In a surprise to absolutely no one, government changes to Inheritance Tax liabilities for farm businesses was right at the top of the agenda at the NFU’s annual conference in London today.
And despite Defra secretary Steve Reed’s best efforts to shift the dial with a raft of policy announcements, the now festering wound created by the universally hated ‘family farm tax’ and the government’s refusal to change course on the policy meant anything else discussed was pretty much academic.
In his speech to the conference, an at times visibly rattled Reed attempted in vain to emphasise the policy change was merely “the straw that broke the camel’s back”.
The government wanted to focus on resolving profitability as a whole, he insisted, as “the underlying problem in this sector is that farmers do not make enough money for the hard work and commitment they put in”.
But Reed seemed unaware of the irony of putting profitability first when many farmers were facing tax bills of over £1m.
And as one delegate put it, despite announcements including the confirmation of a five-year Seasonal Worker scheme extension, the IHT controversy was effectively “sucking all the oxygen out of the room”.
The human impact of IHT
Protesters hijacked his speech with a banner protesting the family farm tax, tractors parked outside the conference centre blared their horns as he spoke, and he was heckled by NFU members when answering questions. Needless to say, Reed was not being let off easy.
And nor should he be, when the human impact of this policy is taken into account.
NFU president Tom Bradshaw was emotional when discussing the topic, and said he had received hundreds of desperate messages and calls about the “morally wrong” farming tax.
He choked up while discussing one of the starkest human consequences – the risk that many elderly farmers are considering taking their own lives before April 2026 to protect their families from a “farm tax bill they simply cannot afford”.
While this might sound like an exaggeration, a member of the audience later asked a similar question in reference to his own family member. In reply, Reed said he could not comment on individual circumstances.
Read more: Defra aims to reset farming sector relations with raft of NFU conference announcements
Bradshaw believes the government knows the policy change is wrong, but simply does not possess the political will to change it.
Faced with a barrage of objections on the policy, and now more than four months since it was announced, Reed sounded far less confident in his defence of it than he has been previously, without actually deviating from the government’s now well-trodden line that its own calculations show very few farmers will be impacted by it.
He repeatedly apologised as farmers came up time and again with concerns about the Treasury’s plan to halve agriculture and business property relief on properties valued over £1m. But there is ultimately nothing he can do.
Policy peace offerings
As Bradshaw told journalists after Reed’s speech, he has been backed into a corner by the decision made by the Treasury and, like a lamb to the slaughter, Reed was yet again forced to face angry farmers.
Reeves was nowhere to be seen – despite the conference taking place a stone’s throw from Parliament at the QEII Centre.
And her absence was repeatedly noted, as she has continued to refuse meetings not only with the NFU but with Labour backbenchers who are keen for her to defend her policy.
As Bradshaw joked: “Maybe if I offered to meet her in Davos she would be more willing.” Instead he has the “sound of a slamming door ringing in our ears”.
The government did attempt to offer some new policy peace offerings to farmers, but these were underwhelming at best. The majority of the announcements were effectively recycled policies that had already been announced, such as the plan to source 50% of food served by public services from the UK, which was originally announced in January.
Read more: ‘Fury’ from farmer groups as Treasury ‘shuts door’ on alternative tax solutions
Even the major Seasonal Worker scheme announcement, promising workers for the next five years for fresh produce growers, was rather underwhelming. There had been months of pestering from farmers to get more security on this major issue, and after all this time the only thing the government could come up with was effectively the same policy the Conservatives launched last May.
None of these policies offered enough to provide farmers with certainty, and delegates argued they were definitely not enough to encourage the investment so badly needed in the sector. Ultimately, this means Labour’s much-repeated mantra that “food security is national security” is, at the moment, just an empty slogan.
There was one particularly revealing moment when the audience was asked if it was confident enough to invest in its farming businesses and only two members raised their hands. There were over 700 people in the room.
While the government window-dresses with recycled commitments and carries on avoiding questions about the damaging impact of IHT, the farming sector is in great pain. If it truly believes food security is national security, a radical shift in policy is required.
No comments yet