Is it time to acknowledge the difference.....?

Location
Devon
....... between an agri-business and small holdings/family farms?


I try to read a large portion of all that is written on TFF and I see a continuous and growing divide/ confusion between these types of farming.

The problems, needs and benefits are so often polar opposites between these types that regulations, grants and support for one can often be detrimental to the other.

As there is going to be a huge amount of change in the next few years, I wondered if now would be a good time for this difference to be acknowledged and catered for.


The main problem is trying to define which is which so my idea would be for everyone to choose to define themselves.

I imagine choosing to be defined as a agri-business would give access to support and tax breaks for employment, production and general wealth creation.

I imagine choosing to be defined as a micro-agri, would secure inheritance tax exemption and avoid much of the red tape that would be required of the bigger concerns.

The one good thing in the Red Tractor review was to try and differentiate between business types and I can only believe that ELMS etc. would be much better if they considered them differently as well.

I could go on but I would love to hear your thoughts......
 
Location
Devon
An impossible task to define.

One more cow than me = agribusiness

One less = part timer

That's why I think it's up to you to define.

I think it would largely be down to choosing the package of tax breaks/ costs that would be best for your business rather than an 'emotional' decision.

Imagine agri-business retains red diesel but has to have tractor/ implement MOT's.

Micro-business doesn't have red diesel but is exempt from the MOT's.

That may be a crap example but demonstrates the sort of 'drift' between the 2.
 
Location
Devon
I don't see the need for yet further compartmentalisation and division, there's eleventy trendy new types of farming now as it is!

A fair point but with ever more rules being put in place, would it not be good to have a way in which they were administered more proportionately?

Often smaller businesses are discriminated against in terms of funding but have to meet the same costs to meet rules that are only necessary for controlling the larger businesses.
And the support for the larger businesses isn't as much as it should be because funds have to reserved in case smaller businesses claim.
 

Spud

Member
Arable Farmer
Location
YO62
A fair point but with ever more rules being put in place, would it not be good to have a way in which they were administered more proportionately?

Often smaller businesses are discriminated against in terms of funding but have to meet the same costs to meet rules that are only necessary for controlling the larger businesses.
And the support for the larger businesses isn't as much as it should be because funds have to reserved in case smaller businesses claim.
Funds generally are administered proportionately - bigger projects get more funding. I don't see how being an agribusiness or small holding makes that any difference.

Look at it like free school meals - if you have nowt, you get a lot of assistance.
If you have a lot you arguably don't need the assistance.
If you the poor sod in the middle just the wrong side of the line, you graft like hell and still have to fork out for everything.

Funding on the merits of the project, not the size of the business would be fairer to the funder and farm, regardless of type.
 

icanshootwell

Member
Location
Ross-on-wye
Funds generally are administered proportionately - bigger projects get more funding. I don't see how being an agribusiness or small holding makes that any difference.

Look at it like free school meals - if you have nowt, you get a lot of assistance.
If you have a lot you arguably don't need the assistance.
If you the poor sod in the middle just the wrong side of the line, you graft like hell and still have to fork out for everything.

Funding on the merits of the project, not the size of the business would be fairer to the funder and farm, regardless of type.
Not quite a fair comparison, a big farm with an AD plant gets paid twice, rhi money and paid for the crops that feeds it through sfp.
 

delilah

Member
A fair point but with ever more rules being put in place, would it not be good to have a way in which they were administered more proportionately?

Yeah. We get the rules changed.
We can't differentiate, because there is nothing wrong my side of the gate or yours, and to try and draw a line would suggest otherwise.
 

Spud

Member
Arable Farmer
Location
YO62
Not quite a fair comparison, a big farm with an AD plant gets paid twice, rhi money and paid for the crops that feeds it through sfp.
AD plant is usually separate industrial business, not farming, so a different entity. The feedstock is obvs agricultural, but there'll be no sfp in future
 

Sid

Member
Livestock Farmer
Location
South Molton
AD plant is usually separate industrial business, not farming, so a different entity. The feedstock is obvs agricultural, but there'll be no sfp in future
So when does the digestate magically become an agricultural product instead of a industrial one?

Local incident of digestate being spread on land used for a digester getting into the river was agricultural pollution not industrial pollution.

@Jackov Altraids
Like Pollard was out on farm last week promising to help keep small family farms.
These small family farms need to generate enough income to provide for 2 if not 3 families to live off of.

They can not be small to do that.
So would be 300 cow units. Is that a small business?

It doesn’t answer your question but muddies the water.
 

7610 super q

Member
Arable Farmer
I've been thinking this for a while. Reading on TFF the casual attitude to buying £100k tractors, the idea on elf n safety threads that we can just go off and spend £20k on a cherry picker, and the " Get it bought " tags when something expensive ( to my mind ) turns up on Facebook got me brainwashed into thinking I was a peasant who didn't deserve to exist.
Adam Henson's program on Chanel 5 made me realise that actually, there's plenty of famers on the breadline. Most definitely a 2 tier industry.
 
Location
Ceredigion
I've been thinking this for a while. Reading on TFF the casual attitude to buying £100k tractors, the idea on elf n safety threads that we can just go off and spend £20k on a cherry picker, and the " Get it bought " tags when something expensive ( to my mind ) turns up on Facebook got me brainwashed into thinking I was a peasant who didn't deserve to exist.
Adam Henson's program on Chanel 5 made me realise that actually, there's plenty of famers on the breadline. Most definitely a 2 tier industry.
It's the same in all walks of life ,always has been , be small be happy
 

Steevo

Member
Location
Gloucestershire
....... between an agri-business and small holdings/family farms?


I try to read a large portion of all that is written on TFF and I see a continuous and growing divide/ confusion between these types of farming.

The problems, needs and benefits are so often polar opposites between these types that regulations, grants and support for one can often be detrimental to the other.

As there is going to be a huge amount of change in the next few years, I wondered if now would be a good time for this difference to be acknowledged and catered for.


The main problem is trying to define which is which so my idea would be for everyone to choose to define themselves.

I imagine choosing to be defined as a agri-business would give access to support and tax breaks for employment, production and general wealth creation.

I imagine choosing to be defined as a micro-agri, would secure inheritance tax exemption and avoid much of the red tape that would be required of the bigger concerns.

The one good thing in the Red Tractor review was to try and differentiate between business types and I can only believe that ELMS etc. would be much better if they considered them differently as well.

I could go on but I would love to hear your thoughts......

Seems like an excellent observation to me! Acknowledging it to be as it is is a pretty big step......and then implementing it is the really tricky bit.

Perhaps the NFU could start up a different membership tier for family farm agriculture.....they could call it something like "Countryside membership"..... ;) :LOL:
 

holwellcourtfarm

Member
NFFN Member
Imagine agri-business retains red diesel but has to have tractor/ implement MOT's.

Micro-business doesn't have red diesel but is exempt from the MOT's.
How about agribusinesses allowed to use tractors that can exceed 40K and remove the 18.29T trailer weight limit (just keeping the 31T gross train weight) but subject to drivers hours limits and monitoring plus higher driver certification (sort of HGV Lite) alongside annual MOTs.

Micro- businesses limited to current tractor rules including 40k limit and 18.29T max trailer.

Might help with all the trailer overturns....
 

Turnip

Member
Although a good way of thinking about it my question would be what would we be relieved of as there is enough paperwork as it is and this distinction could increase that amount. Nice to introduce a distinction but getting rid of or simplifying the existing rules and regs might be more useful.
 

Update on the Sustainable Farming Incentive pilot

  • 96
  • 0
Update on the Sustainable Farming Incentive pilot

Written by Lisa Applin

Webp.net-resizeimage-3.jpg


In July, we opened the applications window for farmers to join our Sustainable Farming Incentive pilot.

The Sustainable Farming Incentive is 1 of the 3 new environmental land management schemes. It sits alongside the future Local Nature Recovery and Landscape Recovery schemes.

Through the Sustainable Farming Incentive, farmers will be paid for environmentally sustainable actions – ones that are simple to do and do not require previous agri-environment scheme experience.

We are piloting the scheme to...
Top