Agenda item

To consider the attached motion from Cllrs Rich Rogers and Bill Parks.

On the invitation of the Chairman, Cllr Rich Rogers proposed the motion as set out in the Summons, which was seconded by Cllr Bill Parks.

Cllr Rogers spoke about the important role that farms played in providing food security and stewarding Wiltshire’s countryside. He argued that the government’s changes to restrict full Agricultural Property Relief, to the first million pounds, with a 20 percent rate paid on assets over that amount, showed a lack of understanding about the rural economy. Describing the changes as a blunt instrument to close a tax loophole, Cllr Rogers criticised the changes and asked Council to support his motion to write to government setting out opposition to the government action.

In response to the motion Cllr Richard Clewer, Leader of the Council, emphasised that Wiltshire Council worked closely with farms and helped to promote the purchase of local produce through schemes such as the Wiltshire Marque. He also said that he would welcome more direct links with farmers, as much of the communication with government went through the Department for the Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs. Reporting that he had met with the National Farmers’ Union the previous week, he contrasted the council’s approach with that of the government, which he argued did not understand the countryside. He criticised the changes to Agricultural Property Relief, and stated it was important for Wiltshire, as a large rural authority, to inform the government about their impact.

The Chairman then moved that Council debate the motion, which was seconded and approved.

Other group leaders then had the opportunity to comment.

Cllr Ian Thorn, Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group, supported the motion, describing farmers as the backbone of the community in Wiltshire. In particular, he welcomed measures to gather evidence about the impact of the changes on Wiltshire. He observed that the preamble to the motion referenced Conservative objections but stated that the Liberal Democrats supported the wording of the motion itself.

Cllr Jon Hubbard, speaking on behalf of the Independent Group, stated that he had sympathy for the motion though noted that it was an issue that would be best discussed in parliament.

Cllr Ricky Rogers, Leader of the Labour Group, explained that he supported the idea of gathering evidence about the impact of the changes but could not support the rest of the motion. Although he had sympathy for farmers, he pointed out that other businesses were asked to pay 40 percent inheritance tax above the threshold whereas famers were only being asked to pay 20 percent and had a decade to pay. He argued that Council was not the appropriate place for the issue to be debated.

The Chairman then opened the debate for general discussion.

Numerous comments were made in support of the motion, with some members sharing concerns from residents about the risk of losing their family farms, including one that had been on the same land for hundreds of years. It was highlighted that although many farmers were asset rich, they were often cash poor, with much of their wealth being tied up in the land.

Other concerns raised underlined the impact of the changes on the landscape, food security, heritage, culture, and the mental health of farmers. Additional criticisms of the changes to Agricultural Property Relief included that it was unfair, would not raise much revenue, and would have unintended consequences such as increasing food imports. Some Members suggested that the likely effect of the policy was that land would be purchased by large commercial enterprises, who might not end up paying inheritance tax.

It was requested that in future Council be updated about the responses to letters that it sent to central government on its behalf. Differing views were expressed over whether the government would be persuaded to change course on the policy.

A comment in opposition to the motion argued that the Leader should not write to government until the impact on Wiltshire had been factually assessed. He pointed out that the full 100 percent combined Business and Agricultural Relief would be applied to the first million pounds of combined business and agricultural property. The 20 percent effective tax above this level could be paid interest free in instalments over 10 years, so could be paid at two percent a year. There would also be further exemptions for spouses, so people, depending on their circumstances, could pass on up to £3 million tax free.

At the conclusion of debate Cllr Clewer, Leader of the Council, welcomed the strength of feeling in the chamber in support of the motion. He highlighted that Council had passed a motion in February 2024 to support Wiltshire’s farmers and food producers. 

Cllr Rich Rogers, as mover of the motion, thanked members for debating the issue and for the heartfelt stories that had been shared. He felt that the motion would send a strong message against what he argued was an ill-conceived and unfair tax. 

At the conclusion of the debate, it was then,

Resolved:

1)    That Richard Clewer, the Leader of Wiltshire Council, writes to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, and our Wiltshire MPs, in order to outline Wiltshire Council’s dismay at the decision in the Budget to restrict Agricultural Property Relief, and to request the Government puts an immediate stop to the Family Farm Tax.

2)    That the council undertakes an analysis of how many of Wiltshire's farms would be affected by the changes in national policy announced in the recent budget and reports this back to members.

In accordance with the constitution there was a recorded vote.

Votes for the motion (65)

Votes against the motion (0)

Votes in abstention (7)

Details of the recorded vote are attached to these minutes.