normal, so then it would be only 0.7% per year.
cardidd-mc@reddit
He is not wrong, and the reason people are turning off the BBC in droves .. he has the money to be able to avoid this new tax, but the land rick cash poor farmers do not. It pisses me off that when I die, the government and solicitors will take most of my small estate, leaving nothing of worth for my children
Rev_Dean@reddit
Yeah, how dare the BBC use his exact words in context!!
Optimaximal@reddit
How can your estate be considered small if it's going to attract inheritance tax?
Lewinator56@reddit
Go to the South east of England, a modest 3-4 bed house can easily be worth over 700k. For everyone but farmers the limit for no inheritance tax is £375k, what do you do if you live in those areas? Most people didn't buy that property at that price, 20 years ago it was £200k or less. As an individual you may not be any richer, but your assets have accumulated value you can't control. These are the people that don't like inheritance tax because they are effectively being punished for something they can do nothing about, EVEN if they have a fairly average wage and monetary assets.
Optimaximal@reddit
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.
You have a personal allowance, which is doubled if you're married and your spouse has passed their estate to you if they die before you and you have an additional amount of allowance if you pass your property onto a direct descendent. 🤷♂️
Yes, there are cases where some people's (physical) estates have matured into being liable for paying tax, but if that's the case, you're ultimately now a very wealthy individual. I don't subscribe to the 'all tax is theft' mindset - I care about the state of the country and it's currently being bled dry, partially by those who can afford to pay refusing to do so.
pinewind108@reddit
And the stupid thing is that most children of farmers will have to sell off a chunk of the farm to pay the tax. The government really does seem to have it in for small farmers. If they want to raise money, then do a business or banking tax.
Optimaximal@reddit
No, they won't. They only pay the tax on the amount over the generous threshold. There are plenty of steps that can be taken to push up that threshold (main residence exclusion, spousal allowance etc) or mitigate it entirely and even if any is due, it's half of what any other 'estate' must pay and it can be paid across 10 years (whereas every other type of estate is paid immediately).
I.e. if a farmer plans to leave the farm to the children, why not just give it to them whilst your healthy? 7 years down the line, it's no longer going to attract the tax. You can still work it and raise money for 'the business', your name just isn't above the door. I guess the only worry is if your children show no interest and you know they're just going to immediately flip the land, but then that was likely going to happen anyway.
Also, if this tax has the intended effect of pushing out all the people using it purely as a tax dodge, then the average per acreage value of farm land will fall and many farms just over the threshold will fall under it. Yes, the on-paper value is less, but why does this matter to working famers intending to continue with the job?
SpeedflyChris@reddit
How exactly do you expect those things to take "most" of said estate?
kh250b1@reddit
Its not.
Its 40% or 20% of the second million of a 2m farm inheritance
LickMyKnee@reddit
Always a great day when the millionaire landowners are upset. Means the plebs are doing something right.
FirmDingo8@reddit
Seeing Clarkson like this, unable to back up his comments, makes me wonder how May and Hammond put up with him on TG and GT for so many years.
I love the motoring shows but not the man himself
existential_chaos@reddit
The BBC journalists have been shit for years, always asking loaded questions. I'm surprised Jeremy held himself back here, you can hear the contempt when he goes 'You people'.
kh250b1@reddit
Its not loaded. He famously bought the farm as a tax dodge and ignored it for 10 years. Now he denies the truth. I like Clarkson but hes being a lying twat here
existential_chaos@reddit
Tbf, I meant them in general now, not so much with what she said to Jeremy. If he's being a bit of a hypocrite, at least he's a big enough figure to where these protests might gain some traction.
BellendicusMax@reddit
Given jezza has always been a bit if a right wing twat it's par for the course not liking having to justify your shit attitudes.
the_brazilian_lucas@reddit
can someone explain to me how inheritance tax makes sense? why would the government be entitled to something that your parents worked for and is rightfully yours?
potato_merchant@reddit
It's also worth remembering how few people it actually impacts. In general inheritance tax, the majority of people will never pay any, however it is portrayed by the wealthy that they are going after your parents assets.
KC0023@reddit
Following this logic no tax makes sense. Why should I work and hand over a piece of my wage to the government. Why is it different from an inheritance tax?
It follows the same logic, money goes from person a to b and you pay a tac on the transaction.
TGX03@reddit
Because you can easily reverse the question: Why would you be entitled to something your parents worked for you, but you haven't?
An inheritance is an income most people haven't worked for. Which makes it strange it should be tax free, as basically every other income, which you generally have to work or take risks for, is taxed. That's also why you saying "it's rightfully yours" is very much up for debate. Whether it's right you get a lot of money for winning the birth lottery is something many people disagree with.
I think the big difference is that some people view a family as a single unit tax wise, meaning if your parents give you something it effectively hasn't changed owners, so the government shouldn't meddle with it.
But other people, like me, don't share this view, and view everyone individually, and at that point, it is weird to say that this specific income shouldn't be taxed.
V_LEE96@reddit
What the fuck happened to the BBC.