in response to:I’d be the first to admit that I don’t know everything, and you’ve got to realise that in this sort of situation each case has to be judged on its own merits, as such it will always be impossible to give a definitive answer. However, in the interests of full disclosure I must point out that I was in discussion ( along with many others ) with HMRC about the legal use of rebated fuel and would like to think that I had a much better comprehension of the subject than most.
To answer your points:-
1) As these discussions took eight years and I wasn’t paid by anyone to be in them I think it a little unfair to say that I don’t give a monkey’s.
2 and 3) Maintaining the land doesn’t qualify you to use red. There are numerous contractors that get paid to remove grass from parks, some of them actually make it into hay and sell it to the equestrian market but because they are being paid to clear the grass they are running on white. Just because you graze your ground with horses doesn’t make it agricultural, just the same as a tree surgeon isn’t classed as forestry.
4) As far as I’m aware, even long before I was in discussions with HMRC, it has always been illegal to use red diesel when keeping animals for sport or leisure.
5) Nobody said you were supplying the livery yard for leisure, we understand that that is your business. It’s not the point. The fact is that the horses are used for leisure. If you were keeping the horses for blood donation or meat that would be a different matter.
6) Laws only come about by one of three mechanisms, an act of parliament, a statutory instrument ( which basically better defines the act of parliament ) or case law. If you are so certain the you are right you are more than welcome to see if you can become the case law that defines the situation for everyone else. I suspect that it would cost you a small fortune as I doubt HMRC would take it lightly but I can assure you that we’ll watch the case with interest.
7) The rules don’t mention equine as such because as I have stated above you could legitimately be farming horses. For clarity it’s what you ( or your customers ) do with the horse that would or wouldn’t qualify the keeping them as agriculture.
I hope this information helps you. I don’t mind having a sensible discussion with you on here, but if you decide to be aggressive or abusive I will withdraw from the dialogue. Thanks
1. i never said you where paid to be in those discussions did i? and your initial response suggested you didn't give a monkeys! I do wonder how many equine where invited to all these talks, cant say i know of any round here? so what did they just select who they felt would say "yes sir no sir"?
2 and 3. well that barely makes sense, its not about what you think horses should be classified as or not classified as the FACT IS by the governments own admissions livestock description and agriculture is what it is defined as via their own ACTS that actually ARE law (well presumably at least!), and this statement is complete rubbish "Just because you graze your ground with horses doesn’t make it agricultural" ...why then when you sell or buy the property is it then legally classed as agricultural land? it appears to me some people just say what ever suits at the time it suits!
4. mmm never even heard of anything of the sort! so is there actual proof of law please? because the words "as far as I'm aware" is not proof of anything.
5. here's the funny thing, horses are kept till they die....when they die they have to be taken away ...which is then used FOR MEAT that is what you just said ...right? just they charge more these days to take them away, because of animal activism, trouble is that never changed anything, other than the price paid to get them taken away!
6 Laws are created by a government, but that government needs the consent of the governed, otherwise the only thing they are creating is corporate statute, which requires consent of two opposing parties signing agreements to make the legally binding, which is fine if you can fool people into believing something's law then conning them into a signature of agreement....corporations do that all the time... mmm anyway we may have left the EU, but we didn't leave United nations did we? and what's article 21 of the universal Declaration of human rights state again? ... trouble is these days the government are nothing but a corporation all with nice little dun and Bradstreet numbers, why would that be? because they are for profit and greed, yet people want to believe they are sovereign and for the people funny that? funnier than that is the part where extinction rebellion, David Icke HS2 and STOP HS2 are all part of the same you relaise even queeny has her properties listed under dun and bradstreet? (just to name a few), with their very own dun numbers...but hey... i could go on, but then we would be drift completely off point, i certainly will be at minimum be writing to HMRC and asking questions that's for sure!
7.fair enough, because there are or maybe other reasons some horse yards are accepted.
Finally i don't get aggressive, unless people purposely wind me up.... or misrepresent law! Hey now... there's a question, does the queens stables get to use red? does her yacht? HVO looks interesting i have to say!?! anyhow must fly!