Thousands of farmers gathered in London to protest changes to inheritance tax rules for agricultural estates, announced in the recent Budget.
The reforms, set to take effect in April 2026, will introduce a 20% inheritance tax on agricultural assets worth more than £1 million, sparking fears of financial hardship for farming families.
Among the protesters in Whitehall was TV presenter Jeremy Clarkson, who owns Diddly Squat Farm in Oxfordshire. Speaking at the rally, Clarkson said the policy would mark “the end” for many farmers and urged the government to reconsider.
The changes mean married couples or civil partners could pass on agricultural estates worth up to £3 million tax-free, but many farmers argue this is insufficient. Farming families, often “asset rich but cash poor,” claim they could face crippling tax bills requiring them to sell land, livestock, or entire farms.
Tom Bradshaw, president of the National Farmers’ Union (NFU), described the reforms as “a stab in the back” for farmers, calling them destructive and wrong. Speaking to protesters, Bradshaw said the policy was the “straw that broke the camel’s back,” accusing the government of betraying a long-standing “contract” with the farming community dating back to World War Two.
Bradshaw criticized Environment Secretary Steve Reed for reneging on earlier promises to retain agricultural property relief.
Farmers also pointed to rising costs of production—up 54% for pig farming, 44% for cattle, and 43% for cereal crops since 2019—as well as declining subsidies following Brexit. A recent government survey suggests the average farm made a profit of £45,300 last year, though this figure excluded the least profitable farms.
The government claims the changes will impact only the wealthiest 500 farming estates annually. However, the NFU and the Country Land and Business Association (CLA) estimate up to 70,000 farms worth more than £1 million could be affected.
Gloucestershire livestock farmer David Barton, whose family has run their farm since 1913, said his £5 million estate generates little profit. He fears his son would face an £800,000 tax bill and might be forced to sell.
Protesters highlighted that inheritance tax exemptions for married couples total £2.65 million, with an additional £175,000 available for the family home. Yet, farmers like Jen, a seventh-generation farmer from Yorkshire, said these allowances fall short. Rupert Burchett, Agricultural Property solicitor, Payne Hicks Beach said:
“The Government campaigned on a promise to give “our rural communities their future back” and were adamant that they would not change agricultural property relief. These proposals directly contradict those promises. Even if you just use bare agricultural land values, 40% of farms will be affected. When you add on the value of farmhouses, diversified farm buildings and so on, that figure skyrockets.
There is a real and understandable sense of betrayal in our rural communities. It doesn’t matter how many times the Prime Minister repeats that the vast majority of farms and farmers will be unaffected – the Government’s own figures show that this simply isn’t the case. Many farmers are now beginning the process of considering how to mitigate the tax burden that will otherwise decimate the future of their and their families’ businesses and livelihoods.”
Jen estimates that her family farm would face a £1.2 million tax bill. “Unless something changes, we’d have to sell the farm. It’s been our family’s passion for generations,” she said.
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak defended the changes, insisting that “the vast majority” of farms would remain unaffected. Speaking at the G20 summit in Rio de Janeiro, he argued the policy was “fair and proportional” and necessary to fund investments in rural hospitals, schools, and housing.
Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer, who grew up in a rural community, acknowledged farmers’ concerns but emphasised that only farms worth more than £3 million would be taxed in typical cases. He said £5 billion had been allocated over two years for farming and food sustainability initiatives, along with increased funding for flood defences and disease outbreaks.
The government maintains it will not reconsider the policy, despite protests. However, Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch pledged to reverse the tax if elected, calling it “the family farms tax” that would “destroy farming as we know it.” Michael Miller, Agriculture, Farms and Estates Partner at law firm Spencer West LLP, said:
“A number of my clients are rightly exercised by the changes to IHT. It will be interesting to see how the protests on Tuesday are received.
The proposal is ill-conceived if, the justification for making it, was to make agricultural land less attractive to non-farming, investment buyers. If this was the intention why also include Business Property Relief within the £1m limit for the Agricultural Property Relief?
If APR is used against the farmland and buildings, then BPR is used to cover the livestock and machinery. A non-farming investment owner won’t be holding livestock and machinery, just agricultural land, As such one begins to appreciate why the ordinary farmer feels beleaguered by the IHT changes since most family farms, once equipped with livestock and machinery, are likely to exceed the limited allowances and be caught by the tax.”
