The future of the Labour Party

[Ozyhibby]

https://bsky.app/profile/danneidle.bsky.social/post/3l7te2pmzev25

Good thread here on the farmer inheritance tax.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

I went to Clarksons farm in June. The hype is greater than the reality. Without the queues of Clarkson fans it would fail.

It consists of 2 sheds, a shop selling overpriced merchandise and a burger takeaway.

I use gloagburn farm shop near Perth as the benchmark.

[Kato]

I went to Clarksons farm in June. The hype is greater than the reality. Without the queues of Clarkson fans it would fail.

It consists of 2 sheds, a shop selling overpriced merchandise and a burger takeaway.

I use gloagburn farm shop near Perth as the benchmark.Burger van will be the money maker.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

https://bsky.app/profile/danneidle.bsky.social/post/3l7te2pmzev25

Good thread here on the farmer inheritance tax.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So pretty much the super rich farmers mostly effected and probably well under 500 farms per year. We'll never be able to do a wealth tax as they have better advisors than they hoi polloi and they will fight every bit of extra tax that comes

[Jack]

I wonder how many landowners own the rented farms and farmland.

There will be no change in farming economics for the 45% (I'm pretty sure that's the figure from what I could find) that pay a rent.

I suspect in terms of the number of landlords it will be quite small and they'll all have stuff in place to protect their assets.

[Ozyhibby]

Burger van will be the money maker.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

If he paid £12.5m for that then I suspect that avoiding inheritance tax is his main motivation. In which case, this tax is long overdue.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grunt]

So pretty much the super rich farmers mostly effected and probably well under 500 farms per year. We'll never be able to do a wealth tax as they have better advisors than they hoi polloi and they will fight every bit of extra tax that comesDon't know if this is true, but ...

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:wjnuvxq6rqp4ig3wo67aai6f/bafkreiaw7x3qieobajqrrxtnazg26woia2x6p2udi2m6ba3xf r4zbu456m@jpeg

[Ozyhibby]

Don't know if this is true, but ...

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:wjnuvxq6rqp4ig3wo67aai6f/bafkreiaw7x3qieobajqrrxtnazg26woia2x6p2udi2m6ba3xf r4zbu456m@jpeg

Ah now I see why it hasn’t happened before. And btw, I think it should be set at 40% the same as for any other asset class.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Andy Bee]

According to Andy Wightmans first book 433 people own 50% of private land in Scotland, in his new book it's now 421 people owning 50% and that's after the Duke of Buccleuch sold vast swathes of his land. That figure needs to rise dramatically. I posted previously that 15% of land in Scotland is owned for Grouse shooting. That's land that should either be used for farming or left to grow wild with trees and shrubs etc but is burnt every year to create young Heather shoots which the birds are drawn to.

[Andy Bee]

Don't know if this is true, but ...

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:wjnuvxq6rqp4ig3wo67aai6f/bafkreiaw7x3qieobajqrrxtnazg26woia2x6p2udi2m6ba3xf r4zbu456m@jpeg


The biggest land owner in Scotland is Anders Povlsen a Danish billionaire and IIRC made his money via the ownership of ASOS the online clothing store.

[lapsedhibee]

According to Andy Wightmans first book 433 people own 50% of private land in Scotland, in his new book it's now 421 people owning 50% and that's after the Duke of Buccleuch sold vast swathes of his land. That figure needs to rise dramatically. I posted previously that 15% of land in Scotland is owned for Grouse shooting. That's land that should either be used for farming or left to grow wild with trees and shrubs etc but is burnt every year to create young Heather shoots which the birds are drawn to.

Wolves. Don't forget the wolves.

[Ozyhibby]

According to Andy Wightmans first book 433 people own 50% of private land in Scotland, in his new book it's now 421 people owning 50% and that's after the Duke of Buccleuch sold vast swathes of his land. That figure needs to rise dramatically. I posted previously that 15% of land in Scotland is owned for Grouse shooting. That's land that should either be used for farming or left to grow wild with trees and shrubs etc but is burnt every year to create young Heather shoots which the birds are drawn to.

A bit of tax on that should be very welcome.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CropleyWasGod]

The tax advice they were given up to Oct 7th was to hold onto everything though, it would take a very astute farmer to employ an advisor and have him implement those kind of measures before Oct 7th just on the off chance wouldn't it? Out of interest CWG what do you think an advisor would cost who would have the knowledge to advise on this kind of situation? I know employing a personal financial advisor to manage a retirement plan costs in the region of £2k a year.

I'm not subscribing to the argument that just because it's easy to mitigate around tax rises it isn't a problem, surely that should raise questions around the tax system rather than farmers? Just don't implement the tax on farmers and create a way to tax the people that are abusing the system.

All of those things should have been in place anyway, no matter what happened. It's basic IHT planning.

Planning for the future, when it comes to capital taxes, is always a bit of a punt. But the things I mentioned are fairly standard. Even if they aren't in place now, the nature and timing of the new measures means that there's still a fair bit of time to get them in place.

That's why I'm a little dubious about the protests that are going on.

As for costs, I'd say it's a one-off cost to arrange everything. Maybe a few grand for the tax advisor and solicitor. There would also probably need a review every few years to make sure things are on track.

[jamie_1875]

Scottish Labour saying they will reinstate the Winter Fuel payment. Can't work out if this is a brilliant strategy for 2026 or not.

Devolution allows Scotland to make different choices so I think it's a good thing. But interesting to see how Scottish Labour position this. Puts pressure on the SNP as well.

[Moulin Yarns]

Scottish Labour saying they will reinstate the Winter Fuel payment. Can't work out if this is a brilliant strategy for 2026 or not.

Devolution allows Scotland to make different choices so I think it's a good thing. But interesting to see how Scottish Labour position this. Puts pressure on the SNP as well.

https://news.stv.tv/politics/scottish-labour-pledge-means-tested-winter-fuel-payment-ahead-of-holyrood-elections

No difference to the current situation. Means tested benefit. Labour in Scotland following their counterpart in Westminster.

[jamie_1875]

https://news.stv.tv/politics/scottish-labour-pledge-means-tested-winter-fuel-payment-ahead-of-holyrood-elections

No difference to the current situation. Means tested benefit. Labour in Scotland following their counterpart in Westminster.

Not exactly.

"Under the plans, all pensioners would receive the payment initially, but it would be tapered over the years to reflect the income of recipients, with those who are better off receiving less in the longer term"

I don't believe the current system (after the change) means all pensioners will get the payment.

[Smartie]

Not exactly.

"Under the plans, all pensioners would receive the payment initially, but it would be tapered over the years to reflect the income of recipients, with those who are better off receiving less in the longer term"

I don't believe the current system (after the change) means all pensioners will get the payment.

I think that depends on what you wish to read into their spin.

[jamie_1875]

I think that depends on what you wish to read into their spin.

It's about winning in 2026, if this puts pressure on the SNP to do the same then Labour can claim it was because of pressure from them and if they don't they can say use this in the 2026 campaign saying vote for us and we will introduce this again in Scotland using the powers of devolution.

Pretty much everyone supports the policy so it will be a popular policy to campaign on.

Put who you support politically aside for a minute and it's a clever move?

[grunt]

Put who you support politically aside for a minute and it's a clever move?
What are they going to cut elsewhere to find the money for this?

[jamie_1875]

What are they going to cut elsewhere to find the money for this?

Well that's a question they will of course have to answer. I suspect the answer lies in the increased block grant given by the UK Labour Government which is why the SNP were also considering it.

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/john-swinney-actively-considering-bringing-34051227


"John Swinney is "actively considering" the reintroduction of universal winter fuel payments in his December Budget. Government sources said they are mulling over the move after Chancellor Rachel Reeves slashed the payment for around 90% of older Scots."

[Smartie]

It's about winning in 2026, if this puts pressure on the SNP to do the same then Labour can claim it was because of pressure from them and if they don't they can say use this in the 2026 campaign saying vote for us and we will introduce this again in Scotland using the powers of devolution.

Pretty much everyone supports the policy so it will be a popular policy to campaign on.

Put who you support politically aside for a minute and it's a clever move?

It would have been incredibly clever… if it was actually how you initially described it.

Instead, I think it can be outflanked.

As it happens I don’t think it’s that big a deal. People who care deeply about the winter fuel allowance are only ever going to vote for unionist parties, probably Labour, in their droves anyway.

[Ozyhibby]

https://bsky.app/profile/bladeofthes.bsky.social/post/3lbcmijin622f

Clarkson making a tit of himself and undermining all the rest of the rich landowners.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mon Dieu4]

https://bsky.app/profile/bladeofthes.bsky.social/post/3lbcmijin622f

Clarkson making a tit of himself and undermining all the rest of the rich landowners.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

To be fair to him that's clipped, if you see the rest of it he says he's rich so can just put it in a trust and can avoid it, the other farmers don't have that option etc

[Bostonhibby]

https://bsky.app/profile/bladeofthes.bsky.social/post/3lbcmijin622f

Clarkson making a tit of himself and undermining all the rest of the rich landowners.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkErsehole normally.

Being a bit lazy I find it easier just to take the opposite view of any utterance that comes out his mouth rather than analysing it too much.



Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

To be fair to him that's clipped, if you see the rest of it he says he's rich so can just put it in a trust and can avoid it, the other farmers don't have that option etc

Do you have to be rich to use a trust? Maybe time we closed such loopholes when the rich are waving them on our faces like that?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

Well that's a question they will of course have to answer. I suspect the answer lies in the increased block grant given by the UK Labour Government which is why the SNP were also considering it.

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/john-swinney-actively-considering-bringing-34051227


"John Swinney is "actively considering" the reintroduction of universal winter fuel payments in his December Budget. Government sources said they are mulling over the move after Chancellor Rachel Reeves slashed the payment for around 90% of older Scots."

Universal winter fuel allowance for all pensioners isn’t what Sarwar is proposing. He is proposing some kind of means tested benefit. No details yet, of course.

It's turned cold this week and it's currently 4:30 in the afternoon and my smart meter display is already reading above £10 electric use for the day. That £300 Universal winter fuel allowance wouldn't cover one month of cold temperatures

[Ozyhibby]

Universal winter fuel allowance for all pensioners isn’t what Sarwar is proposing. He is proposing some kind of means tested benefit. No details yet, of course.

It's turned cold this week and it's currently 4:30 in the afternoon and my smart meter display is already reading above £10 electric use for the day. That £300 Universal winter fuel allowance wouldn't cover one month of cold temperatures

Labour have no intention of doing anything different from down south. Expect tuition fees in Scotland if they get back in power.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

Labour have no intention of doing anything different from down south. Expect tuition fees in Scotland if they get back in power.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We need to sort universities. Every university in Scotland is going to be doing mass redundancies as they all aren't sustainable with the current funding. It was the tories that went to war on them and student visas. It's so stupid as its part of UKs soft power and our world leading universities should be one of our last remaining assets. We get so many of the world's best and a large proportion stay and give massive benefit to the economy. They aren't like your average business.

We either need to find much more funding if they are to be free or have a small tuition like many other European countries

[Ozyhibby]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20241119/e530629feea9b1b583a8590e7df6668c.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jamie_1875]

Universal winter fuel allowance for all pensioners isn’t what Sarwar is proposing. He is proposing some kind of means tested benefit. No details yet, of course.

It's turned cold this week and it's currently 4:30 in the afternoon and my smart meter display is already reading above £10 electric use for the day. That £300 Universal winter fuel allowance wouldn't cover one month of cold temperatures

Well he is at first, that was in the article you posted.

It's a good political move.

Edit: Details now here.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c70452jj21ro

"Sarwar said his proposals would “deliver a fairer system that guarantees everyone who needs support gets it”.

He said all pensioners would receive the benefit – which is currently either £200 or £300 – without having to apply, but that better off Scots would pay some of the it back.

“A good way of thinking about it is how child benefit currently operates,” the Scottish Labour leader told BBC Scotland.

“(It is) widely viewed as a universal payment for everyone, but when it goes beyond a certain income threshold a taper is then applied.”

[CropleyWasGod]

Do you have to be rich to use a trust? Maybe time we closed such loopholes when the rich are waving them on our faces like that?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not at all.

My life assurance and pension policies are written in trust, so that they aren't part of my estate for IHT purposes. The providers didn't charge me for doing that.

It's quite easy, and relatively cheap, to set up a trust.

[Smartie]

We need to sort universities. Every university in Scotland is going to be doing mass redundancies as they all aren't sustainable with the current funding. It was the tories that went to war on them and student visas. It's so stupid as its part of UKs soft power and our world leading universities should be one of our last remaining assets. We get so many of the world's best and a large proportion stay and give massive benefit to the economy. They aren't like your average business.

We either need to find much more funding if they are to be free or have a small tuition like many other European countries

Just checking… after your rant the other day about folk being more right wing than they think, you’re now suggesting the introduction of tuition fees for university?

[Andy Bee]

Not at all.

My life assurance and pension policies are written in trust, so that they aren't part of my estate for IHT purposes. The providers didn't charge me for doing that.

It's quite easy, and relatively cheap, to set up a trust.

With the latest changes to DC pensions now going to be included in IHT does this cheap trust exclude that from happening? If so there's got to be a drawback surely?

[Stairway 2 7]

Just checking… after your rant the other day about folk being more right wing than they think, you’re now suggesting the introduction of tuition fees for university?

No I 100% don't want that but if they won't increase funding they will have no choice as the biggest 5 will all lose 8 figures each year the next years. I think the state should fund higher education it boost a country by having educated people and drawing educated people from other countries. It must be funded though and it's hard to justify as the income for the economy isn't clear

I've said many times on here the clearest difference on how more left wing the SNP is to Westminster is tuition fees, prescriptions and 2 child cap. They should be proud of it

[Smartie]

No I 100% don't want that but if they won't increase funding they will have no choice as the biggest 5 will all lose 8 figures each year the next years. I think the state should fund higher education it boost a country by having educated people and drawing educated people from other countries. It must be funded though and it's hard to justify as the income for the economy isn't clear

I've said many times on here the clearest difference on how more left wing the SNP is to Westminster is tuition fees, prescriptions and 2 child cap. They should be proud of it

Tbh I was only trying to be mischievous there.

I’d probably class myself as a centrist, holding some views that are more to the left, some to the right, all of which balances out somewhere in the middle.

I’m VERY left wing when it comes to education, including university. We should be proud of the free tuition fees and should be doing all we can to preserve them. It’s not right if the fee is set too low for the universities to be viable and I don’t think tuition fees are the answer. If cuts need to be made elsewhere to fund an increase in what the unis receive - then so be it.

I hate to think how life might have worked out differently for some of my contemporaries and even myself if tuition fees had introduced an unnecessary barrier to education for our generation and those before.

[grunt]

Not at all. My life assurance and pension policies are written in trust, so that they aren't part of my estate for IHT purposes. The providers didn't charge me for doing that. It's quite easy, and relatively cheap, to set up a trust.:coffee:

[CropleyWasGod]

With the latest changes to DC pensions now going to be included in IHT does this cheap trust exclude that from happening? If so there's got to be a drawback surely?

Short answer is I don't know. All I know is that "for now", my pension is excluded.

If my kids are looking in, I'm planning to spend it all anyways, so tough ****. :greengrin

[NORTHERNHIBBY]

To be fair to him that's clipped, if you see the rest of it he says he's rich so can just put it in a trust and can avoid it, the other farmers don't have that option etc

The farmers have a point to make, but perhaps a tax dodging Neo-con isn't the best person to make it.

[Jones28]

The farmers have a point to make, but perhaps a tax dodging Neo-con isn't the best person to make it.

And a guy who farms for entertainment.

I think there is real merit in taxing the person that owns the farm and closing the loopholes that allow people to put money in to farmland and keeping the tax away from working family farms.

I'm not sure a case can really be made for taxing the ones that will get hit with inheritance tax, though the majority of small farms won't be hit with it.

I'm not 100% sure the majority of the farming community understand the ins and outs, 1 side says DEFRA don't understand the figure and they are wrong, the Government says they are correct.

[CropleyWasGod]

The farmers have a point to make, but perhaps a tax dodging Neo-con isn't the best person to make it.

I'm not even sure they have much of a point to make. I'm a bit bemused by the protests; they look less like a protest based in reality, more a protest against a Labour government. (which is where JC comes in, of course)

[Ozyhibby]

Another positive of this tax is it takes capital out of land and hopefully puts it somewhere more productive. Owning grouse moors should not be a better place for capital than owning factories.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Andy Bee]

I'm not having it. It's far too easy for everyone to conflate people like Clarkson, Dyson and Lloyd Webber with his 5000 acres with normal farmers and dismiss them all as the same. Neidle done the same with Ozzys link to his ? (what do you call a bluesky tweet?:greengrin). He mentions a 70,000 figure which TBF when I read it for the first time I thought it was ludicrous, and he dismisses it as hyperbolic nonsense. I've watched three Labour MPs this morning all state it's only 500 out of 209,000 farms, it's not though, it's 500 farms out of 1700 a year based on HMRC and Treasury figures. 500 farmers a year is absolutely huge. 500 farmers out of 1700 is roughly a third, a third of 209,000 farmers is 70,000 so I'm assuming that's where that figure comes from and it's not hyperbolic nonsense, it's the same figure he's literally using in the 500. It's him that's spouting hyperbolic nonsense. He goes on to mention the nil rate allowance which is £325k each to give farmers a bigger allowance on ATR but ATR doesn't cover grain, livestock or farm machinery which I'm assuming would be taxed at 40% although I'm not sure if BADR can be used?

It seems a rough rule of thumb to calculate a farmers income as 1 - 2% of the farm value so if a single person owns a £1.5m farm which is small for around here anyway they're getting up to £30k. They inherit that farm from their parents, the way I understand it they'll have £1.325m tax free using their nil rate allowance but still £175k at 20% and whatever cash in bank, grain, feed, machinery and livestock at 40%?

[lapsedhibee]

I'm not having it. It's far too easy for everyone to conflate people like Clarkson, Dyson and Lloyd Webber with his 5000 acres with normal farmers and dismiss them all as the same. Neidle done the same with Ozzys link to his ? (what do you call a bluesky tweet?:greengrin). He mentions a 70,000 figure which TBF when I read it for the first time I thought it was ludicrous, and he dismisses it as hyperbolic nonsense. I've watched three Labour MPs this morning all state it's only 500 out of 209,000 farms, it's not though, it's 500 farms out of 1700 a year based on HMRC and Treasury figures. 500 farmers a year is absolutely huge. 500 farmers out of 1700 is roughly a third, a third of 209,000 farmers is 70,000 so I'm assuming that's where that figure comes from and it's not hyperbolic nonsense, it's the same figure he's literally using in the 500. It's him that's spouting hyperbolic nonsense. He goes on to mention the nil rate allowance which is £325k each to give farmers a bigger allowance on ATR but ATR doesn't cover grain, livestock or farm machinery which I'm assuming would be taxed at 40% although I'm not sure if BADR can be used?

It seems a rough rule of thumb to calculate a farmers income as 1 - 2% of the farm value so if a single person owns a £1.5m farm which is small for around here anyway they're getting up to £30k. They inherit that farm from their parents, the way I understand it they'll have £1.325m tax free using their nil rate allowance but still £175k at 20% and whatever cash in bank, grain, feed, machinery and livestock at 40%?

Mr Andy, did you do all the same special pleading for corner shop businesses when supermarkets opened up in their area? If small farmers can't make a living after paying the same tax as everyone else, perhaps they will have to alter their business model? I've read that food is comparatively cheap in the UK. If this is true, shouldn't it be more expensive? Problem is, if food goes up in price, the Telegraph, GB News and Kuenssberg will call it a Labour tax raid on shoppers.

(I'm not saying an increase in food prices is desirable. It would be somewhat regressive. I just don't entirely get the special pleading.)

PS Can't it just be a tweet?

[Ozyhibby]

I'm not having it. It's far too easy for everyone to conflate people like Clarkson, Dyson and Lloyd Webber with his 5000 acres with normal farmers and dismiss them all as the same. Neidle done the same with Ozzys link to his ? (what do you call a bluesky tweet?:greengrin). He mentions a 70,000 figure which TBF when I read it for the first time I thought it was ludicrous, and he dismisses it as hyperbolic nonsense. I've watched three Labour MPs this morning all state it's only 500 out of 209,000 farms, it's not though, it's 500 farms out of 1700 a year based on HMRC and Treasury figures. 500 farmers a year is absolutely huge. 500 farmers out of 1700 is roughly a third, a third of 209,000 farmers is 70,000 so I'm assuming that's where that figure comes from and it's not hyperbolic nonsense, it's the same figure he's literally using in the 500. It's him that's spouting hyperbolic nonsense. He goes on to mention the nil rate allowance which is £325k each to give farmers a bigger allowance on ATR but ATR doesn't cover grain, livestock or farm machinery which I'm assuming would be taxed at 40% although I'm not sure if BADR can be used?

It seems a rough rule of thumb to calculate a farmers income as 1 - 2% of the farm value so if a single person owns a £1.5m farm which is small for around here anyway they're getting up to £30k. They inherit that farm from their parents, the way I understand it they'll have £1.325m tax free using their nil rate allowance but still £175k at 20% and whatever cash in bank, grain, feed, machinery and livestock at 40%?

That’s the problem. A farmers income should not be 1-2% of the value of the farm. If it was taxed the same as other assets then the value of the farm would be nowhere near that high and people like Clarkson and Dyson would be nowhere near farming.
The only reason these farms are worth as much is because of the inflated values cause by tax avoiders. I think this will massively reduce land prices going forward and in future returns on buying farms will be higher than 1-2%.
Farms currently worth £5m might find they are only worth £3m and won’t have to pay any IHT.
People are squeeling now because something is being taken away from them but long term this will be good for farming. Actual farmers may be able to buy their own farms rather than just renting from a billionaire trying to protect his wealth for generations.

[Andy Bee]

Mr Andy, did you do all the same special pleading for corner shop businesses when supermarkets opened up in their area? If small farmers can't make a living after paying the same tax as everyone else, perhaps they will have to alter their business model? I've read that food is comparatively cheap in the UK. If this is true, shouldn't it be more expensive? Problem is, if food goes up in price, the Telegraph, GB News and Kuenssberg will call it a Labour tax raid on shoppers.

(I'm not saying an increase in food prices is desirable. It would be somewhat regressive. I just don't entirely get the special pleading.)

PS Can't it just be a tweet?


A Skite maybe? :greengrin

Where are all these farms going to go, it's certainly more lucrative to plaster solar panels or wind farms on the land but is that really what people want when the general public don't benefit from them? A wee fact, in Iceland everyone pays £60 a month for all the electric, hot water and heating they can use. If that was going to be the outcome then I wouldn't be arguing but it aint. It'll go to Sir Starmer the Farmer Harmers new mate big Larry Fink and we'll end up importing lower quality food from abroad.

For the record I did do the same with local shops and I still harp on about the local greengrocer buying from the local hardware shop, both buying cars from the local garage, basically a local economy where everyone funded everyone else instead of the wealth extraction happening now.

[Andy Bee]

That’s the problem. A farmers income should not be 1-2% of the value of the farm. If it was taxed the same as other assets then the value of the farm would be nowhere near that high and people like Clarkson and Dyson would be nowhere near farming.
The only reason these farms are worth as much is because of the inflated values cause by tax avoiders. I think this will massively reduce land prices going forward and in future returns on buying farms will be higher than 1-2%.
Farms currently worth £5m might find they are only worth £3m and won’t have to pay any IHT.
People are squeeling now because something is being taken away from them but long term this will be good for farming. Actual farmers may be able to buy their own farms rather than just renting from a billionaire trying to protect his wealth for generations.

The land is valued higher because of the likes of Clarkson and Dyson, that's well established. Sort the problem of them and all the Dukes and Viscounts and by the way King Charles also where they benefit financially and leave the generational farmers to do what they do best for the benefit of all of us.

[lapsedhibee]

For the record I did do the same with local shops and I still harp on about the local greengrocer buying from the local hardware shop, both buying cars from the local garage, basically a local economy where everyone funded everyone else instead of the wealth extraction happening now.
Fair dos then, crack on! :greengrin (My local hardware shop was once Corson's in Stockbridge so it's not all been bad news.)

[cabbageandribs1875]

the same "classic" BBC that made him a lot of money over the years :greengrin

"Classic BBC" - Search / X (https://x.com/search?q=%22Classic%20BBC%22&src=trend_click&vertical=trends)

[Andy Bee]

That’s the problem. A farmers income should not be 1-2% of the value of the farm. If it was taxed the same as other assets then the value of the farm would be nowhere near that high and people like Clarkson and Dyson would be nowhere near farming.
The only reason these farms are worth as much is because of the inflated values cause by tax avoiders. I think this will massively reduce land prices going forward and in future returns on buying farms will be higher than 1-2%.
Farms currently worth £5m might find they are only worth £3m and won’t have to pay any IHT.
People are squeeling now because something is being taken away from them but long term this will be good for farming. Actual farmers may be able to buy their own farms rather than just renting from a billionaire trying to protect his wealth for generations.

A £3m farm inherited by a couple will be due 20% of £350k plus 40% of the value of all machinery, livestock, cash in bank and investments and any harvested crops if you're unlucky enough to die after harvest time although maybe someone can clarify if you could use your nil rate allowance to cover the machinery and pass that value on to the 20% rate? Outcome either way, sell the farm.

[Smartie]

Given the way the world is going in terms of rejecting immigration, integration and globalisation, picking a fight with the people who produce the food within our own borders just seems an odd thing to be doing right now.

I’d expect our farmers to become more valuable than ever over the coming years.

[Jones28]

I've been speaking to a farmer this afternoon who got paid £2.37 an hour last month and took 0 days off. This is the plight of smaller farms, they get a pittance for the hours they work.

[Ozyhibby]

Given the way the world is going in terms of rejecting immigration, integration and globalisation, picking a fight with the people who produce the food within our own borders just seems an odd thing to be doing right now.

I’d expect our farmers to become more valuable than ever over the coming years.

We have never had food security in the UK for about 500 years. If that’s the most important thing then we need to beef up the navy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CropleyWasGod]

A £3m farm inherited by a couple will be due 20% of £350k plus 40% of the value of all machinery, livestock, cash in bank and investments and any harvested crops if you're unlucky enough to die after harvest time although maybe someone can clarify if you could use your nil rate allowance to cover the machinery and pass that value on to the 20% rate? Outcome either way, sell the farm.

I think you meant "bequeathed" by a couple, no? It's the estate of the deceased which has the allowances, not the inheritors.

It wouldn't need to be just the couple, though.

Simple and regular transfers to offspring and trusts for grandchildren would reduce the exposure considerably. That's basic IHT planning for any business, which farms haven't had to do much of before now.

And then,ás I've mentioned before, taking out life assurance to cover any potential IHT liability would ensure that the inheritors don't have to sell.

All of this is something which "normal" family businesses have had to deal with in the past.

[Smartie]

We have never had food security in the UK for about 500 years. If that’s the most important thing then we need to beef up the navy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sure, but potentially increasing the food insecurity strikes me as being daft.

[grunt]

I am in tears thinking of the injustice of farmers having to pay half the IHT that the rest of us pay.

[Ozyhibby]

I am in tears thinking of the injustice of farmers having to pay half the IHT that the rest of us pay.

Most Farmers won’t have to worry about it at all. It’s rich landowners who are using them to rile up a mob.
With a bit of luck eventually they will have to pay the same rate as the rest of us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jones28]

People are talking as though farmers have us all over a barrel and they’re getting some sort of comeuppance?

Really don’t get the attitudes here. Yes there’s lots of big farmers who do very well out of farming but for every one of them there’s 10 or more who make a pittance.

[Ozyhibby]

People are talking as though farmers have us all over a barrel and they’re getting some sort of comeuppance?

Really don’t get the attitudes here. Yes there’s lots of big farmers who do very well out of farming but for every one of them there’s 10 or more who make a pittance.

And this should make farms a lot cheaper for them to buy. A win win.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grunt]

People are talking as though farmers have us all over a barrel and they’re getting some sort of comeuppance?

Really don’t get the attitudes here. Yes there’s lots of big farmers who do very well out of farming but for every one of them there’s 10 or more who make a pittance.
It's just about fairness. If I inherit my parents' £3m house I have to pay IHT. If a farmer inherits their parents' £3m farm they pay no IHT?

[Jones28]

And this should make farms a lot cheaper for them to buy. A win win.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And who has the capital to buy them?


Bigger farms will just get bigger and there will be no incentive for middle sized farmers to increase their holdings so they might buy land if it comes up but once they hit the threshold at which they pay IHT they’ll stop.

I posted earlier in the thread that I spoke to a farmer today who added up their drawings from the farm and the hours they worked and was being paid less than £3 an hour. How’s he raising the capital to expand?

[Jones28]

It's just about fairness. If I inherit my parents' £3m house I have to pay IHT. If a farmer inherits their parents' £3m farm they pay no IHT?

Do your parents have a £3m house?

[grunt]

Do your parents have a £3m house?No. It was a theoretical question. They weren't farmers, either.

[Jones28]

No. It was a theoretical question. They weren't farmers, either.

And this theoretical £3m house, does it contribute anything other than existing as a £3m house in the way a working farm produces food?

[grunt]

And this theoretical £3m house, does it contribute anything other than existing as a £3m house in the way a working farm produces food?
What does that have to do with how we impose taxes?

And in answer to your question, it may contribute something. Perhaps it was home to some very clever scientists ...

[grunt]

What does that have to do with how we impose taxes?
Thinking about this further... There's a chance that I'm amazingly clever and during my working life I have contributed more to the good of the country than say, someone else. Does that mean I should pay less tax than the other person? (Maybe I'm warming to this idea).

[Ozyhibby]

And this theoretical £3m house, does it contribute anything other than existing as a £3m house in the way a working farm produces food?

What if it’s a £3m buy to let property portfolio that provides housing for people?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jones28]

What if it’s a £3m buy to let property portfolio that provides housing for people?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

😂

[superfurryhibby]

What if it’s a £3m buy to let property portfolio that provides housing for people?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

😀

[Stairway 2 7]

I said this previously but your probably talking about 2 figures of large farms that are effected. If the average farm makes 60k I'd think it would be farms that make a few times that, and they will get 10 years to pay half normal business rates. They will probably have it sorted through trusts and insurance. Farmers closed down Holland and Germany because they were getting asked to be net zero and reduce fertiliser use. They seem to just want things the same way forever. I think this will bring farms down to a normal price by taxing super farms


"There were 462 inherited farms last year that were valued above £1 million

345 valued between £1m and £2.5m
80 at £2.5m to £5m
37 above £5m

75% of farmers are married I'd read so the majority wouldn't pay any tax as they get £2.7 million tax free."

[Jones28]

I said this previously but your probably talking about 2 figures of large farms that are effected. If the average farm makes 60k I'd think it would be farms that make a few times that, and they will get 10 years to pay half normal business rates. They will probably have it sorted through trusts and insurance. Farmers closed down Holland and Germany because they were getting asked to be net zero and reduce fertiliser use. They seem to just want things the same way forever. I think this will bring farms down to a normal price by taxing super farms


"There were 462 inherited farms last year that were valued above £1 million

345 valued between £1m and £2.5m
80 at £2.5m to £5m
37 above £5m

75% of farmers are married I'd read so the majority wouldn't pay any tax as they get £2.7 million tax free."

Not a chance the average farm is making that kind of money. The numbers will be wildly skewed by the big operations. Its not a fair comparison because the capital investments required by even small farms are still enormous and will be a bigger % of their total income.

[Stairway 2 7]

Not a chance the average farm is making that kind of money. The numbers will be wildly skewed by the big operations. Its not a fair comparison because the capital investments required by even small farms are still enormous and will be a bigger % of their total income.

Farmers weekly says the average is up to 2023 £96,000 but could be weighted to bigger farms. Then again looking at last year it'll mostly be the top 100 or so farms that will pay each year so probably a good estimate

https://www.fwi.co.uk/business/business-management/average-farm-incomes-rise-to-96100-despite-volatility

[Moulin Yarns]

My neighbouring farm, around 175,000 hectares was the Old Faskally Farming Company until last year, it then changed names to Faskally Hydro and Old Faskally Agricultural Conracting Company and maybe some other names. They still farm, largely sheep, cattle and mixed arable and fodder, but they have turned a fair amount over to growing christmas trees.

The family has been land owners in the area since before 1689. (the battle of Killiecrankie) Are the sons due inheritance tax if the father dies?

[CropleyWasGod]

My neighbouring farm, around 175,000 hectares was the Old Faskally Farming Company until last year, it then changed names to Faskally Hydro and Old Faskally Agricultural Conracting Company and maybe some other names. They still farm, largely sheep, cattle and mixed arable and fodder, but they have turned a fair amount over to growing christmas trees.

The family has been land owners in the area since before 1689. (the battle of Killiecrankie) Are the sons due inheritance tax if the father dies?

That's an impossible question to answer without further information, such as:-

Who actually owns the farm and the other businesses? Is it only him, or has he already passed bits on to his spouse, sons, their spouses , their kids, trusts?

How much is the agricutural land worth?

How much are the other businesses worth?

How much is his (or their) house worth?

What else is in his estate?

How much of his estate is written in trust (Life Assurance, pensions etc)?

How much are his funeral expenses?

How much are the legal etc fees for winding up his estate?

How much of his Nil Rate Band has he used up already?


Actuallly, it sounds like an IHT exam question, for which there's 10 marks available. I think I'd get 6 :greengrin

[Moulin Yarns]

That's an impossible question to answer without further information, such as:-

Who actually owns the farm and the other businesses? Is it only him, or has he already passed bits on to his spouse, sons, their spouses , their kids, trusts?

How much is the agricutural land worth?

How much are the other businesses worth?

How much is his (or their) house worth?

What else is in his estate?

How much of his estate is written in trust (Life Assurance, pensions etc)?

How much are his funeral expenses?

How much are the legal etc fees for winding up his estate?

How much of his Nil Rate Band has he used up already?


Actuallly, it sounds like an IHT exam question, for which there's 10 marks available. I think I'd get 6 :greengrin

:greengrin Which is the point, all this talk of every farmer is going to hammered is just not the case.

I think the sons are already more involved than the father who is about 70 now, plus the different company names suggest it has already been 'broken up'.

[Andy Bee]

:greengrin Which is the point, all this talk of every farmer is going to hammered is just not the case.

I think the sons are already more involved than the father who is about 70 now, plus the different company names suggest it has already been 'broken up'.


It'll probably be broken up already because of the new land reforms, over 1000Ha IIRC triggers various measures although splitting it up and selling 3 or as many as you want x 1000Ha parcels doesn't. That land is nearly 700 square miles, you sure it's 175000Ha. In any case it'll be sown up to keep passing it down the little Lordys. Completely different from local farmers.

[Moulin Yarns]

It'll probably be broken up already because of the new land reforms, over 1000Ha IIRC triggers various measures although splitting it up and selling 3 or as many as you want x 1000Ha parcels doesn't. That land is nearly 700 square miles, you sure it's 175000Ha. In any case it'll be sown up to keep passing it down the little Lordys. Completely different from local farmers.

The land stretches from killiecrankie to the other side of Pitlochry and from the A9 to Ben Vrackie.

As I said, fergusson of Baledmund have been landowner for centuries.

I might have got a 0 in the wrong place but, about 3.5 X 5km

[SHODAN]

Oh no. Millionaires might have to pay a bit more money. This is so sad.

[lapsedhibee]

Oh no. Millionaires might have to pay a bit more money. This is so sad.

Keep up. Farmers only get paid £2.37 an hour.

[cabbageandribs1875]

oh no, who woulda thunk it, i do expect that lower amount to fall even lower

https://scontent.fman1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/467185031_8820001438056609_4926910832169543537_n.j pg?_nc_cat=103&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=aa7b47&_nc_ohc=CoLP2sbL424Q7kNvgGUtvNu&_nc_zt=23&_nc_ht=scontent.fman1-1.fna&_nc_gid=AA4Rx0qdr1adY0QZQntFki8&oh=00_AYDu1GpHyp90t7LHOS43WCimr2Lsr4BaFz4T2e21sJyu zQ&oe=674526A3

[cabbageandribs1875]

i didn't realise John "Two Jags" Prescott had passed away yesterday, 86

https://scontent.fman1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/468021135_1144650040352645_1260103413882665359_n.j pg?_nc_cat=104&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=127cfc&_nc_ohc=muR4SsD7oasQ7kNvgGEC4Td&_nc_zt=23&_nc_ht=scontent.fman1-1.fna&_nc_gid=AnpbW1-0cJIl1IzQ8bvhxbn&oh=00_AYD9mPRnttXrBr4nKO4LEJNjXIWC9YQZXj203xiBNCFf Lw&oe=674551C6

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/farmers-protest-organiser-made-racist-34159402

These protesting farmers seem a nice bunch.[emoji849]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jones28]

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/farmers-protest-organiser-made-racist-34159402

These protesting farmers seem a nice bunch.[emoji849]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I’ve not really got a dog in this fight but an individual person made some horrendous remarks.

[Smartie]

i didn't realise John "Two Jags" Prescott had passed away yesterday, 86

https://scontent.fman1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/468021135_1144650040352645_1260103413882665359_n.j pg?_nc_cat=104&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=127cfc&_nc_ohc=muR4SsD7oasQ7kNvgGEC4Td&_nc_zt=23&_nc_ht=scontent.fman1-1.fna&_nc_gid=AnpbW1-0cJIl1IzQ8bvhxbn&oh=00_AYD9mPRnttXrBr4nKO4LEJNjXIWC9YQZXj203xiBNCFf Lw&oe=674551C6

I always quite liked him.

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c789yggdxn3o

BBC verify says govt and not farmers are correct in numbers affected by new IHT. Basically all those farmers were out trying to protect the wealthy elite landowners.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibs4185]

My brother in law is a *ank. His family own a lot of land. Not through hard work or years of struggle.

They’ve had it for hundreds of years. Won’t say how they got it but it wasn’t through anything to be proud of.

They’ve done F all for years and basically milk the tenant farmers and the tenants in their properties.

I’ve always supported land reform in Scotland just to get it up them.

Hopefully IHT does just that. I’m all for it.

[wookie70]

My brother in law is a *ank. His family own a lot of land. Not through hard work or years of struggle.

They’ve had it for hundreds of years. Won’t say how they got it but it wasn’t through anything to be proud of.

They’ve done F all for years and basically milk the tenant farmers and the tenants in their properties.

I’ve always supported land reform in Scotland just to get it up them.

Hopefully IHT does just that. I’m all for it.

There was a lady on the radio the other day. Large holding of land that had been in the family 1000 years. To be fair she didn't see too much of an issue with the tax but that is exactly why I support the tax and I would actually try to remove as many loopholes as possible. Her land wasn't bought and has made here family rich for 1000 years, no merit and no graft. Land reform is the single biggest thing we could do to create a more even society imo.

Most of the land owned in Scotland was never acquired through hard work. Quite a chunk of it became owned on the back of sending others to war or working against the nation. IHT is a good way to at least get some money back and the most important group to target is those that have huge holdings. If someone's family has actually bought a farm in the last couple of hundred years and not got it through enclosures or a gift from William the Conqueror etc then I have some sympathy and I would happily try to work with them.

[Jack]

There was a lady on the radio the other day. Large holding of land that had been in the family 1000 years. To be fair she didn't see too much of an issue with the tax but that is exactly why I support the tax and I would actually try to remove as many loopholes as possible. Her land wasn't bought and has made here family rich for 1000 years, no merit and no graft. Land reform is the single biggest thing we could do to create a more even society imo.

Most of the land owned in Scotland was never acquired through hard work. Quite a chunk of it became owned on the back of sending others to war or working against the nation. IHT is a good way to at least get some money back and the most important group to target is those that have huge holdings. If someone's family has actually bought a farm in the last couple of hundred years and not got it through enclosures or a gift from William the Conqueror etc then I have some sympathy and I would happily try to work with them.

1,000 years of IHT avoided 😆

[Hibs4185]

There was a lady on the radio the other day. Large holding of land that had been in the family 1000 years. To be fair she didn't see too much of an issue with the tax but that is exactly why I support the tax and I would actually try to remove as many loopholes as possible. Her land wasn't bought and has made here family rich for 1000 years, no merit and no graft. Land reform is the single biggest thing we could do to create a more even society imo.

Most of the land owned in Scotland was never acquired through hard work. Quite a chunk of it became owned on the back of sending others to war or working against the nation. IHT is a good way to at least get some money back and the most important group to target is those that have huge holdings. If someone's family has actually bought a farm in the last couple of hundred years and not got it through enclosures or a gift from William the Conqueror etc then I have some sympathy and I would happily try to work with them.

Could’ve been my brother in laws mum! 🤣

I hate them. She’s rough as tatties but is all ‘yah, yah’. All that nonsense.

[JimBHibees]

i didn't realise John "Two Jags" Prescott had passed away yesterday, 86

https://scontent.fman1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/468021135_1144650040352645_1260103413882665359_n.j pg?_nc_cat=104&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=127cfc&_nc_ohc=muR4SsD7oasQ7kNvgGEC4Td&_nc_zt=23&_nc_ht=scontent.fman1-1.fna&_nc_gid=AnpbW1-0cJIl1IzQ8bvhxbn&oh=00_AYD9mPRnttXrBr4nKO4LEJNjXIWC9YQZXj203xiBNCFf Lw&oe=674551C6

Sympathy for the guy dying and his family however that decision was despicable and so many of the Labour elite should have brought to justice for the lies. Very few could hold their head up with Robin Cook an obvious example of who could. Reason i have never voted for Labour since and never will

[AgentDaleCooper]

petition calling for an immediate general election doing the rounds just now - being pushed by Reform. Obviously it'll come to nowt, but it's got nearly 500k signatures, but we're in serious danger of sleep walking into something like Trump. I'm sure it could have been a routine meeting or something, but the optics of Starmer meeting with Blackrock make me feel like he actually wants to rile up the farmers.

The fact that it now appears that Starmer has been outflanked on the left by Jeremy Clarkson tells you everything you need to know. I know that in reality that's not exactly the case, but it's what the vast majority of British voters are seeing (or at least, that he's more likely to stand up for working people).

[Ozyhibby]

petition calling for an immediate general election doing the rounds just now - being pushed by Reform. Obviously it'll come to nowt, but it's got nearly 500k signatures, but we're in serious danger of sleep walking into something like Trump. I'm sure it could have been a routine meeting or something, but the optics of Starmer meeting with Blackrock make me feel like he actually wants to rile up the farmers.

The fact that it now appears that Starmer has been outflanked on the left by Jeremy Clarkson tells you everything you need to know. I know that in reality that's not exactly the case, but it's what the vast majority of British voters are seeing (or at least, that he's more likely to stand up for working people).

I don’t really detect much public support for the farmers?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Andy Bee]

petition calling for an immediate general election doing the rounds just now - being pushed by Reform. Obviously it'll come to nowt, but it's got nearly 500k signatures, but we're in serious danger of sleep walking into something like Trump. I'm sure it could have been a routine meeting or something, but the optics of Starmer meeting with Blackrock make me feel like he actually wants to rile up the farmers.

The fact that it now appears that Starmer has been outflanked on the left by Jeremy Clarkson tells you everything you need to know. I know that in reality that's not exactly the case, but it's what the vast majority of British voters are seeing (or at least, that he's more likely to stand up for working people).

Whilst meeting Larry Fink aint a good look the Bill Gates meeting is just as bad. Gates owns the largest amount of farmland in the US by a country mile. TBF to Fink though companies Blackrock have control over have apparently bought up a third of Ukrainian farmland with options to buy the rest. It seems there's an absolute dogfight for buying up good quality farmland, Bezoz is at it to. A cynic could think there's some kinda global warming going on and what used to be good farmland will disappear to floods and the likes leaving what's left worth a lot more.


I don’t really detect much public support for the farmers?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I watched a report by Andrew Marr the other day saying 52% support the farmers and 24% against.

[Stairway 2 7]

Blackrock, bill gates 😆 this is all going a big 5g tracking us. Last year There were 462 inherited farms last year that were valued above £1 million

345 valued between £1m and £2.5m
80 at £2.5m to £5m
37 above £5m

75% of farmers are married so that knocks off most up to £2.7 million. We're really talking about less than 100 mega farms who will almost all afford 20% spread over 10 years. Doubt there will be a handful selling up do we not think Blackrock have bigger things to deal with

When in five years there's barely any farms that have had to sell up I think some people will have to row back on this. As for Clarkson it's just shown him to be the right wing tit he is, a Tory MP today saying he'd be welcome in the party

[Andy Bee]

Blackrock, bill gates �� this is all going a big 5g tracking us. Last year There were 462 inherited farms last year that were valued above £1 million

345 valued between £1m and £2.5m
80 at £2.5m to £5m
37 above £5m

75% of farmers are married so that knocks off most up to £2.7 million. We're really talking about less than 100 mega farms who will almost all afford 20% spread over 10 years. Doubt there will be a handful selling up do we not think Blackrock have bigger things to deal with

When in five years there's barely any farms that have had to sell up I think some people will have to row back on this. As for Clarkson it's just shown him to be the right wing tit he is, a Tory MP today saying he'd be welcome in the party

Ahhh, here we go again.

At very best a married couple passing the farm to their kids and it includes the main dwelling will, if administered correctly, receive £3m in relief not £2.7m, see I'm even helping you out here. :greengrin

I can only argue the point with my local farmers in mind, normal farmers with I'm guessing anything from 200 - 400 acres of land and probably an income of say £20k - £50k at best but probably lower, there's 10 of them I can think of off the top of my head in my area. We'll settle on those farms being worth around £3m yup?

Using a mate of mine as an example, he's a farmer growing up on his parents farm and working the land from a young age. He's since built a very modest bungalow in the corner of the farmyard to now raise his own family with his parents living in the main farmhouse mainly retired but still working the farm as all farmers seem to do.

On the passing of his parents reliefs will now be due of £1m each for each parent, £325k each for the Nil Rate and I'm not sure there'll be the £175k each for passing the main dwelling to kids as he stays in the bungalow mentioned but we'll include that anyway, see still helping. :greengrin so £3m for a £3m farm yup? All good apart from the fact that livestock, machinery like tractors, trailers, spreaders, cutters, sprayers, combines etc and commodities like feed, fertiliser, cash/investments, grain, pickup and all other assets apart from land and buildings are not given reliefs because you've used them all for the land side of things where previously they could of used their Nil Rate of £325k x 2. He's a livestock farmer in the main but with some arable land he puts to use with both cattle and sheep as his main business. Cows are £1k with sheep cheaper, I'm guessing he has around 200 cows as the average is over 300 so there's £200k for starters taxed at either 20% or normal IHT rates of 40% I'm not sure? Add to that all the other assets mentioned and we could be getting close to £1m depending on the time of year, due to be taxed. That's a minimum of £200k, sell the farm. Keep sticking to the narrative of only rich fat cats will be affected, that's completely fine, doesn't make it correct though. I've actually written this as a best case scenario where all reliefs are realised and overlooked the fact he has around 300 acres which at todays prices would be worth in the region of £3m swallowing up all reliefs before the farmhouse and buildings were taken into account. i.e it could be a lot worse.

I've no doubt CWG will be along shortly with his witchcraftery levels of understanding in the tax system and he'll state that you could just dodge the lot of this and I accept that but on this occasion I'd appreciate if we all assume that measures haven't been put in place as that's got to be a realistic dilemma for some farmers?

[Ozyhibby]

Ahhh, here we go again.

At very best a married couple passing the farm to their kids and it includes the main dwelling will, if administered correctly, receive £3m in relief not £2.7m, see I'm even helping you out here. :greengrin

I can only argue the point with my local farmers in mind, normal farmers with I'm guessing anything from 200 - 400 acres of land and probably an income of say £20k - £50k at best but probably lower, there's 10 of them I can think of off the top of my head in my area. We'll settle on those farms being worth around £3m yup?

Using a mate of mine as an example, he's a farmer growing up on his parents farm and working the land from a young age. He's since built a very modest bungalow in the corner of the farmyard to now raise his own family with his parents living in the main farmhouse mainly retired but still working the farm as all farmers seem to do.

On the passing of his parents reliefs will now be due of £1m each for each parent, £325k each for the Nil Rate and I'm not sure there'll be the £175k each for passing the main dwelling to kids as he stays in the bungalow mentioned but we'll include that anyway, see still helping. :greengrin so £3m for a £3m farm yup? All good apart from the fact that livestock, machinery like tractors, trailers, spreaders, cutters, sprayers, combines etc and commodities like feed, fertiliser, cash/investments, grain, pickup and all other assets apart from land and buildings are not given reliefs because you've used them all for the land side of things where previously they could of used their Nil Rate of £325k x 2. He's a livestock farmer in the main but with some arable land he puts to use with both cattle and sheep as his main business. Cows are £1k with sheep cheaper, I'm guessing he has around 200 cows as the average is over 300 so there's £200k for starters taxed at either 20% or normal IHT rates of 40% I'm not sure? Add to that all the other assets mentioned and we could be getting close to £1m depending on the time of year, due to be taxed. That's a minimum of £200k, sell the farm. Keep sticking to the narrative of only rich fat cats will be affected, that's completely fine, doesn't make it correct though. I've actually written this as a best case scenario where all reliefs are realised and overlooked the fact he has around 300 acres which at todays prices would be worth in the region of £3m swallowing up all reliefs before the farmhouse and buildings were taken into account. i.e it could be a lot worse.

I've no doubt CWG will be along shortly with his witchcraftery levels of understanding in the tax system and he'll state that you could just dodge the lot of this and I accept that but on this occasion I'd appreciate if we all assume that measures haven't been put in place as that's got to be a realistic dilemma for some farmers?

Is the farm actually worth £3m now that the IHT rules have been changed? It’s possible that it’s worth a lot less now and there will be no tax for him to pay?[emoji2369]
There won’t be IHT dodgers in the market anymore for farm land.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grunt]

Ahhh, here we go again.
Please tell me why farmers, out of everyone in the UK, should be exempt from IHT.

[Stairway 2 7]

Please tell me why farmers, out of everyone in the UK, should be exempt from IHT.

And at half the rate and with a generous time to pay unlike other businesses. It's seems many just want to have that land and wealth forever without inheritance tax paid.

It's already dropping down the news and will be forgotten about in 5 when the figures show it's only effected a small amount. Poor millionaires.

I'm for wealth redistribution and a wealth tax but as Oz says it won't happen. The papers, celebrities, the millionaires and their friends will not allow it.

[lapsedhibee]

Please tell me why farmers, out of everyone in the UK, should be exempt from IHT.

They're not exempt, they just get reliefs which seem to some people quite generous.

[Andy Bee]

Please tell me why farmers, out of everyone in the UK, should be exempt from IHT.

I've just outlined it above, simply put we either help them or we allow corporations in to food production. I'd rather my mate produced my food rather than being held to ransom by corporations.

[Andy Bee]

And at half the rate and with a generous time to pay unlike other businesses. It's seems many just want to have that land and wealth forever without inheritance tax paid.

It's already dropping down the news and will be forgotten about in 5 when the figures show it's only effected a small amount. Poor millionaires.

I'm for wealth redistribution and a wealth tax but as Oz says it won't happen. The papers, celebrities, the millionaires and their friends will not allow it.

In my scenario above how does the farmer pay around £200k in taxes over 10 years on an income of £20k - £50k and where does the farm go if he can't meet those payments?

You just resent anyone having money even if that money is unrealisable because it's locked into land that's needed to keep the business growing food for your own table. That's not a healthy attitude to have but you bash on mate, the irony being the farms will eventually end up in the hands of the very people you obviously despise :greengrin

As for dropping down the news, erm you do know there's a petition started a day or two ago calling for another General Election which has now over 1.2m signatures already. It aint going to achieve what it's asking but it certainly gives an idea of the feelings of the general public over this and other issues.

[Ozyhibby]

In my scenario above how does the farmer pay around £200k in taxes over 10 years on an income of £20k - £50k and where does the farm go if he can't meet those payments?

You just resent anyone having money even if that money is unrealisable because it's locked into land that's needed to keep the business growing food for your own table. That's not a healthy attitude to have but you bash on mate, the irony being the farms will eventually end up in the hands of the very people you obviously despise :greengrin

As for dropping down the news, erm you do know there's a petition started a day or two ago calling for another General Election which has now over 1.2m signatures already. It aint going to achieve what it's asking but it certainly gives an idea of the feelings of the general public over this and other issues.

I think that farm isn’t really worth that once the IHT tax dodgers leave the market.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grunt]

As for dropping down the news, erm you do know there's a petition started a day or two ago calling for another General Election which has now over 1.2m signatures already. It aint going to achieve what it's asking but it certainly gives an idea of the feelings of the general public over this and other issues.
If you think the farmers IHT argument is playing a role in this petition then I've got a bridge to sell you.

[grunt]

I've just outlined it above, simply put we either help them or we allow corporations in to food production. I'd rather my mate produced my food rather than being held to ransom by corporations.Seems like we're already there. https://gca.org/let-half-of-britains-farmland-go-wild-and-it-benefits-us-all/#:~:text=A%20round%2020%25%20of%20the,produce%20ve ry%20much%20at%20all.


Around 20% of the UK’s farms account for 80% of the country’s total food production, and they do this on about half of all the farmed land there is. At least 80% of farms in the UK don’t produce very much at all.

In England, just 7% of farms produce over half of the country’s agricultural output – on 30% of its farmland. A little under half (42%) of England’s farms produce a meagre 2% of the total agricultural output, working just 8% of the country’s total land.

[Stairway 2 7]

In my scenario above how does the farmer pay around £200k in taxes over 10 years on an income of £20k - £50k and where does the farm go if he can't meet those payments?

You just resent anyone having money even if that money is unrealisable because it's locked into land that's needed to keep the business growing food for your own table. That's not a healthy attitude to have but you bash on mate, the irony being the farms will eventually end up in the hands of the very people you obviously despise :greengrin

As for dropping down the news, erm you do know there's a petition started a day or two ago calling for another General Election which has now over 1.2m signatures already. It aint going to achieve what it's asking but it certainly gives an idea of the feelings of the general public over this and other issues.

Your using one hypothetically farm with hypothetically figures. In reality it'll effect probably a two figure amount of farms per year and they will be the most valuable 20% of farms going by last year. The average farm in the uks profits last year was 86,000, God knows what the 20% most valuables was but they will pay the tax fine.

I resent the top 5% hoarding money when millions are in poverty. My wife has staff and her outlays went out a lot due NI going up and I think it's fair to end austerity. I pay a lot more tax myself than I would in England due to Scotland having a higher rate, I totally agree with that and think I should pay more. Problem with the uk is when polled most are against pretty much every tax rise but almost want spending increases.

The poll has been retweeted by Musk, Farage and Tommy Robinsons account who are bleeting about free speech and immigration. Thankfully we live in a democracy and don't try and overturn elections

[Andy Bee]

If you think the farmers IHT argument is playing a role in this petition then I've got a bridge to sell you.
Why didn't you highlight the part where I said "and other issues" you wouldn't be being selective to suit your narrative Grunt would you, you wouldn't do that Mr Grunt would you, i'll file it under a geniune mistake on your part. How much is this bridge? :greengrin

Seems like we're already there. https://gca.org/let-half-of-britains-farmland-go-wild-and-it-benefits-us-all/#:~:text=A%20round%2020%25%20of%20the,produce%20ve ry%20much%20at%20all.


Ahhh percentages again, those things that can make people think things are completely different to what they actually are, is Stairway training you?

50% of all farms in the UK are under 50 acres so not really a serious food producing concern unless of course they're vertical farms, that's a whole different can of worms. So disregard 50% of total farms and those percentages take on a whole new meaning. As I stated I can only draw on my own understanding of the farms surrounding me, all produce food of some kind, are around the 200 - 400 acres in size, are all generational farmers and as I showed in the figures above they'll be affected.

[Andy Bee]

Your using one hypothetically farm with hypothetically figures. In reality it'll effect probably a two figure amount of farms per year and they will be the most valuable 20% of farms going by last year. The average farm in the uks profits last year was 86,000, God knows what the 20% most valuables was but they will pay the tax fine.

I resent the top 5% hoarding money when millions are in poverty. My wife has staff and her outlays went out a lot due NI going up and I think it's fair to end austerity. I pay a lot more tax myself than I would in England due to Scotland having a higher rate, I totally agree with that and think I should pay more. Problem with the uk is when polled most are against pretty much every tax rise but almost want spending increases.

The poll has been retweeted by Musk, Farage and Tommy Robinsons account who are bleeting about free speech and immigration. Thankfully we live in a democracy and don't try and overturn elections

What does it matter if they're hypothetical farms or not, for the record they're not. The figures don't lie, tell me where the figures are wrong anywhere in my post. I've highlighted that what I class as an average food producing farm will be hit, I've even been generous with the figures and added on £350k you didn't know about and it still hits the farm. Answer my question, where does this and many other farms go if the costs can't be met? And yes many other farms, you state 75% of farmers are married so 25% of your stated 345 valued between £1m and £2.5m will be hit massively, some of the 400 odd between £500k and £1m will also be hit, the full 80 of between £2.5m and £5m will be hit and certainly all the 37 over £5m will also be hit, Rachel Reeves herself thinks 520 could be hit, tell me where I'm wrong in assuming that?

Take a look at this site.......https://www.uklandandfarms.co.uk/rural-properties-for-sale/ There's 3 or 4 properties for sale on each page starting around £15m with less than 50 acres of land, a lot of these properties are being classed as farms/estates and receive APR due to loopholes of them having paddocks or fields of whatever crops, start there and take all APR away from them, look more in depth at serious land reform, be a bit more astute and calculating around this rather than just smash all farmers with an ill thought out policy. WFA is the same, pinpoint exactly who needs it instead of taking £300 away from all pensioners on £11.5k and above.

[Stairway 2 7]

If a farmer can't pay the tax once in a lifetime he should pass it to his kids or save up now to pay it eventually or take life insurance out that covers the tax. If he can't do that do what ever other company that can't pay their tax does sell up and live on the millions. The mean average farm profit is 86k, I'd bet most will dodge the tax or just pay it.

I and economists I've read said this could drop the value of a farm massively and help your average farmer live in or buy his farm. We'll see it'll not be news in 12 months and most on here are probably bored of it already

[AgentDaleCooper]

Blackrock, bill gates 😆 this is all going a big 5g tracking us. Last year There were 462 inherited farms last year that were valued above £1 million

345 valued between £1m and £2.5m
80 at £2.5m to £5m
37 above £5m

75% of farmers are married so that knocks off most up to £2.7 million. We're really talking about less than 100 mega farms who will almost all afford 20% spread over 10 years. Doubt there will be a handful selling up do we not think Blackrock have bigger things to deal with

When in five years there's barely any farms that have had to sell up I think some people will have to row back on this. As for Clarkson it's just shown him to be the right wing tit he is, a Tory MP today saying he'd be welcome in the party

my point is that this is the direction the thinking of the farmers is going, and folk in charge need to start being conscious of not feeding conspiracy theories. they're nearly as mainstream here now as they are in the US, simply because of how global social media is. Bannon, Farage and Reform are waiting to pounce on it.

[Andy Bee]

my point is that this is the direction the thinking of the farmers is going, and folk in charge need to start being conscious of not feeding conspiracy theories. they're nearly as mainstream here now as they are in the US, simply because of how global social media is. Bannon, Farage and Reform are waiting to pounce on it.

Whilst I don't think for a second Labour introduced this tax to force farmers out and let Fink and Gates in it could be an outcome that happens by accident. Inviting Fink and Gates to tea days after and shouting from the rooftops about it though was naïve at best by Starmer.

[Ozyhibby]

Whilst I don't think for a second Labour introduced this tax to force farmers out and let Fink and Gates in it could be an outcome that happens by accident. Inviting Fink and Gates to tea days after and shouting from the rooftops about it though was naïve at best by Starmer.

I think this policy will be deterring wealthy people from buying land? [emoji2369]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

I think this policy will be deterring wealthy people from buying land? [emoji2369]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Probably see loads of them selling huge swathes of unused land, rather than paying tax, be great for the small farmer.

Although Josh Taylor just tweeted it's all a plan by the world economic forum, so who knows

[Paulie Walnuts]

petition calling for an immediate general election doing the rounds just now - being pushed by Reform. Obviously it'll come to nowt, but it's got nearly 500k signatures, but we're in serious danger of sleep walking into something like Trump. I'm sure it could have been a routine meeting or something, but the optics of Starmer meeting with Blackrock make me feel like he actually wants to rile up the farmers.

The fact that it now appears that Starmer has been outflanked on the left by Jeremy Clarkson tells you everything you need to know. I know that in reality that's not exactly the case, but it's what the vast majority of British voters are seeing (or at least, that he's more likely to stand up for working people).

A petition that will be getting battered by bots.

[Stairway 2 7]

A petition that will be getting battered by bots.

Boy on twitter showed the isp regions of the voters. About 600k of the 1.2 million votes have been made in the UK.

[Ozyhibby]

Probably see loads of them selling huge swathes of unused land, rather than paying tax, be great for the small farmer.

Although Josh Taylor just tweeted it's all a plan by the world economic forum, so who knows

I heard the World Economic Forum also scouted Bursic.[emoji35]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grunt]

Why didn't you highlight the part where I said "and other issues" you wouldn't be being selective to suit your narrative Grunt would you, you wouldn't do that Mr Grunt would you, i'll file it under a geniune mistake on your part. No mistake on my part. You clearly think that the farmers' IHT argument is a factor in the current petition against the Government, otherwise you wouldn't have mentioned it. You just dont like your own words being replayed to you.


Ahhh percentages again, those things that can make people think things are completely different to what they actually are, is Stairway training you?Percentages, statistics, facts. It's really awkward when they contradict your understanding based on your perceived knowledge of your neighbouring farms.

Still haven't had a good reason why farmers should be exempted from paying IHT.

[grunt]

petition calling for an immediate general election doing the rounds just now - being pushed by Reform. Obviously it'll come to nowt, but it's got nearly 500k signatures, but we're in serious danger of sleep walking into something like Trump.

We had a petition signed by 6 million people calling to revoke Article 50. Made no difference.

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:d36oeeywyhmmvpqmzvj6m2qq/bafkreif6chuvkwv7ib4pvdqhqf4sdzun3gtn56htg2y4ux3ou s6mvntx4q@jpeg

[Scottie]

Genuinely interested if you voted Labour in the last election are they living up to your expectations ? Asking for a friend.

[Ozyhibby]

Genuinely interested if you voted Labour in the last election are they living up to your expectations ? Asking for a friend.

I did not and they are.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

Genuinely interested if you voted Labour in the last election are they living up to your expectations ? Asking for a friend.

I didn't. I'd thought they would be centre centre right. They mostly have but their budget was far more to the left than I could have thought. Pretty much everyone was saying it would be austerity but it was tax rises and public sector rises. I'm more interested in the next budget as there should be small growth until then and pretty low inflation so it'll be interesting in how they go.

They promised a huge change on housebuilding I've seen next to no changes, same with nuclear and planning.

[jamie_1875]

Genuinely interested if you voted Labour in the last election are they living up to your expectations ? Asking for a friend.

I did and I am happy to give them some leeway. I live in Edinburgh so vast majority of my day to day concerns are Edinburgh Council and Scottish Government responsibilities.

It's not been a great start but they inherited a mess, I reckon they deserve 12-18 months before you can seriously judge them.

[AgentDaleCooper]

We had a petition signed by 6 million people calling to revoke Article 50. Made no difference.

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:d36oeeywyhmmvpqmzvj6m2qq/bafkreif6chuvkwv7ib4pvdqhqf4sdzun3gtn56htg2y4ux3ou s6mvntx4q@jpeg

that's reassuring :aok:

[Jack]

I saw this on Facebook and it will strike a cord with many on here. Many more than a few elite millionaire farmers.

“My mum has Alzheimer's & if she has to go into a home she'll lose her house to pay for it. She worked all her life to provide that for me & my sister when she's gone. & millionaire farmers are acting like victims & the press are supporting them. I feel invisible.

Carers genuinely don't get a day off. There is no way they can descend on London like those farmers. But we're not 'romantic' & we're mostly women so no one gives a **** about us.”
Solidarity with @Splodgehappy and her family.

[Ozyhibby]

I saw this on Facebook and it will strike a cord with many on here. Many more than a few elite millionaire farmers.

“My mum has Alzheimer's & if she has to go into a home she'll lose her house to pay for it. She worked all her life to provide that for me & my sister when she's gone. & millionaire farmers are acting like victims & the press are supporting them. I feel invisible.

Carers genuinely don't get a day off. There is no way they can descend on London like those farmers. But we're not 'romantic' & we're mostly women so no one gives a **** about us.”
Solidarity with @Splodgehappy and her family.

That’s always been the case though? [emoji2369]
Cost of care is extortionate. The care home on Telford road is £3k a week. That will burn through life savings for most real quick.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grunt]

That’s always been the case though?
Just because it's always been the case doesn't prevent it from being a valid comment on the right wing media's nauseating support of farmers' inequitable treatment under UK tax laws.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Just because it's always been the case doesn't prevent it from being a valid comment on the right wing media's nauseating support of farmers' inequitable treatment under UK tax laws.

:agree:

[NORTHERNHIBBY]

Genuinely interested if you voted Labour in the last election are they living up to your expectations ? Asking for a friend.

Voted tactically, but I'm a Labour supporter. I really can't believe the niavety that they've shown in government so far. The right things done the wrong way, is not a great way to operate at all.

[Jack]

That’s always been the case though? [emoji2369]
Cost of care is extortionate. The care home on Telford road is £3k a week. That will burn through life savings for most real quick.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No disagreement there. I must say though I've always seen it as an inheritance tax on the "poor".

My wife's mother is approaching that time when going into a care home is a real possibility. She is so bitter about her and her husband working all the hours they could to buy their council house and pass it to their daughters. It won't take long before that value has gone.

A guy I've been going to the football with since school has seen his parents very nice home in Morningside sold for care home fees a few years ago and having exhausted that doesn't know what will happen to his mother. Well he does sort of.

The people clawing the money in for this take no prisoners. It would be a lot easier to avoid normal inheritance tax!

It's a "tax" to keep the less well off less well off.

[Ozyhibby]

No disagreement there. I must say though I've always seen it as an inheritance tax on the "poor".

My wife's mother is approaching that time when going into a care home is a real possibility. She is so bitter about her and her husband working all the hours they could to buy their council house and pass it to their daughters. It won't take long before that value has gone.

A guy I've been going to the football with since school has seen his parents very nice home in Morningside sold for care home fees a few years ago and having exhausted that doesn't know what will happen to his mother. Well he does sort of.

The people clawing the money in for this take no prisoners. It would be a lot easier to avoid normal inheritance tax!

It's a "tax" to keep the less well off less well off.

Get rid of all the loopholes in IHT and use it to fund proper social care for the elderly.
We see how hard that is though with everyone jumping in to defend the richest landowners in the country.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lapsedhibee]

Get rid of all the loopholes in IHT and use it to fund proper social care for the elderly.
We see how hard that is though with everyone jumping in to defend the richest landowners in the country.


Maybe not quite everyone. Media miilionaires and billionaires, including the likes of Kuenssberg and Preston, are going to speak up for their millionaire and billionaire chums, Mr Andy knows some non-billionaire farmers who may very well have to rejig their financial plans, and that's about it outside the farming community, isn't it? :dunno:

[grunt]

Hope this hasn't been posted before, but I found this a useful summary of the position on farmers and IHT, from the Institute for Fiscal Studies.

https://ifs.org.uk/articles/inheritance-tax-and-farms-0


The reforms to taxation of agricultural property proposed in the Budget would reduce the inheritance tax advantages enjoyed by owners of farmland but would still leave that land much more lightly taxed than most other assets. The exact number that will be affected is uncertain but government figures imply it will be significantly less than 500 estates per year. Some relatively simple tax planning will ensure that many farms worth considerably more than £2 million will not be liable for tax. And it is important to remember that most of the inheritance tax payable will be on very valuable estates.

Overall, this moves our inheritance tax in the right direction. We should treat similar assets similarly for the purposes of inheritance tax, or any other tax, unless there are very good reasons not to. It is not obvious that such reasons exist in this case, and if the concern is about food production or protection of the environment then much better tools exist to support those activities.

[Moulin Yarns]

Hope this hasn't been posted before, but I found this a useful summary of the position on farmers and IHT, from the Institute for Fiscal Studies.

https://ifs.org.uk/articles/inheritance-tax-and-farms-0

Decent summary. What the landowners are ignoring is that you and I are liable for inheritance tax above the threshold of £325,000

[MKHIBEE]

Genuinely interested if you voted Labour in the last election are they living up to your expectations ? Asking for a friend.

I did not and they have fallen far short of my ( exceedingly low) expectations

[CropleyWasGod]

Decent summary. What the landowners are ignoring is that you and I are liable for inheritance tax above the threshold of £325,000

I'm assuming "you and I" are a couple, :greengrin, in which case it's double that.

[grunt]

I'm assuming "you and I" are a couple, :greengrin, in which case it's double that.Quite possibly one of the strangest marriage proposals I've seen, but congratulations anyway.

[Andy Bee]

Maybe not quite everyone. Media miilionaires and billionaires, including the likes of Kuenssberg and Preston, are going to speak up for their millionaire and billionaire chums, Mr Andy knows some non-billionaire farmers who may very well have to rejig their financial plans, and that's about it outside the farming community, isn't it? :dunno:

OI :greengrin Don't lump me in with Peston and Kuensberg. I think the problem here is the term "landowners", it's such a broad description of some very different situations. 50% of landowners own less than 50 acres and then we have some Dukes with over 250000 acres and use it for nothing but entertaining their mates on August 12th. To make things clear I'd slap a CPO on every Dukes estate including Balmoral if I had the means to do so, I'd also include landowners who own and rent out multiple farms and land in that also. I think serious land reforms should be the tool used rather than IHT.

[Ozyhibby]

https://bsky.app/profile/torstenbell.bsky.social/post/3lbrypqm5yk2f

Interesting thread on how the farmers IHT story is being manipulated.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Andy Bee]

https://bsky.app/profile/torstenbell.bsky.social/post/3lbrypqm5yk2f

Interesting thread on how the farmers IHT story is being manipulated.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

5000 acres, black face sheep and hilly land in Perthshire. He's a shooter :agree:

[Moulin Yarns]

5000 acres, black face sheep and hilly land in Perthshire. He's a shooter :agree:

Garrow farm, it's at the east end of Glen Quaich. A wonderful part of perthshire. Don't mention the hydro schemes and turbines.

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/nov/25/labour-poised-announce-ratify-100m-gambling-levy-addiction-charity

This is a good idea but the tax should go back to the old 10%.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Andy Bee]

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/nov/25/labour-poised-announce-ratify-100m-gambling-levy-addiction-charity

This is a good idea but the tax should go back to the old 10%.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Now that's a better tax to implement that I think everyone would agree on :agree:, they should be treated like the oil and gas companies and hit with a windfall type level of tax if they don't already. What was the old 10%?

Going back to farmers IHT, I know I know. Grunts link got me to thinking when it stated 20% of farms produce 80% of all food production in the UK. I countered that by stating 50% of farms own less than 50 acres. The argument isn't important, what's important is why do 50% of farms only own below 50 acres, it's not possible to contribute to food production with that amount of land. To put things in context that's 2 fields at most. Granted there'll be small farmers probably growing for their own and friends benefits or as we have around here, a small area of land used by a charity to grow plants and shrubs mainly by mentally disabled youngsters. I'd hazard a guess though that a large amount of those 104,500 "farms" are for tax avoidance purposes. It happens also around here whereby a local farmer rents a field from an individual for a fairly small amount, that field is generating a small income but also will be tax free for IHT. Are we being sidetracked here hating on people like Clarkson and Dyson when the majority of tax avoidance is happening under our noses with the "farms" under £1.5m? Slap IHT on anyone that inherits land and sells straight away, make it a 10 or 15 year window before anyone can sell without being hit the full 40% and reinstate the old IHT measures for everyone. Genuine farmers aren't wanting to sell so it wouldn't affect them and I bet there'd be a mass exodus of landowners if they had to hold the land for 15 years before selling?

[Ozyhibby]

Now that's a better tax to implement that I think everyone would agree on :agree:, they should be treated like the oil and gas companies and hit with a windfall type level of tax if they don't already. What was the old 10%?

Going back to farmers IHT, I know I know. Grunts link got me to thinking when it stated 20% of farms produce 80% of all food production in the UK. I countered that by stating 50% of farms own less than 50 acres. The argument isn't important, what's important is why do 50% of farms only own below 50 acres, it's not possible to contribute to food production with that amount of land. To put things in context that's 2 fields at most. Granted there'll be small farmers probably growing for their own and friends benefits or as we have around here, a small area of land used by a charity to grow plants and shrubs mainly by mentally disabled youngsters. I'd hazard a guess though that a large amount of those 104,500 "farms" are for tax avoidance purposes. It happens also around here whereby a local farmer rents a field from an individual for a fairly small amount, that field is generating a small income but also will be tax free for IHT. Are we being sidetracked here hating on people like Clarkson and Dyson when the majority of tax avoidance is happening under our noses with the "farms" under £1.5m? Slap IHT on anyone that inherits land and sells straight away, make it a 10 or 15 year window before anyone can sell without being hit the full 40% and reinstate the old IHT measures for everyone. Genuine farmers aren't wanting to sell so it wouldn't affect them and I bet there'd be a mass exodus of landowners if they had to hold the land for 15 years before selling?

When you put a bet on, you had to pay a 10% tax on top. If you didn’t, your winnings got taxed at 10%.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Andy Bee]

Dan Neidle seems to have changed his tune slightly on APR, not knocking it infact it's very welcome.

https://taxpolicy.org.uk/2024/11/24/how-to-stop-iht-avoidance-but-protect-farmers/

Given that he sits on some kinda Labour board I hope he's listened to.

[Stairway 2 7]

When you put a bet on, you had to pay a 10% tax on top. If you didn’t, your winnings got taxed at 10%.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Mad that they ended that, pure populism

[Ozyhibby]

Dan Neidle seems to have changed his tune slightly on APR, not knocking it infact it's very welcome.

https://taxpolicy.org.uk/2024/11/24/how-to-stop-iht-avoidance-but-protect-farmers/

Given that he sits on some kinda Labour board I hope he's listened to.

His suggestion has some merit in that the big landowners have to pay the full 40%.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grunt]

Inequality in the UK in 2022, per ONS



The richest 10% own 48.6% of the wealth
The poorest 30% own 1.2% of the wealth


https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:od6zwsr6mizdpv3kn3c2pln5/bafkreiaj7owhhb3cha53puuargxtxcrdjug53jq7rluzxiikj jympkullu@jpeg

[cabbageandribs1875]

well said Zarah hen, they both sicken me :agree:

(1) Zarah Sultana MP on X: "Just to be clear: I won’t be having cosy chats with Nigel Farage — who named Enoch Powell his political hero, claimed he “would never say Powell was racist in any way” & allegedly marched through a Sussex village chanting Hitler Youth songs. No thanks. https://t.co/Ak8cDLyxm8" / X (https://x.com/zarahsultana/status/1863213500027347229)

[Moulin Yarns]

https://news.stv.tv/west-central/glasgow-by-election-winner-disqualified-after-failing-to-quit-council-job


Oops, silly woman. 🤣

[superfurryhibby]

Inequality in the UK in 2022, per ONS



The richest 10% own 48.6% of the wealth
The poorest 30% own 1.2% of the wealth


https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:od6zwsr6mizdpv3kn3c2pln5/bafkreiaj7owhhb3cha53puuargxtxcrdjug53jq7rluzxiikj jympkullu@jpeg

Damning statistics.

If you start adding health and educational outcomes to this type of information then the lie of trickle down wealth and meritocracy is exposed even more.

As a man of simple thinking, it appears to me that the ordinary person cannot be squeezed to extract any more. That begs the question, why does our government not target the massive profits of the corporates?

The old chestnut of driving away investment etc. Surely, if one investment goes, something else will take it's place?

I also ask myself, what is the value of investment if it lacks social sustainability/accountability?

[cabbageandribs1875]

Glasgow Labour councillor charged over stalking offences | The National (https://www.thenational.scot/news/24767523.glasgow-labour-councillor-charged-stalking-offences/?fbclid=IwY2xjawG70edleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHZkH3yKqxnMC gqlwYi4GDu2ORzSkQxV5OIsY-mTZLiBhGl0yqVa4MtK78w_aem_Lmbmeu5pU2_0YQhypbshjQ)

A GLASGOW Labour (https://www.thenational.scot/politics/labour/) councillor has been suspended from the party after he was arrested and charged in connection with stalking offences.

Philip Braat, who used to be lord provost in the city, represents the Anderston/City/Yorkhill ward.

A spokesperson for Police Scotland said: “A 48-year-old man was arrested and charged on Wednesday, October 23, in connection with stalking offences.
“A report will be submitted to the procurator fiscal and he is expected to appear at a Glasgow Sheriff Court at a later date.”


A spokesperson for Labour meanwhile said the party “takes all complaints seriously”.
“They are fully investigated in line with our rules and procedures, and any appropriate action is taken.”
Braat was formerly head of the Strathclyde Police Authority, acting as its convener before its dissolution in 2013.

[Andy Bee]

So what's going to be coming in the big reset on Thursday? A rollback on any of the existing policies introduced over the last 5 months?

[Moulin Yarns]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/dec/03/mps-back-proportional-representation-system-uk-elections


MPs back proportional representation system for UK elections in symbolic vote

Lib Dem proposal is passed by 137 votes to 135 with some Labour backbench support but is unlikely to become law

A step in the right direction.

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/dec/03/mps-back-proportional-representation-system-uk-elections


MPs back proportional representation system for UK elections in symbolic vote

Lib Dem proposal is passed by 137 votes to 135 with some Labour backbench support but is unlikely to become law

A step in the right direction.

Zero chance of it happening.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/dec/04/uk-interest-rates-to-fall-more-slowly-than-expected-after-budget-claims-report?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=bluesky&CMP=bsky_gu

Interest rates to fall more slowly because of budget. Nice one.[emoji849]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grunt]

MPs back proportional representation system for UK elections in symbolic vote

Lib Dem proposal is passed by 137 votes to 135 with some Labour backbench support but is unlikely to become law

A step in the right direction.


Zero chance of it happening.

Keir Starmer in reply to Ed Davey on PR: “Proportional representation is not our policy. We won’t be making time for it. I would gently say to him he didn’t do too badly under the system as it is.”

[Smartie]

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/dec/04/uk-interest-rates-to-fall-more-slowly-than-expected-after-budget-claims-report?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=bluesky&CMP=bsky_gu

Interest rates to fall more slowly because of budget. Nice one.[emoji849]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

From the budget to Trump’s election, I don’t see any way that rates fall any time soon.

We’ll be doing well to avoid a fairly drastic climb imo.

[Ozyhibby]

From the budget to Trump’s election, I don’t see any way that rates fall any time soon.

We’ll be doing well to avoid a fairly drastic climb imo.

A dream for reform.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bostonhibby]

A dream for reform.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkDefinitely is if that happens, as we know Farage is excellent at barking from the side with a solution to absolutely everything people might be concerned about.

Delivery and substance will be the issue

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/dec/04/uk-interest-rates-to-fall-more-slowly-than-expected-after-budget-claims-report?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=bluesky&CMP=bsky_gu

Interest rates to fall more slowly because of budget. Nice one.[emoji849]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm certain you would have liked Labour to have kept austerity and just gave the markets what it wanted. It says growth is expected to be 1.7% next year and inflation to be 2.7%. That would be the stuff off dreams over the last 5 years, although you wouldn't believe it from the press. Yes it would have been slightly higher if we didn't increase taxes and plug the funding gap. Wages are rising above inflation and are expected to continue to next year.

Reform will do well because there fans read the media and comics like the middle class Guardian

[Ozyhibby]

I'm certain you would have liked Labour to have kept austerity and just gave the markets what it wanted. It says growth is expected to be 1.7% next year and inflation to be 2.7%. That would be the stuff off dreams over the last 5 years, although you wouldn't believe it from the press. Yes it would have been slightly higher if we didn't increase taxes and plug the funding gap. Wages are rising above inflation and are expected to continue to next year.

Reform will do well because there fans read the media and comics like the middle class Guardian

I’m not exactly sure what they are doing to be honest?[emoji2369]
Feels like they have taken 6 months off and are now starting to look around for something to do? The fact they are having a relaunch already backs that up.
I would have thought after 14 years in opposition you would be pretty clear eyed about what you want to get started on? Blair and Brown didn’t wait 6 months before getting started in 1997.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grunt]

He doesn't half go on ....

[silverhibee]

Glasgow Labour councillor charged over stalking offences | The National (https://www.thenational.scot/news/24767523.glasgow-labour-councillor-charged-stalking-offences/?fbclid=IwY2xjawG70edleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHZkH3yKqxnMC gqlwYi4GDu2ORzSkQxV5OIsY-mTZLiBhGl0yqVa4MtK78w_aem_Lmbmeu5pU2_0YQhypbshjQ)

A GLASGOW Labour (https://www.thenational.scot/politics/labour/) councillor has been suspended from the party after he was arrested and charged in connection with stalking offences.

Philip Braat, who used to be lord provost in the city, represents the Anderston/City/Yorkhill ward.

A spokesperson for Police Scotland said: “A 48-year-old man was arrested and charged on Wednesday, October 23, in connection with stalking offences.
“A report will be submitted to the procurator fiscal and he is expected to appear at a Glasgow Sheriff Court at a later date.”


A spokesperson for Labour meanwhile said the party “takes all complaints seriously”.
“They are fully investigated in line with our rules and procedures, and any appropriate action is taken.”
Braat was formerly head of the Strathclyde Police Authority, acting as its convener before its dissolution in 2013.

And not a single blue tent to be seen, or reporters door stepping him for an interview.

[Ozyhibby]

He doesn't half go on ....

But is he actually saying anything?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

Not sure why they set themselves up to fail, no new nuclear so they will fail the clean energy one, probably fail the rest although I like all of the targets

PolitlcsUK
🚨 NEW: Keir Starmer’s Milestones in his Plan for Change:
- Highest sustained growth in the G7
- ⁠1.5 million homes in England and Wales, and fast track planning decisions in 150 major economic infrastructure projects
- ⁠Named police officer for every neighbourhood and 13,000 additional officers, PCSOs and volunteer special constables
- ⁠Record 75% proportion of 5 year olds starting school ‘ready to learn’
- ⁠Clean power by 2030 through GB Energy
- ⁠End hospital backlogs to meet NHS standards of 92% of patients waiting no longer than 18 weeks for an elective treatment

[grunt]

Not sure why they set themselves up to fail, no new nuclear so they will fail the clean energy one, probably fail the rest although I like all of the targets
Did he mention Europe at all? Did any of the reporters mention it?

[Ozyhibby]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20241205/5c3da8d731867547c7a801168ef8e793.png
Down to 3rd place.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Andy Bee]

Did he mention Europe at all? Did any of the reporters mention it?

Can't help, I lost the will to live after "It's great to be here"

[grunt]

Down to 3rd place.
What is down? What is up? Who knows?

[Ozyhibby]

Not sure why they set themselves up to fail, no new nuclear so they will fail the clean energy one, probably fail the rest although I like all of the targets

PolitlcsUK
[emoji599] NEW: Keir Starmer’s Milestones in his Plan for Change:
- Highest sustained growth in the G7
- ⁠1.5 million homes in England and Wales, and fast track planning decisions in 150 major economic infrastructure projects
- ⁠Named police officer for every neighbourhood and 13,000 additional officers, PCSOs and volunteer special constables
- ⁠Record 75% proportion of 5 year olds starting school ‘ready to learn’
- ⁠Clean power by 2030 through GB Energy
- ⁠End hospital backlogs to meet NHS standards of 92% of patients waiting no longer than 18 weeks for an elective treatment

Was there any detail on steps they are actually taking to achieve these things is is it just another mid term manifesto type launch?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

Did he mention Europe at all? Did any of the reporters mention it?

I would literally put my house on Labour loosing the next election if the said they wanted a referendum on the EU. We had net migration of 2 million people in 3 years. The EU would demand free movement, with the rise of Reform it would be suicide for a decade.

Any Labour strategist suggesting they should support rejoining the EU needs sacked. It's absolutely depressing and self harming but it's the truth unfortunately

[Stairway 2 7]

Was there any detail on steps they are actually taking to achieve these things is is it just another mid term manifesto type launch?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There is but I haven't read it yet I'll have a look think Peston shared it but I didn't have the will to read the waffle. Milliband tweeted about the net zero one and it's all nonsense

[Ozyhibby]

I would literally put my house on Labour loosing the next election if the said they wanted a referendum on the EU. We had net migration of 2 million people in 3 years. The EU would demand free movement, with the rise of Reform it would be suicide for a decade.

Any Labour strategist suggesting they should support rejoining the EU needs sacked. It's absolutely depressing and self harming but it's the truth unfortunately

The evidence suggests free movement gives you less immigration? [emoji6][emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

The evidence suggests free movement gives you less immigration? [emoji6][emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And white rather than mostly black and brown, maybe the vote leave squad were very liberal and just wanted more black people making our society richer

[Ozyhibby]

And white rather than mostly black and brown, maybe the vote leave squad were very liberal and just wanted more black people making our society richer

I see Mohammed became the most popular boys name in the UK today so that no doubt has them rejoicing.[emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grunt]

I would literally put my house on Labour loosing the next election if the said they wanted a referendum on the EU. We had net migration of 2 million people in 3 years. The EU would demand free movement, with the rise of Reform it would be suicide for a decade. Any Labour strategist suggesting they should support rejoining the EU needs sacked. It's absolutely depressing and self harming but it's the truth unfortunately
And during those three years, were we in or out of the EU? :rolleyes:

And frankly I could care less about Labour strategists and their employment prospects. It is obvious now, as it has always been, that the UK will be significantly better off inside the EU. If any Labour strategist doesn't see that, then maybe you're right and they should be sacked. What Labour needs to do is to explain to the country - and Reform voters - the benefits to the UK of being in the EU. It's what should have been happening for the last 10 years. Starmer's continued red lines and unwillingness to deal with this issue shames and impoverishes us all.

[Stairway 2 7]

And during those three years, were we in or out of the EU? :rolleyes:

And frankly I could care less about Labour strategists and their employment prospects. It is obvious now, as it has always been, that the UK will be significantly better off inside the EU. If any Labour strategist doesn't see that, then maybe you're right and they should be sacked. What Labour needs to do is to explain to the country - and Reform voters - the benefits to the UK of being in the EU. It's what should have been happening for the last 10 years. Starmer's continued red lines and unwillingness to deal with this issue shames and impoverishes us all.

We were out the EU and your saying sell to voters opening free migration from Europe. If Labour do something that will guarantee them to lose the next election they are idiots and will usher in reform to power. So a little bit of trying to do what's right for the country will infact bring in the far right and less collaboration with the EU in the next decade.

Labour will lose the next election if they promise a vote on the EU. So seeing as that means Tory reform I hope they don't do it, the lesser of two evils. They should slowly integrate in a way they can get away with it.

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5ydrkpz1yyo

Read a few articles about the relaunch today and I’m still none the wiser on what they are trying to do?[emoji2369]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibs4185]

I’m genuinely in disbelief how bad starmer and reeves have been.

Not just their policies but the lies in their manifesto, the gifts, the lying on CV’s.

To be behind reform in the polls, 5 months after getting such a massive majority is failure on a momentous scale.

I had hope for them, but I can’t stand the sight of Starmer.

There was a woman interviewed on sky news during the election. She was in Edinburgh and she called him a hollow, hollow man. She was 100% correct.

[lapsedhibee]

I’m genuinely in disbelief how bad starmer and reeves have been.

Not just their policies but the lies in their manifesto, the gifts, the lying on CV’s.

To be behind reform in the polls, 5 months after getting such a massive majority is failure on a momentous scale.

I had hope for them, but I can’t stand the sight of Starmer.

There was a woman interviewed on sky news during the election. She was in Edinburgh and she called him a hollow, hollow man. She was 100% correct.

Starmer was really bad at PMQ yesterday. Simple straightforward questions from Badenoch and he just ignored the lot, producing awful comebacks which I guess were supposed to be clever. No doubt being PM is a difficult job, but does he have to make it look quite so difficult? :dunno:

[Jack]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5ydrkpz1yyo

Read a few articles about the relaunch today and I’m still none the wiser on what they are trying to do?[emoji2369]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Anything about the reform of the House of Lords?

Anything about council tax reform?

Anything about doing away with the need for food banks?

Anything about getting kids out of poverty?

Anything about tax avoidance by individuals or companies?

Anything about land reform?

Anything that matters to millions of worried people?

[Ozyhibby]

Anything about the reform of the House of Lords?

Anything about council tax reform?

Anything about doing away with the need for food banks?

Anything about getting kids out of poverty?

Anything about tax avoidance by individuals or companies?

Anything about land reform?

Anything that matters to millions of worried people?

Nothing. And it’s not like he was popular to start with. Labour won a huge parliamentary majority but on less than 34% of the vote. It will not take much to reverse that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibs4185]

Just read an article about Starmer and Sarwar. Starmer is hoping to help Sarwar win the scottish election and is determined to ‘deliver, deliver, deliver’ to help the best he can.

However, they’ve kind of tripped themselves up. In the article, Starmer says during the general election,

“We were devising the strategy together, the political thinking, the alignment of what we were trying to achieve,” he says.

Therefore either Starmer lied to Sarwar about his intentions or Sarwar was aware of the cuts and tax raises that were coming.

I think Starmer is trying the same trick again with the scottish election, promise everything to get power and then implement his real policies.

Charlatans the pair of them.

[cabbageandribs1875]

another one Edinburgh council leader suspended by Labour | The National (https://www.thenational.scot/news/24779783.edinburgh-council-leader-suspended-labour/)

THE leader of Edinburgh City Council has been suspended by Labour amid reports he sent Ukrainian refugees messages asking about their sexual preferences.

Police have also been handed a report of inappropriate behaviour regarding Cammy Day, who has led the local authority since May 2022.
Opposition groups in the city council now say he should resign as leader.
The Sunday Mail spoke to two Ukrainians who said they received messages from Day, saying they felt unable to ignore his unsolicited approaches.

[Moulin Yarns]

Latest Scottish polling. Yes majority, SNP largest party, labour hemorrhaging votes to reform.

https://news.stv.tv/politics/poll-suggests-pro-independence-majority-at-holyrood-with-snp-on-59-seats


And 54% yes for independence.

[Ozyhibby]

Latest Scottish polling. Yes majority, SNP largest party, labour hemorrhaging votes to reform.

https://news.stv.tv/politics/poll-suggests-pro-independence-majority-at-holyrood-with-snp-on-59-seats


And 54% yes for independence.

Hard to predict how things will go in 2026. Sarwar hasn’t really caught the public imagination but the SNP is treading water as well. A lot will depend on how Starmer is doing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibs4185]

Latest Scottish polling. Yes majority, SNP largest party, labour hemorrhaging votes to reform.

https://news.stv.tv/politics/poll-suggests-pro-independence-majority-at-holyrood-with-snp-on-59-seats


And 54% yes for independence.

A good sign! Watch Starmer and co, go all out on promises for Scotland

[cabbageandribs1875]

A good sign! Watch Starmer and co, go all out on promises for Scotland


that was ALWAYS going to happen regardless

indeed the king of U-turn will be exceptionally sweet in the run up


the leader of the Branch party can lie all he wants but he's a puppet END OF

[cabbageandribs1875]

Starmer lights up the downing st xmas tree https://www.facebook.com/reel/381155421692212

[cabbageandribs1875]

merry xmas Sir Keir :agree:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQrvmY5s2mo

[grunt]

Labour's Cammy Day has resigned as leader of Edinburgh Council

[cabbageandribs1875]

well said Henry McLeish, finally someone from BLiS admitting they're just a branch party at Holyrood(anyone with half a brain will already know that of course) :agree:

https://scontent.fman1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/468540048_3073626859493563_3180823077754765880_n.j pg?_nc_cat=110&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=aa7b47&_nc_ohc=9RDaqKf22aoQ7kNvgERG_2_&_nc_zt=23&_nc_ht=scontent.fman1-1.fna&_nc_gid=AcQV_NY94yzgBusI0wSvmMm&oh=00_AYC-78kB6UGfI-e8xdlvfLVR031wvCxpQ2koM6HuYd5sPA&oe=675D1A06

[Ozyhibby]

Labour's Cammy Day has resigned as leader of Edinburgh Council

Will the council switch to SNP control now?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CropleyWasGod]

well said Henry McLeish, finally someone from BLiS admitting they're just a branch party at Holyrood(anyone with half a brain will already know that of course) :agree:

https://scontent.fman1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/468540048_3073626859493563_3180823077754765880_n.j pg?_nc_cat=110&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=aa7b47&_nc_ohc=9RDaqKf22aoQ7kNvgERG_2_&_nc_zt=23&_nc_ht=scontent.fman1-1.fna&_nc_gid=AcQV_NY94yzgBusI0wSvmMm&oh=00_AYC-78kB6UGfI-e8xdlvfLVR031wvCxpQ2koM6HuYd5sPA&oe=675D1A06

Who wrote this? My pedantry can't see past the typos and poor punctuation. :rolleyes:

[CropleyWasGod]

Will the council switch to SNP control now?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He's still a Councillor, no?

[grunt]

Who wrote this? My pedantry can't see past the typos and poor punctuation. :rolleyes:It's a mess, isn't it?

On that topic, I haven't read The Scotsman in ages, picked one up today in a waiting room, spotted two typos in headlines in two pages. Put it back down again.

[grunt]

He's still a Councillor, no?Suspended by Labour, so possibly not? :dunno:

[CropleyWasGod]

Suspended by Labour, so possibly not? :dunno:

Fair do's.

FTR, I had a few dealings with him back when he was a rising star in local politics. Always found him to be a reasonable and "right thinking" guy, at that time not necessarily swayed by party issues. I know nothing about him personally. The cynic in me, though, wouldn't be surprised if there's some politically-motivated ****housery also going on here.

[grunt]

Cammy Day - who this week resigned as leader of Edinburgh City Council - is being investigated by the local authority following a claim he was acting as an unregistered landlord.

[Ozyhibby]

Cammy Day - who this week resigned as leader of Edinburgh City Council - is being investigated by the local authority following a claim he was acting as an unregistered landlord.

Labour through and through.[emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq5lw84w1yeo

Saying your all about growth is easier than actually delivering it. Taxing your way to growth impossible.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibs4185]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq5lw84w1yeo

Saying your all about growth is easier than actually delivering it. Taxing your way to growth impossible.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I know, absolute shambles. You come into government and start saying how bad it is, black holes etc and then businesses and the people start to loose confidence which is the worst thing you can do for growth.

Then give a budget which hammers businesses more.

Then they still blame the previous government.

I dislike starmer and reeves an incredible amount and my anger with them grows every day. How on earth they can make such a shambles of it so quickly is beyond me. They make even a clown like Boris look competent.

[Andy Bee]

Things heating up for Starmer and Milliband. Quadrature who gave Labour £4m before the election, who then disclosed it after the election, have also given Ed Milliband £99k and are a hedge fund heavily invested in fossil fuels. They setup Quadrature Climate Foundation Advisory Board. Rachel Kyte is the Co Chair on this board and has also been appointed the Governments new Climate Envoy around the time the donations came in. :hmmm:

[Stairway 2 7]

Things heating up for Starmer and Milliband. Quadrature who gave Labour £4m before the election, who then disclosed it after the election, have also given Ed Milliband £99k and are a hedge fund heavily invested in fossil fuels. They setup Quadrature Climate Foundation Advisory Board. Rachel Kyte is the Co Chair on this board and has also been appointed the Governments new Climate Envoy around the time the donations came in. :hmmm:

Ed Milliband is heavily focused on green energy. He was one of the main pushers in the windfall tax on fossil fuels that Labour brought in. Steven Flynn said would cost thousands of jobs in the fossil fuel industry and BP said it would be a hammer blow. He also decided to stop the onshore wind farm ban. If he's a fossil fuel asset he needs shot

He's also a buffoon as Milliband was swayed into opposing nuclear for years including the first few months in this job. He's mildly changing his mind this week after people pointing out he's clueless. We'll not get any small nuclear reactors sorted under Labour because they are slow, well watch the rest of Europe set up with Rolls Royce during the time UK has consultations and objections

[grunt]

He's also a buffoon as Milliband was swayed into opposing nuclear for years including the first few months in this job.
So you think we should be investing in nuclear instead of other forms of power generation?

[Stairway 2 7]

So you think we should be investing in nuclear instead of other forms of power generation?

Both of course. 40% of UKs energy this second is from burning fossil fuels, I read at one point two nights ago at 2am it was 95% as no wind and sun obviously.

Nuclear is a constant source of green energy for when wind solar and hydro doesn't cover it. Scotland mainly uses gas burning as our non green source, we're about to open an enormous gas plant near Peterhead. The damage to the planet will be brutal.

The problem is due to our planning system our Nuclear costs 4 times the amount of places like South Korea who have mastered new safe small reactors. For the same price as Millibands stupid carbon capture scheme he's announced, we could have 20 small reactors powering 20 million homes with green energy.

It would also give us power security away from buying from other nations and shield us from price rises. Frances energy prices barely went up compared to ours over the last few years, that's because they invested decades ago in nuclear.

We obviously should invest heavily in wind and solar and I think Labour is going that way and trying to catch up to Scotland

[Ozyhibby]

I would def have nuclear. It’s safe, green and provides high quality jobs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

Both of course. 40% of UKs energy this second is from burning fossil fuels, I read at one point two nights ago at 2am it was 95% as no wind and sun obviously.

Nuclear is a constant source of green energy for when wind solar and hydro doesn't cover it. Scotland mainly uses gas burning as our non green source, we're about to open an enormous gas plant near Peterhead. The damage to the planet will be brutal.

The problem is due to our planning system our Nuclear costs 4 times the amount of places like South Korea who have mastered new safe small reactors. For the same price as Millibands stupid carbon capture scheme he's announced, we could have 20 small reactors powering 20 million homes with green energy.

It would also give us power security away from buying from other nations and shield us from price rises. Frances energy prices barely went up compared to ours over the last few years, that's because they invested decades ago in nuclear.

We obviously should invest heavily in wind and solar and I think Labour is going that way and trying to catch up to Scotland

https://www.citizen.org/article/nuclear-power-is-not-clean-or-green/#:~:text=The%20mining%2C%20milling%20and%20enrichm ent,the%20burning%20of%20fossil%20fuels.

Green??

[Stairway 2 7]

https://www.citizen.org/article/nuclear-power-is-not-clean-or-green/#:~:text=The%20mining%2C%20milling%20and%20enrichm ent,the%20burning%20of%20fossil%20fuels.

Green??

Your not sharing an opinion you've just linked an article that isn't working. I could Google nuclear power isn't green then share the top ten results on this post, then Google nuclear power is green and share the top ten results on this post.

This is the estimated life cycle for each energy source, so it includes mining and building the plants. The most important thing to remember nuclear isn't replacing renewable as its for when they can't provide, so you should compare the number against gas or coal ect. We need another source of power. If your not choosing nuclear you need to say on the thread what you are choosing is it coal, oil or gas like scot gov are choosing?


Coal: The worst emitter, producing 740–1689 grams of CO2e per kilowatt-hour (kWh)

Oil: Produces 510–1170 grams of CO2e per kWh

Natural gas: Produces 290–930 grams of CO2e per kWh

Solar: Produces around 41 grams of CO2e per kWh

Nuclear: Produces approximately 12 grams of CO2e per kWh

Wind: Produces approximately 11 grams of CO2e per kWh
Hydropower: Produces approximately 4 grams of CO2e per kWh

[Jack]

The UK should invest more in hydro systems than its currently doing or has planned. They wouldn't need to be the huge systems that make the news now and again.

[Ozyhibby]

The UK should invest more in hydro systems than its currently doing or has planned. They wouldn't need to be the huge systems that make the news now and again.

Hydro works well but it usually involves flooding land somewhere, sometimes kicking people out their houses etc.
That was a lot easier back in the day when we built stuff but nowadays there is no chance. The whole thing would be cancelled now if a couple of badgers lived there, never mind people.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jack]

Hydro works well but it usually involves flooding land somewhere, sometimes kicking people out their houses etc.
That was a lot easier back in the day when we built stuff but nowadays there is no chance. The whole thing would be cancelled now if a couple of badgers lived there, never mind people.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It doesn't need to involve a reservoir, lots of the smaller systems take water from and return it to the same river or make use of a weir.

[grunt]

Your not sharing an opinion you've just linked an article that isn't working.

https://www.citizen.org/article/nuclear-power-is-not-clean-or-green/

[Stairway 2 7]

https://www.citizen.org/article/nuclear-power-is-not-clean-or-green/

Doesn't say much and again is basically comparing nuclear to renewables. So I say again which non renewable source are you wanting to take the strain rather than nuclear. Scot gov is going with Peterhead 2 a gas station. The current station at Peterhead produced 1.35 million tonnes of CO2 last year. A small nuclear reactor would have created 20 to 60 times less co2, that includes the mining that the article says is so co2 intensive.

Nuclear is far from perfect it still produces co2 but it's a hell of a lot better than burning fossil fuels like we do now. Some estimates are 1 in 5 deaths worldwide are due to burning fossil fuels 8.7 million people.

https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2021/feb/fossil-fuel-air-pollution-responsible-1-5-deaths-worldwide

Literally pick your poison gas, nuclear, coal, oil?

[grunt]

Nuclear is far from perfect it still produces co2 but it's a hell of a lot better than burning fossil fuels like we do now. Some estimates are 1 in 5 deaths worldwide are due to burning fossil fuels 8.7 million people.

You do realise that co2 emissions are not the main concern that people have with nuclear?

[Ozyhibby]

You do realise that co2 emissions are not the main concern that people have with nuclear?

What is the main concern? Waste or safety?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

It doesn't need to involve a reservoir, lots of the smaller systems take water from and return it to the same river or make use of a weir.

A lot of 'run of river' hydro schemes around Highland perthshire, I actually think there's a missing a trick by not installing them on large rivers like the Tay or where there are waterfalls.


220*m3/s for the Tay

[grunt]

What is the main concern? Waste or safety?
The article that you couldn't link to and then summarily dismissed cited four issues - it's not green energy, difficult to dispose of, safety and security concerns and it's expensive.

[Ozyhibby]

The article that you couldn't link to and then summarily dismissed cited four issues - it's not green energy, difficult to dispose of, safety and security concerns and it's expensive.

You are mixing me up with someone else. It’s is green compared with fossil fuels, which we need for base load. It can be disposed off safely. Its safety record is second to none in producing energy. And it’s only expensive in this country.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grunt]

You are mixing me up with someone else. It’s is green compared with fossil fuels, which we need for base load. It can be disposed off safely. Its safety record is second to none in producing energy. And it’s only expensive in this country.

Apologies. I do often confuse the two of you.

[Andy Bee]

It doesn't need to involve a reservoir, lots of the smaller systems take water from and return it to the same river or make use of a weir.

You basically just need the PSI in the water, run a pipe from point A upstream to point B downstream and divert the water through jets pointed at a pelton wheel at the bottom of the run which in turn turns the motor and then the water returns to the river/stream. Power = Head (drop from point A to B) x Flow /10 gives you the Watts it can generate. I'm trying like mad to buy a property I know that has a stream running alongside for this very reason. You can get 1.5 - 2.5Kw/h quite easily for around £2.5k and these systems can be scaled up massively.

[Moulin Yarns]

You basically just need the PSI in the water, run a pipe from point A upstream to point B downstream and divert the water through jets pointed at a pelton wheel at the bottom of the run which in turn turns the motor and then the water returns to the river/stream. Power = Head (drop from point A to B) x Flow /10 gives you the Watts it can generate. I'm trying like mad to buy a property I know that has a stream running alongside for this very reason. You can get 1.5 - 2.5Kw/h quite easily for around £2.5k and these systems can be scaled up massively.

OK, so the Tay has a head of 720m (over 193km) and a flow of 220m3/ second, how much could it generate? 15840kWh?

[Andy Bee]

OK, so the Tay has a head of 720m (over 193km) and a flow of 220m3/ second, how much could it generate? 15840kWh?

:greengrin With something the size of the Tay it'd be easier creating the head with a dam rather than running 193km of pipe.

You're missing a couple of zeros btw:greengrin it's 1553MWh

[Moulin Yarns]

:greengrin With something the size of the Tay it'd be easier creating the head with a dam rather than running 193km of pipe.

You're missing a couple of zeros btw:greengrin it's 1553MWh

Blimey, the hydro potential for our rivers, need to mothball Torness immediately. 🤣🤣

[Andy Bee]

Blimey, the hydro potential for our rivers, need to mothball Torness immediately. 🤣🤣

I don't get why we don't do it, Norways main electricity generation is from hydro and they've been doing it for over 100 years.

[lapsedhibee]

I don't get why we don't do it, Norways main electricity generation is from hydro and they've been doing it for over 100 years.

UKGov will put this into practice as soon as they're convinced there's no more threat of indy.

[Andy Bee]

UKGov will put this into practice as soon as they're convinced there's no more threat of indy.

I'm thinking the opposite, the UK Government along with the private sector and the help of Freeports will do it because of Indy.

[Stairway 2 7]

The article that you couldn't link to and then summarily dismissed cited four issues - it's not green energy, difficult to dispose of, safety and security concerns and it's expensive.

The four issues are a nonsense compared to the alternative which is were building an enormous gas power station in Peterhead. Gas is dearer than the rest of the world pay for nuclear. Google and Microsoft have just announced they are building nuclear plants to power their AI, they wouldn't do it if there was a cheaper stable alternative.
Nuclear is 20 to 50 times more green than Peterhead.
Safety were not asking for people to build 1960s Soviet or Japanese reactors. Using the safety of past reactors is like saying you wouldn't buy a tesla because you tried a Ford cortina and didn't like it's safety features.

Scotland is going with fossil fuel burning for our power security whilst others are going nuclear. China has 92 plants planned India 22, which will help bring down their emissions. This year 7.5% of uks power was bought from France, so we are outsourcing our nuclear. The fact that some people would oppose new nuclear but wouldn't bat an eyelid to Peterhead 2 being built is baffling

[lapsedhibee]

I'm thinking the opposite, the UK Government along with the private sector and the help of Freeports will do it because of Indy.

If they do that, though, the drum beat will change from 'they stole Scotland's oil' to 'they stole Scotland's cumulative head of water, and we want it back!'

[Stairway 2 7]

I don't get why we don't do it, Norways main electricity generation is from hydro and they've been doing it for over 100 years.

Norway built most of its hydro before the age of conservationism stopping projects no way they would get away with building 1k dams now. The geography is also very different. The two reasons we haven't went for inland hydro are price, wind is cheaper especially when your talking about bringing to the grid. Glenmuckloch hydro scheme got approval in 2016, Scottish Gov has been looking for an energy company to build it in the 8 years since.

Ecosystem concerns and the planning nightmare is hampering other schemes. Red John project has been going back and forward for years and has another campaign against it now

Most of the projects planned are just energy storage though, although that is obviously needed but we need generation too. The increase of AI, electric vehicles and heat pumps were going to need a large increase in generation and grid improvements

[Jack]

I don't get why we don't do it, Norways main electricity generation is from hydro and they've been doing it for over 100 years.

Norway produces 98% of its electricity needs from hydro.

It sells all its gas to the UK to produce electricity!

[Andy Bee]

Norway produces 98% of its electricity needs from hydro.

It sells all its gas to the UK to produce electricity!

And then nicks our wind and sells it back to us adding to their own green credentials :greengrin

[Moulin Yarns]

https://www.sserenewables.com/news-and-views/2024/09/tummel-bridge-power-station-officially-reopened-by-scotland-s-first-minister/

A hydro scheme, built in the 1930s, still going strong with an expectation of 40 more years of generation, that is 130 years of constant, sustainable, 140GWh a year. Clean, green energy. Tell me the lifespan of Torness? 50 years lifespan??

[Hibs4185]

For a country with endless lochs, hills and water, you’d think hydro would be a no brainer

[Moulin Yarns]

For a country with endless lochs, hills and water, you’d think hydro would be a no brainer

https://www.sse.com/news-and-views/2023/03/britain-s-largest-pumped-hydro-scheme-in-40-years-gets-100m-investment-boost/

It's not as 'cuddly' as wind apparently. But it's happening.

[Stairway 2 7]

https://www.sserenewables.com/news-and-views/2024/09/tummel-bridge-power-station-officially-reopened-by-scotland-s-first-minister/

A hydro scheme, built in the 1930s, still going strong with an expectation of 40 more years of generation, that is 130 years of constant, sustainable, 140GWh a year. Clean, green energy. Tell me the lifespan of Torness? 50 years lifespan??

It produces 140gwh per year Torness produces 6,679 gwh per year. To make Tummel bridge power station they made Loch Faskally through flooding. I can't see us being allowed to flood land and create lochs as easy nowadays

I don't think the SNP are conspiring against hydro. If it was financially and ecologically viable then they would go for electric generation from hydro. It's going for gas and heavily into wind power, the latter is the correct choice imo. The fact we've been searching for 8 years for a taker for a site that has planning permission shows this

[Stairway 2 7]

https://www.sse.com/news-and-views/2023/03/britain-s-largest-pumped-hydro-scheme-in-40-years-gets-100m-investment-boost/

It's not as 'cuddly' as wind apparently. But it's happening.

It's not generation it's storage so different from wind but that is needed also and works with the wind power generated

[Moulin Yarns]

It produces 140gwh per year Torness produces 6,679 gwh per year. To make Tummel bridge power station they made Loch Faskally through flooding. I can't see us being allowed to flood land and create lochs as easy nowadays

I don't think the SNP are conspiring against hydro. If it was financially and ecologically viable then they would go for electric generation from hydro. It's going for gas and heavily into wind power, the latter is the correct choice imo. The fact we've been searching for 8 years for a taker for a site that has planning permission shows this

What happens in 5 years when Torness is decommissioned? Tummel is still productive but we lose all nuclear capacity? Guess where we will be, reliant on more renewable energy.

Aye, let's build more nuclear, except that will take 10-15 years. Time wasted IMHO.


9:30pm on a Saturday and nuclear is providing less than 10% of Scotland’s energy, a time when there isn't even solar and still renewable energy accounts for 89% of generation.

[Stairway 2 7]

What happens in 5 years when Torness is decommissioned? Tummel is still productive but we lose all nuclear capacity? Guess where we will be, reliant on more renewable energy.

Aye, let's build more nuclear, except that will take 10-15 years. Time wasted IMHO.


9:30pm on a Saturday and nuclear is providing less than 10% of Scotland’s energy, a time when there isn't even solar and still renewable energy accounts for 89% of generation.

Your first paragraph no unfortunately we will replace Torness with gas burnt at the new enormous Peterhead 2, which is insane. Torness has 6 years minimum now it's been extended, we'd be well on the road to a new reactor in its place. We should have went nuclear like France decades ago and saved millions of tons of co2 per year.

It's very windy now hence the high wind output. Weather fluctuates though sometimes wind is as low as 10%.

Last year we got our electricity through renewable energy (61.8%), nuclear (25.7%) and fossil fuel burning (10.9%) according to scot gov. So that shows it fluctuates

Torness produces between 10% and 90% of our energy at times.

[RyeSloan]

For a country with endless lochs, hills and water, you’d think hydro would be a no brainer

It’s massively damaging to its immediate environment though…and often the whole river / water system it is based upon.

You could argue that’s justifiable weighted against the impact of fossil fuels but it should never be seen as a perfect green solution with no negatives.

And that’s before you consider the fact that you would need to expand existing capacity by about 25 times to get anywhere near what’s needed.

In short it’s not a viable option for being anything more than just a minor player.

I’m with the nuclear crew on this. Seems to me that the only real option to seriously decarbonise quickly here is to have a nuclear base load supplemented by renewables.

Possibly over time energy storage might be expanded enough to remove the need for nuclear but it’s never going to be at a viable enough scale in the timelines required.

[Jack]

What happens in 5 years when Torness is decommissioned? Tummel is still productive but we lose all nuclear capacity? Guess where we will be, reliant on more renewable energy.

Aye, let's build more nuclear, except that will take 10-15 years. Time wasted IMHO.


9:30pm on a Saturday and nuclear is providing less than 10% of Scotland’s energy, a time when there isn't even solar and still renewable energy accounts for 89% of generation.

10 to 15 years is optimistic at best.

After years of procrastination (1986), Hinckley was given the go ahead in 2010. Yet to produce enough to spark up an LED bulby thing, 2026 is the current [sic] best estimate for completion.

Goodness knows what the estimated price would have been in 1986 but when it kicked off, the price was around £18bn!!!

It's now closer to £50bn.

The French and Chinese owners are unlikely to be more than soup'yuan out of pocket but will reap mega bucks from the British consumer during its expected 60 years of operation.

38 years and counting.

[Stairway 2 7]

10 to 15 years is optimistic at best.

After years of procrastination (1986), Hinckley was given the go ahead in 2010. Yet to produce enough to spark up an LED bulby thing, 2026 is the current [sic] best estimate for completion.

Goodness knows what the estimated price would have been in 1986 but when it kicked off, the price was around £18bn!!!

It's now closer to £50bn.

The French and Chinese owners are unlikely to be more than soup'yuan out of pocket but will reap mega bucks from the British consumer during its expected 60 years of operation.

38 years and counting.

That's got nothing to do with nuclear that's to do with UKs planning system, hence our rail and energy projects cost multiples of other nations and take double the time. The proposed lower Thames Crossings report has 350,000 pages and has cost £300 million and a spade hasn't went in the ground years later. Labour say they will change all that but I'm doubtful

Korea’s Wolseong Nuclear Power Plant Reactor 3 took 49 months to build. The next generation small modular nuclear reactors that we would build like the proposed Hitachi SNR are estimated to take 2 to 3 years to build.

[Ozyhibby]

That's got nothing to do with nuclear that's to do with UKs planning system, hence our rail and energy projects cost multiples of other nations and take double the time. The proposed lower Thames Crossings report has 350,000 pages and has cost £300 million and a spade hasn't went in the ground years later. Labour say they will change all that but I'm doubtful

Korea’s Wolseong Nuclear Power Plant Reactor 3 took 49 months to build. The next generation small modular nuclear reactors that we would build like the proposed Hitachi SNR are estimated to take 2 to 3 years to build.

I’m not against any of these schemes but I am against talking endlessly about them while building hee haw. Our energy is far too expensive and we should probably be building a combination of all of them so we can reduce prices. We should also get rid of the anti Scottish pricing practices.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jack]

That's got nothing to do with nuclear that's to do with UKs planning system, hence our rail and energy projects cost multiples of other nations and take double the time. The proposed lower Thames Crossings report has 350,000 pages and has cost £300 million and a spade hasn't went in the ground years later. Labour say they will change all that but I'm doubtful

Korea’s Wolseong Nuclear Power Plant Reactor 3 took 49 months to build. The next generation small modular nuclear reactors that we would build like the proposed Hitachi SNR are estimated to take 2 to 3 years to build.

That's all very well but we don't live in Korea. Even when the planning stage has been fought through it will have taken more than a decade before a spark will be produced.

[Stairway 2 7]

That's all very well but we don't live in Korea. Even when the planning stage has been fought through it will have taken more than a decade before a spark will be produced.

Your talking about completely different systems. We're talking about small prefabricated modular reactors. The parts are fabricated abroad, so Korea and in our case Japan is relevant.

We seem to be going with Hitachi along with Canada building
12, Sweden, Estonia, Poland building 10 and others. Canada are building 4 Hitachis SNRs at their Darlington Nuclear Power Plant. Construction will start next year and it's scheduled to open in under 3 years from starting.

The 4 reactors will have 1200MW output, that's the same as Torness and they are costing £3.5 billion in total. Scotlands biggest offshore windfarm is Seagreen Offshore Wind Farm has a peak 1000WM and cost £3 billion. So similar cost for output but the SNR output is constant every day.

We could get Hitachi to build 4 now at Torness and have it running for Torness closing with minimal job losses.

[Moulin Yarns]

Offshore/Far-Offshore wind vs. nuclear generation

Recent cost estimates by Wall Street, including Moody's, Standard and Poor's and Lazard Ltd., indicate that nuclear power is the most costly of all forms of non-carbon-based sources and more costly than efficiency and energy derived from cogeneration, biomass, geothermal, solar thermal and wind.

Citing excessive costs and the failure of the bidding process to offer up a suitable option, the Ontario government announced in July of 2009 that it would be postponing a $26 billion nuclear expansion project. ***ushima has demonstrated the tremendous risks that are inherent in any nuclear power generation. Nuclear cost overruns, hidden charges, avoided costs (hidden from public view) such as liability for nuclear disasters, non-payment of resource uses (water use and consumption), etc., etc. make any nuclear power generation far too risky for any jurisdiction.

Furthermore, capital cost estimates of nuclear power in Ontario have often been unreasonably low to create the impression that nuclear is less expensive. These efforts have been pure propaganda by the secretive nuclear industry and their apologists and sycophants. The Ontario Power Authority's most recent analysis of the capital cost of a new CANDU 6 reactor (C$2,845/kW) is 30% less than the actual historic capital cost (C$4,085/kW in 1993) of the Darlington nuclear station, Ontario's newest plant. Another complete fabrication of the nuclear industry and their supporters.

When one also considers the escalating cost of uranium, the fact nuclear fission produces highly radioactive waste that requires storage for tens of thousands or millions of of years, that nuclear facilities have higher staff and maintenance costs than other generation sources, wind power is clearly the more viable and environmentally friendly option.

Nuclear power is the most costly,*heavily subsidized*(UK,*US), and*shockingly*risky*form of electricity generation possible. Nuclear operators have twisted any sensible risk/reward model that the general public could intrinsically understand such that all of the profits flow to the operators and any catastrophic risks/costs flow to the citizens of Ontario (or elsewhere where nuclear reactors operate).

Nuclear power is the most costly,*heavily subsidized*(UK,*US), and*shockingly*risky*form of electricity generation possible. Nuclear operators have twisted any sensible risk/reward model that the general public could intrinsically understand such that all of the profits flow to the operators and any catastrophic risks/costs flow to the citizens of Ontario (or elsewhere where nuclear reactors operate).

Even though it has been 70 years since the nuclear energy industry was started,*it continues to receive over 30 different generous subsidies, nearly all of which remain hidden from the public so that the nuclear industry and their supporters can continue to*misinform Ontarians that electricity generated from nuclear energy costs less than 10 cents. The ongoing actions of the nuclear energy industry clearly demonstrate that nuclear energy cannot survive without generous taxpayer subsidies, and bailouts, from all Ontarians when there are cost overruns or catastrophic events. According to a US report the nuclear power industry received 96.3% of all subsidies from 1943 until 1999. It is therefore both ironic and hypocritical that the very heavily subsidized nuclear industry complains that renewable energy generators are being subsidized when in fact the exact opposite is true.*

And unlike nuclear, wind offers a decentralized energy source. One nuclear plant requiring unscheduled maintenance can take 1,200 MW from the grid - an unlikely scenario in the offshore wind model where each turbine generates no more than 5 MW of energy.

[Stairway 2 7]

Offshore/Far-Offshore wind vs. nuclear generation

Recent cost estimates by Wall Street, including Moody's, Standard and Poor's and Lazard Ltd., indicate that nuclear power is the most costly of all forms of non-carbon-based sources and more costly than efficiency and energy derived from cogeneration, biomass, geothermal, solar thermal and wind.

Citing excessive costs and the failure of the bidding process to offer up a suitable option, the Ontario government announced in July of 2009 that it would be postponing a $26 billion nuclear expansion project. ***ushima has demonstrated the tremendous risks that are inherent in any nuclear power generation. Nuclear cost overruns, hidden charges, avoided costs (hidden from public view) such as liability for nuclear disasters, non-payment of resource uses (water use and consumption), etc., etc. make any nuclear power generation far too risky for any jurisdiction.

Furthermore, capital cost estimates of nuclear power in Ontario have often been unreasonably low to create the impression that nuclear is less expensive. These efforts have been pure propaganda by the secretive nuclear industry and their apologists and sycophants. The Ontario Power Authority's most recent analysis of the capital cost of a new CANDU 6 reactor (C$2,845/kW) is 30% less than the actual historic capital cost (C$4,085/kW in 1993) of the Darlington nuclear station, Ontario's newest plant. Another complete fabrication of the nuclear industry and their supporters.

When one also considers the escalating cost of uranium, the fact nuclear fission produces highly radioactive waste that requires storage for tens of thousands or millions of of years, that nuclear facilities have higher staff and maintenance costs than other generation sources, wind power is clearly the more viable and environmentally friendly option.

Nuclear power is the most costly,*heavily subsidized*(UK,*US), and*shockingly*risky*form of electricity generation possible. Nuclear operators have twisted any sensible risk/reward model that the general public could intrinsically understand such that all of the profits flow to the operators and any catastrophic risks/costs flow to the citizens of Ontario (or elsewhere where nuclear reactors operate).

Nuclear power is the most costly,*heavily subsidized*(UK,*US), and*shockingly*risky*form of electricity generation possible. Nuclear operators have twisted any sensible risk/reward model that the general public could intrinsically understand such that all of the profits flow to the operators and any catastrophic risks/costs flow to the citizens of Ontario (or elsewhere where nuclear reactors operate).

Even though it has been 70 years since the nuclear energy industry was started,*it continues to receive over 30 different generous subsidies, nearly all of which remain hidden from the public so that the nuclear industry and their supporters can continue to*misinform Ontarians that electricity generated from nuclear energy costs less than 10 cents. The ongoing actions of the nuclear energy industry clearly demonstrate that nuclear energy cannot survive without generous taxpayer subsidies, and bailouts, from all Ontarians when there are cost overruns or catastrophic events. According to a US report the nuclear power industry received 96.3% of all subsidies from 1943 until 1999. It is therefore both ironic and hypocritical that the very heavily subsidized nuclear industry complains that renewable energy generators are being subsidized when in fact the exact opposite is true.*

And unlike nuclear, wind offers a decentralized energy source. One nuclear plant requiring unscheduled maintenance can take 1,200 MW from the grid - an unlikely scenario in the offshore wind model where each turbine generates no more than 5 MW of energy.

Again your no giving an opinion your just sharing an article, you complain when others do it with blue sky links.

Like your last article it's not relevant as it's comparing nuclear to non carbon, we've said over the last 3 pages its a discussion about our non renewable source. Literally no one is saying replace renewable with nuclear. It's also talking about the previous generation of reactors and not modern small modular. I showed in my previous post the price to build the next generation is similar to offshore but that's irrelevant it has to be compared against gas.

Last year 60% of our power came from renewable, nuclear (25.7%) and fossil fuel burning (10.9%). When the nuclear goes Scotland will be replacing it mostly from more gas burning in Peterhead.

Peterhead will produce 900MW and cost £2.2 billion, roughly the same cost and output as 3 small reactors. The only difference is nuclear produces about 20 to 30 times less co2. It's an ecologically shocking decision and

Peterhead 1 emits 1.35 million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions per year, Peterhead 2 is expected to be 1 million. If we replaced them with nuclear we would save at least 2 million tons of co2 per year. Bottle return scheme is expected to cost the government £30 million per year to save 100,000 ton of co2 per year for example.

[Andy Bee]

It’s massively damaging to its immediate environment though…and often the whole river / water system it is based upon.

You could argue that’s justifiable weighted against the impact of fossil fuels but it should never be seen as a perfect green solution with no negatives.

And that’s before you consider the fact that you would need to expand existing capacity by about 25 times to get anywhere near what’s needed.

In short it’s not a viable option for being anything more than just a minor player.

I’m with the nuclear crew on this. Seems to me that the only real option to seriously decarbonise quickly here is to have a nuclear base load supplemented by renewables.

Possibly over time energy storage might be expanded enough to remove the need for nuclear but it’s never going to be at a viable enough scale in the timelines required.

Whilst hydro isn't going to be a silver bullet there's positives and negatives for every type of energy generation. Nuclear is expensive and has its obvious dangers. Hydro done correctly can eradicate flooding if sited correctly and impacts on the environment can be mitigated to an extent. Capacity is already planned to double once planning is approved and as has been mentioned hydro is the main source of electricity in Norway so it's proven to work in a country that's very similar to Scotland and Norway doesn't have nuclear. It's certainly better than what's happening in Peterhead with gas generation and that big cash hungry white elephant carbon capture.

I'm with Ozzy, I'm getting sick of turbines churning out power all over the country and sea and being charged more for transmission than someone in London when I and most other people in Scotland can actually see these turbines from their windows. Anyone with kids that are into gaming will understand this, my son has a desk with a gaming pc, he has monitors, speakers, fancy keyboards, pc, Playstation etc and they have all to be powered. The result is one of these 4 gang extensions loaded with a few 2/3 gang socket multiplier thingys. That's how I'm starting to view Scotland, an endless spaghetti junction of cables and generators whereby nearly every foreign Government and private equity firm has its power chord plugged into our wall outlet and they're actually charging us more than anywhere else in Europe to use our own power.

[Keith_M]

For a country with endless lochs, hills and water, you’d think hydro would be a no brainer


You'll get a slightly different percentage depending on which source you read but Scotland produces roughly 100% of it's electricity consumption* from renewable sources (water power, wind power, etc).

Scottish Power has plans to increase that massively over the next 10 years, so much so that we'll be producing far more than we consume.



* We do export some of that energy and also import some, but the net effect is the same

[Stairway 2 7]

You'll get a slightly different percentage depending on which source you read but Scotland produces roughly 100% of it's electricity consumption* from renewable sources (water power, wind power, etc).

Scottish Power has plans to increase that massively over the next 10 years, so much so that we'll be producing far more than we consume.



* We do export some of that energy and also import some, but the net effect is the same

Humza got pulled up in parliament for saying 100% of our energy use is from renewables.

Yes we produce the equivalent of 118% of our energy use but unfortunately it's not consistent. Days like today where there is a storm we'll get 100% but if it's still in Scotland it doesn't matter how many turbines we have the output will be low.

Hence we produced 118% last year but only 60% of our actual usage was from renewables, 25% from nuclear when there was low renewable output.

[RyeSloan]

Whilst hydro isn't going to be a silver bullet there's positives and negatives for every type of energy generation. Nuclear is expensive and has its obvious dangers. Hydro done correctly can eradicate flooding if sited correctly and impacts on the environment can be mitigated to an extent. Capacity is already planned to double once planning is approved and as has been mentioned hydro is the main source of electricity in Norway so it's proven to work in a country that's very similar to Scotland and Norway doesn't have nuclear. It's certainly better than what's happening in Peterhead with gas generation and that big cash hungry white elephant carbon capture.

I'm with Ozzy, I'm getting sick of turbines churning out power all over the country and sea and being charged more for transmission than someone in London when I and most other people in Scotland can actually see these turbines from their windows. Anyone with kids that are into gaming will understand this, my son has a desk with a gaming pc, he has monitors, speakers, fancy keyboards, pc, Playstation etc and they have all to be powered. The result is one of these 4 gang extensions loaded with a few 2/3 gang socket multiplier thingys. That's how I'm starting to view Scotland, an endless spaghetti junction of cables and generators whereby nearly every foreign Government and private equity firm has its power chord plugged into our wall outlet and they're actually charging us more than anywhere else in Europe to use our own power.

Not going to disagree with your wider sentiment.

Hydro, like most green energy sources should always be considered for part of the mix. Seems it would be better to focus on pumped storage if you ask me as that is where it has almost unique advantages.

But beyond that it’s simply not viable to imagine the scale of the build out needed ever being acceptable to do a Norway.

As for the costs. Well I kind of understand where they come from and why they exist but 100% that was based on the old centralised model. Times has changed and so have the way electricity is generated and moved so I’d be hoping the transmission charges will to.

None of that however changes my thoughts that SMR Nuclear appears to be the blinding obvious route to take to create base load quickly and cost effectively. And at the same time giving you the freedom to expand other renewables and storage at a sensible pace and cost.

[Bostonhibby]

Slightly off subject but this seems to be an area where labour are making a bit of headway by doing rather than talking?

Always felt that giving hundreds of millions to Rwanda for nothing and putting folk in hotels was dead money that could be better spent by getting the processing end better funded and moving. Hopefully this continues.

It's an area that needs actions, not the rhetoric that seems to dominate.

https://bsky.app/profile/jacklondonbluesky.bsky.social/post/3ldcp5lgifc23



Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20241215/bc4a294a97d884b0eeb9a3740fd94666.jpg