Feldspar
Member
- Location
- Essex, Cambs and Suffolk
As per the title.
Smaller farmers should receive greater subsidy per ha than larger farmers - discuss.
- Thread starter Feldspar
- Start date
More to life
Member
- Location
- Somerset
I've said else's where use land grades,nowt for grade one then scale it up. It might need a tweak for the hill land but it should keep the whole of the U.K. farmed.
Feldspar
Member
- Location
- Essex, Cambs and Suffolk
I've no firm opinion on this, but just to play devil's advocate, if you look at company tax rates, is there a sliding corporation tax rate (or other type of tax / charge) which increases with the size of the business?
Feldspar
Member
- Location
- Essex, Cambs and Suffolk
Would you have a sliding rate for both land grade and amount of land owned? Both arguably give advantages.
Feldspar
Member
- Location
- Essex, Cambs and Suffolk
How do you think it should be tapered? No subsidy at all above a certain size?
That's very difficult , but imo the first 50ha should be heavily loaded , duckworth lewis will sort it.
More to life
Member
- Location
- Somerset
Me,not on size it's just to easy to fiddle infact I'd have a minimum size it must at least be a part time job on the land and not a pony paddock.
- Location
- South Wales UK
Most prob. If big farm did'nt get the 100k upward in AID
on paper the smaller farms are MORE profitable.
Sooner the subsidy system goes the better !
on paper the smaller farms are MORE profitable.
Sooner the subsidy system goes the better !
Feldspar
Member
- Location
- Essex, Cambs and Suffolk
That's very difficult , but imo the first 50ha should be heavily loaded , duckworth lewis will sort it.
How do the French differentiate between people gaming the system (i.e. splitting farms artificially) and a genuine need to fragment a business (i.e. father passes on to multiple members of the next generation)?
Thinking about natural justice, should four separate owners within the same family each owning 50ha be subsidised more than a family partnership of four with 200ha between them?
- Location
- South Wales UK
Where they is a scheme there is ALWAYS a schemer !
Because if they split it they pay MSA,french national insurance currently @44% for every exploitation ... however it's trés compliqué
Feldspar
Member
- Location
- Essex, Cambs and Suffolk
Hence your view that there shouldn't be any scheme at all.
Again, playing devil's advocate, some people would argue that bigger farms are more profitable. I'm more familiar with the arable side of things and there is a general trend in the figures I get from benchmarking from our accountant that the bigger farmers are more profitable per ha before subsidies. Do you think that pattern is not generally correct, or do you think it's different for mixed and livestock farmers, or different in different parts of the country?
Feldspar
Member
- Location
- Essex, Cambs and Suffolk
How should it work between big farmers and big landowners? Should the reduced subsidy at scale just be for bigger landowners rather than for bigger farmers? If it's just for bigger land owners, then a sliding scale won't necessarily stop more big farmers squeezing out smaller farmers?
I don't see the big farmers buying many hills ?
Feldspar
Member
- Location
- Essex, Cambs and Suffolk
So you think reduced support with increasing scale is better than basing it on geographical area or soil classification (i.e. marginal hill land gets more than the Fens)? I naively thought that you would just get big hill farmers pushing out smaller hill farmers, but from what you say maybe that wouldn't happen?
- Location
- South Wales UK
By means of scale big farmers absorb stuff easier.
The smaller cutting edge hand to mouth farms are effected more in volitility and are more exposed.
This cushion effect is a buffer and hence on paper with "aid "big farms LOOK good -its the nitty gritty -bare bone analysis you need to look at ?
The smaller cutting edge hand to mouth farms are effected more in volitility and are more exposed.
This cushion effect is a buffer and hence on paper with "aid "big farms LOOK good -its the nitty gritty -bare bone analysis you need to look at ?
Feldspar
Member
- Location
- Essex, Cambs and Suffolk
So do you mean that on average smaller farms are more profitable than bigger farms, but that their profitability varies more about that higher average through the years?