Inheritance Tax Changes Could Increase Suicide Risk Among Farmers
Pressures on the farming community will be exacerbated by the introduction of inheritance tax, potentially increasing the risk of suicides among farmers, Parliament has heard.
'We know that a number already have taken that dreadful step—and, as the deadline approaches, the risk will only rise,' shadow minister for environment, food, and rural affairs Lord Massey Roborough
Roborough, a dairy and livestock farmer, made the remarks during a debate on the Employment Rights Bill, urging the government to track suicide rates among farmers, to assess the impact of planned inheritance tax reforms.
'It would appear to be callous in the extreme that the government refuse to take responsibility for this tragic human cost of their Budget decisions,' the shadow minister said.
From April 2026, agricultural estates and assets worth over £1 million will be subject to a 20 percent inheritance tax rate. This is half the usual 40 percent rate, but farms were previously exempt from inheritance tax.
Farmer Takes His Own Life
The plea comes after Sheffield Coroner's Court heard last week that 78-year-old farmer John Charlesworth had committed suicide on Oct. 29, 2024, the day before the Autumn Budget was announced.
John Charlesworth's son, 47-year-old Jonathan Charlesworth, told the coroner that his father had been 'growing more and more anxious about inheritance tax and the implications for the farm' in the weeks before the Budget.
Related Stories
5/16/2025
3/26/2025
He said he believed his father 'wasn't going to let the government beat him' and wanted to 'save the farm for future generations.'
Lord Andrew Sharpe of Epsom, the shadow minister for business and trade, alluded to the case on Tuesday.
Sharpe said: 'I must also highlight a concern that has been brought to light by recent tragic events and official responses, and that is the case of a farmer who took his own life just before the government's Budget, which is a heartbreaking example of the immense pressures our rural communities face.
'These pressures are exacerbated by the looming inheritance tax changes that threaten the very future of family farms.'
The shadow minister also criticised the 'significant delay' in the publishing of accurate data on suicides, saying in the House of Lords, 'Without timely, detailed data, broken down by occupation, policymakers cannot fully understand the human cost of these policies.'
Children ride toy tractors in Parliament Square as demonstrators attend a farmers' rally in London on Nov. 19, 2024.Government minister Lord Sonny Leong said that ministers are in regular contact with the farming community, adding that the government is committed to the UK's farming industry, highlighting its pledge to invest £5 billion into the sector over the next two years.
Leong said: 'It is with immense sadness that we hear about suicides in the farming community, and I agree with noble lords that we need to have accurate and timely data. I promise noble lords that I will speak to my ministerial colleagues at Defra [the Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs] and the ONS [Office for National Statistics] as far as their request is concerned.'
The government has
Rural Mental Health
These peers are not the first to raise concerns that changes to tax rules could drive some farmers to suicide.
Giving evidence to the Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs (Efra) Committee in December, the National Farmers' Union President Tom Bradshaw
Bradshaw argued that it was not the money, per se, putting pressure on these farmers, but the impact the change will have on their legacy.
'This is a lifetime of work; it is the heritage and custodianship of our farms,' he had said.
Farmers protest over the changes to inheritance tax rules in the budget which introduced new taxes on farms worth more than £1 million in Whitehall, London, on March 4, 2025.
Jordan Pettitt/PA Wire
The wider issue of the mental health of farmers has been a matter of concern for years, owing to the higher than average rates of depression and suicide among the farming community.
A 2023
Some of the
If you're struggling or need someone to talk to, help is available. You can call Samaritans for free, any time, on 116 123 or visit
PA Media contributed to this report.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Why the wrong memorial will water down the Holocaust
On Wednesday, the Holocaust Memorial Bill returns to the House of Lords. What a waste of energy over seven and more years this project has been. The motives are good. Unfortunately, the idea is not. In the great battle against growing anti-Semitism in our society, precious weapons are being mistargeted. There are strong second-order objections to the memorial and its accompanying 'learning centre'. They include the vast cost, over £200 million; the lack of room in Victoria Tower Gardens and the loss of green space; the security risk at the heart of government and Parliament which the police and parliamentary authorities increasingly fail to control; and the fact that the gardens will soon be overcrowded by the overspill for the coming 30-year project to restore the fabric of the Houses of Parliament next door. There will be parliamentary amendments tomorrow to address these last two points. Most of the Bill's opponents, many of whom are Jewish, do want a memorial, but a much smaller and more beautiful one. The present design is a grandiose hand-me-down, by the somewhat discredited architect David Adjaye, already used elsewhere. Opponents also do not want the learning centre. Tristram Hunt, the distinguished director of the V&A, thinks it could be much better managed at the Imperial War Museum. The key objection relates to what is really being commemorated. If you track the history of Holocaust Memorial Day since it was instituted a quarter of a century ago, you will find increasing pressure to water down the concept. There have been several occasions – ITV's Good Morning Britain this year, for example – in which coverage has entirely failed to mention the Jews at all, let alone the fact that the Holocaust killed six million of them. People such as the former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, unfailingly hostile to Israel and previously friendly to murderous Hamas, have thus found it possible to take part in Holocaust Memorial Day without having to confront the grim truth of history. Over time, the uniqueness of the Jewish experience thus slips away. A process begins in which the word 'Holocaust' is taken to stand for any persecution of any group by any other group. From there, it is a short step to suggesting, as pro-Gaza mobs always do, that Israel itself is committing genocide against Palestinians. This is not an isolated outbreak of a few fanatics, but a deliberate plan to strip the Jewish state – and all Jews – of their moral authority. The ultimate aim is to preach the equation 'Jews = Israel = Nazis'. This libel is so widespread as to have become one of the main tropes of anti-Semitism. The danger is that the wrong sort of commemoration will facilitate this. Delegations from anti-Israel countries and 'humanitarian' organisations emerging from Parliament will stroll into Victoria Tower Gardens, pose outside the Holocaust Memorial and deliver their piece to camera about alleged war crimes, starvation of children etc. You can just imagine the ineffable Greta Thunberg doing exactly that. Sad to say, both main political parties are putting on whips to get the memorial Bill through Parliament. This suggests an underlying uncertainty about the rightness of their cause. Traditionally, votes on matters of conscience are not whipped. Surely Holocaust commemoration is a classic conscience issue in which party considerations have no place. I fear that establishment politicians, frightened of being labelled anti-Semitic, have supported this great big project without thinking about it. Yet thought is exactly what is needed to correct the errors of Holocaust education today. By the way, there exists a splendid role model for commemoration in, of all places, Poland. The POLIN museum in Warsaw movingly and expertly relates its country's part of the full story we all need to know – how Jews lived there for a thousand years and how, in the end, and most horribly, they died. Like many parishes, our village held its annual fete last Saturday. The problem, in advance, was the weather. Nowadays, weather forecasting is so much more accurate that if it says, two or three days before, that it will rain, it probably will. So event-planners must take it seriously. This avoids the occasional spectacular washouts of the past, after which everyone used to say, through gritted teeth, 'Rain failed to dampen the spirits'. Our organisers therefore did the prudent thing and announced that the fete would not be held in the public garden by the church but in the village's two interconnected halls. The trouble was that, on the day, there was virtually no rain during the fete's opening hours. We all felt slightly silly because we could have stuck with the original plan and saved ourselves a lot of trouble. Should we have followed the old way and just held the thing outdoors, rain or shine? I am not sure of the answer. But I do know that everyone enjoyed the make-do atmosphere among the crowded stalls and the noisy Punch-and-Judy show inside, finding community in adversity. Business was brisk. The splash headline in our local paper says, 'Post office to remain open'. My first reaction was to laugh at this non-news. After all, it is in the nature of shops to open. But I quickly realised I was wrong. It was indeed news. The unspoken policy of the modern Post Office is to close itself down. A decision in the opposite direction certainly deserves the front page. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Wall Street Journal
3 hours ago
- Wall Street Journal
Mark Carney Says Canada Will Reach NATO Spending Target This Fiscal Year
Prime Minister Mark Carney announced a boost in Canada's defense budget and said spending would reach NATO's target of 2% of gross domestic product by the end of the country's fiscal year. Photo:
Yahoo
8 hours ago
- Yahoo
Reeves has left herself with only one way of funding her spending promises
This Wednesday, Rachel Reeves will be in the firing line once again. The event in question will not be a Budget, or even a mini-Budget, but rather a spending review. But such is the pressure on the public finances that the political and economic ramifications will be significant. On the face of it, this review is meant to spell out the details of departmental spending within the overall totals that have already been set to 2028/29 for current day-to-day spending and to 2029/30 for capital spending. Such reviews are not, therefore, meant to be the vehicle for announcing major changes in fiscal policy. There is now supposedly only one major fiscal event for this purpose, namely the autumn Budget, with a subsidiary event, the Spring Statement, which was delivered in March. That said, it would not come as a surprise if the Chancellor increased the spending totals on Wednesday. After all, if defence spending is increased to 3pc of GDP (costing over £17bn per annum by 2029/30) and spending on health increases by 3.4pc in real terms per annum, this would imply that other departments would have to suffer an average real terms reduction in their budgets of 1.8pc per annum out to the end of the review period. Good luck with selling that to the Labour Party. Admittedly, although at one point increasing defence spending to 3pc of GDP was supposedly a 'commitment', more recently it seems to have been downgraded to an 'ambition'. But any leeway you might think this gives is surely undermined by the fact that at last week's Nato meeting in Brussels, there was a call for defence spending of 3.5pc of GDP. And Donald Trump's representative called for the figure to be 5pc. Meanwhile, several recent policy announcements and events have come together to intensify pressure on the Chancellor. It will be interesting to see what she has to say about these on Wednesday and how they can possibly be squared with the existing plans. If she makes no announcements on these matters, then the detailed spending plans that she announces on Wednesday may be viewed as decidedly preliminary. Some of the fiscal pressures on the Chancellor reflect political choices. The Government has announced pay rises for public sector workers in England of between 3 and 5pc in this fiscal year, rather higher than the 2.8pc that the Chancellor had budgeted for. These higher increases will cost up to £3bn. It is no secret that the lurch by Reform UK towards Left-wing economic policies has driven the Government towards increased spending commitments. We don't yet know the full details, but if the Government were to fully reverse the cut to winter fuel payments, the cost would be about £1.7bn. Similarly, under pressure from both Nigel Farage and a significant number of its own backbenchers, the Government is reportedly considering removing the two-child cap on benefits. This would cost another £3.5bn. Meanwhile, a softening of the welfare cuts announced in March would probably cost a further £500m. On a different front, the Government's new migration policy is expected to reduce migration 'by up to around 100,000 per annum'. Whatever you might think of the desirability of such a change, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) would score such a cut as reducing our GDP and thereby raising the likely level of public borrowing, perhaps by about £6bn by 2029/30. Not all the upward pressures on borrowing come from policy decisions. Since March, market interest rate expectations and gilt yields have risen. If this were sustained, then come the Budget in the autumn, another £4bn would have to be devoted to servicing the Government's debt. Over and above this, the OBR could conceivably reduce its forecast for productivity growth. Believe it or not, it has persistently been optimistic about productivity growth, only to be repeatedly proved wrong. At some point, it may well throw in the towel. A reduction of only 0.1pc per year would raise the annual borrowing forecast by about £10bn. The combination of spending increases of over £25bn and an upward revision to the OBR's borrowing forecast of just over £20bn would leave the Chancellor facing a fiscal 'hole' of about £46bn. Unlike before last year's Budget, she may well find this deficit trickier to blame on the previous Conservative government. The Chancellor might well find a bit of wiggle room by tweaking the fiscal rules. After all, in its most recent report, the International Monetary Fund suggested that there might be scope to go down this route. Nevertheless, it seems unlikely she would be able to raise more than about £20bn this way, leaving her with perhaps about £25bn still to find. And she needs to keep a watchful eye on the gilt market. As far as it is concerned, borrowing is borrowing. It is no surprise, therefore, that there is much speculation that huge tax rises are in the offing, perhaps including an extension of the planned freeze on personal tax thresholds by an additional two years, raising about £10bn. There are umpteen other potential personal tax measures that could raise substantial sums. Given that Reform has made much of being able to raise umpteen billions from ending the practice of paying interest on commercial banks' reserves at the Bank of England, however, it would be tempting to shoot their fox. Yet all these calculations assume a relatively small increase in defence spending. If we had to increase defence spending to 5pc of GDP, or even higher, surely the welfare budget would have to give. The Government must be hoping that President Putin's designs on Nato territory amount to just an 'ambition', rather than a 'commitment'. Roger Bootle is senior independent adviser to Capital Economics and a senior fellow at Policy Exchange. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
