Family Business United has been active in challenging the revisions in the Autumn Budget given their impact on the family business sector, especially with regards the changes to Agricultural Property Relief and Business Property Relief. We are keen to continue to amplify the family business voice and to quantify the impact and the challenges the changes are creating. To that end, please share your thoughts in the survey below. Your opinion matters as we need to show those with the power to review and consult on the changes that the current plans are causing significant issues. Paul Andrews, Founder and CEO of Family Business United adds, "Family businesses are at the heart of the national economy, providing employment, generating incomes, paying taxes, creating wealth and supporting the communities in which they operate, building sustainable family firms for generations to come and the Budget is creating real concerns in businesses the length and breadth of the nation." "We want to quantify the impact and demonstrate the risks in order to amplify the family business voice and to continue to push for change. Family business matters and the collective family business voice needs to be heard." The survey will take around 5 minutes to complete and we appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts with us. All responses are confidential and we will publish the results in an aggregated format to preserve confidentiality and your details will not be shared.

Succession planning has always been a difficult topic for many due to the need to confront issues around death and the loss of someone special who has passed. But as the saying goes, ‘there is nothing more certain than death and taxes,’ and the proposed Budget has put the spotlight firmly on family businesses and in particular, Inheritance Tax on the passing of shares from one generation to the next. Ownership succession and the implications are now firmly on the family business agenda and for many family business owners, consideration as to the timing and implications of the transfer of shares to the next generation is more important than ever before. Family business leaders see themselves as custodians and stewards of their businesses for future generations, investing in the business for the long term, employing significant numbers of people, paying taxes and seeking to do business the right way, full of pride, passion and purpose. The recent changes to Business Property Relief in the Autumn Budget, 2024 changes the rules that have previously enabled transfers of shares on the death of the shareholder in a family business to be exempt from Inheritance Tax. With effect from April 6th, 2026 the rules will change, removing the full exemption, meaning the estates of a deceased could be liable for significant IHT liabilities as a result. As Paul Andrews, Founder & CEO of Family Business United explains, "Planning has never been more important and we have created this report to outline the changes and provide information to enable conversations to be started and to enable families in business to work and make decisions together." "Conversations are now more important than ever and the report covers the situation as it was, the rules as we know them today, and some of the ways that any inheritance tax liability may be settled, together with insights into tax planning which may enable shares in a family business to be passed down to the next generation in a more effective manner." "The rules have changed going forward and this report should provide a good starting point for conversations. Obviously, each family and family business is different and professional advice should be sought prior to any decisions being made but we hope that the report provides information and insight to allow conversations to take place. Time really is of the essence." A copy of the final report is available to download here:

The Impact of Proposed Tax Changes Following the government’s costly partial reversal of its welfare reforms, Family Business United urges officials to abandon plans to change inheritance tax relief for family businesses. The organization emphasizes the importance of listening to voices within the family business community to drive the growth agenda. A recent survey by the CBI and Family Business United Kingdom (FBUK) revealed a concerning trend. Proposed cuts to inheritance tax relief for farmers and family-run businesses might backfire. This could lead to a significant drop in Treasury revenue. The report estimates that this policy could result in over 200,000 job losses during this parliamentary term. Additionally, it could create a £1.9 billion net loss to the Treasury and a staggering £14.9 billion in lost economic activity. A Clear Message from Family Business Leaders Paul Andrews, Founder and CEO of Family Business United, has made his views clear. He states, "The Government, through the action of the Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, now faces the challenge of funding the government's U-turn on welfare." The Straightforward Solution "There is clearly a straightforward solution—stop penalising family farms and family businesses by abandoning the proposals. This change will allow family businesses in all sectors to pursue their growth agenda." Andrews further explains, "The result would be the sector employing more people, investing in their infrastructure, and generating more tax revenue—rather than cutting back and searching for ways to fund future inheritance tax liabilities." The Financial Implications “As it stands, the proposed inheritance tax changes won’t raise any revenue; they’ll cost £1.9 billion and jeopardise 200,000 jobs.” He emphasizes that "it’s a policy the Chancellor simply cannot afford to pursue." A strong recommendation is made: consultation with family businesses is essential. Only through such dialogue can a growth agenda that delivers positive outcomes for the economy be established. The Vital Role of Family Businesses Family businesses serve as the engine room of the national economy. They significantly contribute to wealth creation, provide employment, and generate income. Additionally, their impact on communities throughout the nation is remarkable. These businesses already pay substantial amounts in taxes, adding to their importance. Family Business United encourages all family businesses to speak up about the proposed changes. It is crucial that they contact their local MP to make them aware of the potential repercussions. Furthermore, Paul shares a thought from Alexandra Depledge, MBE, who is the Entrepreneurship Adviser to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Insights from Alexandra Depledge "In her own words - 'I love taking risks. Usually, the bigger the better, but this new role is unprecedented even for me... our community is strong, it has heart, and most importantly it offers solutions better than any other I know. So my ask is this…'" "If you have a good idea, a way of unblocking what’s standing in your way of building a fast-growing business, or a lens you think I should be looking at entrepreneurship through, then let’s hear it. I don’t need to know what’s wrong. I need to understand how to fix it." You can review the full post here . In her post, Depledge provides her email address, inviting input from the business community: Alex.Depledge@hmtreasury.gov.uk. She encourages everyone to share ways to create a better environment for family firms. Particularly, the removal of Agricultural Property Relief (APR) and Business Property Relief (BPR) could incentivize further investment and growth. Amplifying the Voices of Family Businesses "We have seen several U-turns on matters including the Winter Fuel Payments and now with the Welfare Reforms." Andrews asserts that MPs are rightly expressing concern over some of the changes occurring in their constituencies. It is essential to keep the messages and concerns for the family business sector on the agenda. A Call for Action As Paul concludes: "We need to continue to amplify the voice of the family business sector to drive change and encourage consultation. This approach is vital for making a difference and enabling a focus on the future growth and contribution of family firms to the UK economy." This urgency cannot be overstated. Preserving inheritance tax relief is not just about financial figures; it is about the lives it affects, the jobs it sustains, and the community it nurtures. Together, let us make our voices heard and safeguard the future of family businesses across the UK.

A national survey commissioned by UK law firm Brodies LLP has revealed that UK residents aged 50 and over are underprepared for the upcoming changes to inheritance tax (IHT), with only 26% fully understanding how the new rules will impact their wealth transfer plans. The representative YouGov survey of 2,001 adults highlights concerning gaps in estate planning and family communication, raising alarms about the risks of inadequate succession strategies in the wake of the new IHT rules. Key Findings: Lack of awareness – More than half (54%) of respondents are aware of upcoming IHT changes but do not fully understand their personal implications. A further 20% were completely unaware of the reforms; Limited family discussions – 58% of respondents have never discussed inheritance plans with family or beneficiaries, potentially leaving loved ones unprepared; Lack of formal planning – Less than half (41%) have a formal estate plan in place, and only 16% have sought professional advice on tax or succession planning; Fairness concerns and disputes – 28% worry about ensuring fairness among heirs, while 23% fear family disputes or relationship breakdowns due to inheritance issues. The upcoming IHT reforms—set to be introduced in phases beginning in 2025—will significantly impact business and agricultural assets, pensions, and domicile status. One of the most notable changes is the reduction of Agricultural and Business Property Relief, meaning only the first £1 million of qualifying assets will be exempt from inheritance tax. The remainder will now face an effective 20% tax rate—a shift that could heavily impact business owners and farmers. “These reforms demand urgent action from individuals and families to review succession plans,” said Mark Stewart, partner at Brodies LLP. “Too many people are unaware of the tax implications, and without early estate planning, they risk unnecessary financial loss and legal complications.” The survey results show that while the majority (69%) believe it is important to discuss wealth and inheritance planning with family before death, the reality suggests these conversations are not happening. The reluctance to seek advice is also evident—despite the complexity of new tax laws, only 16% have already consulted professionals, such as lawyers or wealth experts, and nearly half (47%) either prefer to manage it themselves or see no need for external expertise. “Effective estate planning requires more than just good intentions,” continued Mark. “We encourage families to speak openly about inheritance, seek professional guidance, and structure wealth transfer effectively to avoid future disputes and tax inefficiencies.” Download and read the full report here Check out their podcast on the report here

As the draft legislation for the Finance Bill is laid out, the NFU is urging the government to look at its alternative ‘clawback’ solution to the family farm tax to prevent farmers – the food producers of this country – becoming collateral damage from the planned reforms. The government has outlined plans to hold a technical consultation on the draft legislation, including on inheritance tax, to ensure it ‘works as intended’. This is a common process in the development of a Finance Bill, but given the appalling consequences of this legislation, the NFU will be holding the government to account on every element of this policy. The NFU has repeatedly provided evidence that the current policy does not achieve the government’s intentions of closing a loophole, protecting family farms, or generating as much revenue as it should. Nor do we agree that it is ‘not expected to have a material impact on food security’. On the other hand, the NFU’s ‘clawback’ solution would allow the Treasury to raise the revenue it seeks without tearing apart farming families or jeopardising domestic food production. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has previously said: “If somebody makes powerful representations, then my instinct is to consider what’s being said. Getting it right is more important than ploughing on with a package which doesn’t necessarily achieve the desired outcome.” The NFU agrees, and they are far from alone. Since the Budget in November 2024, swathes of MPs from all parties, including members of the government’s own back benches, alongside county councils4, farming and business organisations, the food supply chain and over a quarter of a million members of the British public have joined the call to stop the family farm tax. Even the Office for Budget Responsibility and the government’s own Efra Committee have highlighted the impact these reforms will have on vulnerable elderly farmers. Throughout the summer, NFU members have also made their voices heard. At county shows across the country, thousands of letters and postcards were collected from farmers and the public to be sent directly to MPs – each sharing personal stories of how this tax will devastate their family farms. NFU President Tom Bradshaw said: “At the heart of this battle are the elderly farmers who have devoted their entire lives to growing food for the country and supporting their rural communities. They should not become collateral damage. To see them face such uncertainty, knowing the legacy they and their families have worked hard for and grown could be ripped away by this tax, is heartbreaking. I cannot begin to imagine the fear many must be feeling right now – their homes, their livelihoods and everything they’ve worked for is under threat." “I have spoken directly to the Prime Minister and Treasury Exchequer Secretary James Murray about the disastrous impact of this tax. Yet, despite our persistent efforts, Chancellor Rachel Reeves still refuses to meet us to discuss our alternative ‘clawback’ proposal. The Treasury claims our solution will raise less revenue, but is refusing to release the modelling on how it came to this conclusion." “I echo the Prime Minister’s own words: getting this right is more important than pushing ahead with a policy that does not achieve its intentions." “Farmers, supermarkets, councils, MPs across the political spectrum and the wider public have all voiced their concerns about this tax. This issue goes far beyond farming. The food and farming sector supports millions of jobs, fuels our domestic food supply and contributes billions to the UK economy. When you undermine farm businesses, you undermine a vital part of our national infrastructure. If this legislation goes ahead, it will unquestionably have devastating and irreversible impacts on the country and it is so poorly designed that it will inevitably have to be changed in the future." “I want to thank every one of our members who took the time to write postcards and letters to their MPs over the summer – your voices are vital. We continue to urge all farmers and the public to make their representations directly to their MPs to show first-hand the impact of this damaging tax." “The Prime Minister must now take his own advice and listen to the overwhelming evidence that the current policy will not work as intended. To ignore the consequences this tax will bring would be a betrayal of the very people who feed our nation. We cannot stand by and watch the backbone of the countryside be broken when there is a credible alternative being offered." “This is a moment that demands listening, compassion and action. The government needs to sit down with farming representatives to find a solution that protects the future of our domestic food production – before it is too late.”

A family business is more than work—it's a passion passed down, a shared dream, and a bond that grows stronger with each and every generation, each one seeking to pass the business on to the next generation in a better condition than the one they inherited.  In fact, family businesses are the engine room of the national economy, with around 5 million family firms employing around 14 million people.  They can be found in all corners of the country and in virtually every sector of the economy, providing significant employment, creating wealth, generating income, paying taxes and supporting the communities in which they operate.  Family businesses, much like farming families, see themselves as custodians for future generations, innovating, investing and continuing to do what they do with a passion, determination and entrepreneurial spirit that transcends generations, making them part of the fabric of the communities where they are based.  Their impact goes beyond the economic too as they give back in so many ways, raising funds for the local hospice, clearing rivers and beaches, sponsoring local sports teams and theatre groups and so much more besides. Family firms also take a long-term view, often thinking in terms of generations and certainly not short-term financial returns or quarterly reporting to meet the demands of their shareholders.  Continued evolution of the business, investment and good governance enables them to prosper through generations creating great British businesses that collectively make a difference too.  Family generate significant revenues for the UK economy, amassing turnover in excess of £1.7 trillion and these businesses pay their way in taxes to the Exchequer too.  Investing and building sustainable businesses is good for the local, regional and national economy and the contribution of family businesses should not be underestimated. In many cases, continued investment and long-term plans for growth means that these businesses are asset rich and cash poor, and the recent changes to Business Property Relief (‘BPR’) and Agricultural Property Relief (‘APR’) are causing serious concerns in a sector that is always looking forward.  The proposed changes, which seek to raise an estimated £500 million per year, may appear fiscally prudent on the surface but will ultimately cause irreparable harm to family businesses, farms and the UK economy as a whole. Since being introduced by Labour’s Jim Callaghan in 1976, BPR has given family businesses the confidence and certainty to take the long-term view, to invest profits back into the business, employ more people, innovate and develop sustainable practices to improve productivity and growth, and at the same time enabling them to support the communities in which they operate. BPR has allowed family businesses to grow and to stay within the family and this has in turn allowed them to confidently plan for the future in the knowledge that they can pass on the ownership of the business to the next generation without them facing significant tax charges upon each transition. Without vast cash reserves or liquid assets at their disposal to cover an enormous inheritance tax bill, many will need to sell parts, or all the business, potentially to an overseas or corporate buyer who will not have the same interest in their long-term objectives, their purpose and passion for what they do, nor their people, their community, local jobs, or growth.  Rather than stimulate growth, the proposed changes are likely to have the opposite effect as family firms are forced to rethink plans, curtail investment and find ways to finance the inheritance on each transition, something that may ultimately result in businesses being sold, broken up or reducing in size in each subsequent generation. As custodians of their businesses for future generations, family business owners are not seeking to transfer wealth on paper to subsequent generations but to pass on thriving businesses which can continue the legacy of generations that have gone before, secure in the knowledge that the business will continue with a purpose, continuing to grow and invest, provide job security and more employment opportunities and to continue to contribute significantly to the UK economy.  Reinstating BPR would be a positive measure to provide family business owners with more certainty and clarity about the future too. As Paul Andrews, Founder and CEO of Family Business United explains, “Family businesses instinctively want to do business the right way, planning for the long-term and in many cases, for generations to come." "BPR provided that security to continue to do so, in the knowledge that they were building sustainable businesses for the future generations of us all, not just the family.” Andrew Hinds, Chairman of F Hinds, the family-owned retail jeweller with 130 stores across Britain that was established in 1856 adds: “Family owners often extract less from their companies annually than those with external shareholders who demand higher returns. This leaves more funds for growth and to protect the business in tough times, both of which are good for the economy, but also means that family owners often have most of their assets in the business and don't have a big pot of cash sitting there ready to pay IHT.” “This will force family business owners to behave in a way that is damaging both for their businesses and the wider economy as they will need to: Reduce investment as they are forced to extract cash to set aside, or to bear additional costs such as Life Insurance, simply to cover IHT; Pass on shares to children before they would have wanted to, with the risks that the children don’t inherit the necessary sense of responsibility and/or that the parents experience financial hardship as a result; Sell the family business, often a multi-generational one, rather than risking being forced to do so at the wrong time in the event on an untimely death.” “Family businesses have a record of being decent employers who care for their employees, suppliers, customers, local communities and wider society." "They plan prudently within their means for the long term and are sources of knowledge and wisdom acquired over decades, as the average length of service in family businesses is far longer than in the corporate world.  They are almost always domiciled in the UK and pay their fair share of taxes year after year.“ As Andrew concludes, “British family businesses are good businesses.  Once they have been sold, they are changed forever and we lose a valued part of our economy and society.  This is a tax on those who have the misfortune to die young. It’s accepted that it’s not wrong in principle to pass on a family business free of IHT, with members of the Government advising people to seek advice and make plans to avoid it, so why is it right for the government to behave penally in the most unfortunate circumstances of all?” Michael Brundle, Managing Director of F. H. Brundle, the UK's leading stockists of metal and steel products, a family business established in 1889 adds: “These changes will have a devastating impact on the business. It means that on the death of the director, the IHT liability will be so large that the family will be forced to either sell the business, sell vital assets, or borrow huge sums of money to fund the tax liability.” “Upon the announcement of this policy, we have stopped investment. In recent weeks we have had the opportunity to continue our expansion plans, but now have decided to not commit and wait to see what happens." "Why would we want to build liabilities? If all businesses affected take this approach, the economy will decline very quickly.” Steve Perez, Founder and Chairman of Global Brands Ltd & owner of Derbyshire's top 4 star independent Hotel, CASA and the Peak Edge Hotel shares Michael's thoughts. "Our family business is private, not corporate. This means we focus on long-term growth rather than short-term pay-outs for shareholders. It’s about building something sustainable for the future, not just the next quarter.” “This change to BPR is a tax on business and, by extension, a tax on job security. Family businesses are often the backbone of their communities, supporting local charities and events. For instance, during COVID, our hotel opened its doors to the NHS, providing R&R for doctors and nurses and serving as a vaccine centre. Such contributions could be at risk if we’re forced to divert funds to cover new tax burdens or if we are bought out by the corporates," continues Steve. “We’ve had to scale back investments to prepare for the inheritance tax that will hit when I pass away. Instead of reinvesting profits into growth and jobs, we’re building a nest egg to pay this tax. I’ve even had to take out life insurance, which is yet another cost that could have gone back into the business.” "As a family business, we reinvest in our businesses, which means investing in jobs and growth. This is what drives local economies. Going forward it seems likely that Banks will hesitate to lend to family businesses knowing they could lose 20% of their value when the owner dies. Even younger business owners will be forced to take out life insurance policies, draining resources that could otherwise fuel growth and innovation," adds Steve. Kate Nicholls OBE and CEO of UK Hospitality continues, "Like so many SMEs, a large number of hospitality businesses will be family businesses, passed down from generation to generation - particularly those in coastal and rural destinations. The existing tax regime has allowed them to do this, providing the stability to continuously invest in their people, their businesses and their future. But it also means that they can invest in the health of their communities - their local supply chain from farm to fork and the wider tourism ecosystem." "A change in tax policy with little notice and no consultation coming on top of a £3.4 billion tax hike from changes to NIC threatens to undermine all of this." Stephen Montgomery, Director of the Scottish Hospitality Group who count numerous family businesses amongst their members continues, "The new changes to BPR for our farming community will have devastating consequences to the families of these long standing businesses." "It will of course have a wider impact on those who rely on farm produce. No more so than our hospitality businesses who have again been hit hardest after the UK budget, with the introduction of the higher NICs increases next year." "Let us be very clear about this, in that any increases which our farming community need to pass on to suppliers, will always drop down the chain, which means the cost for hospitality businesses will again be hit. Hospitality businesses cannot just continually raise prices, as this makes it unaffordable for our consumers. Government must not continue to take the hospitality sector for granted," concludes Stephen. As Paul Andrews concludes: “As custodians or stewards of these businesses, family businesses are not looking to sell and realise the capital value of the business but looking to pass the business on to the next generation to continue the model of entrepreneurship. As such, BPR historically has been a way to stimulate growth, investment and future profits, which again feed into the local, regional and national economy." "To that end, BPR should be seen as a driver of economic growth and an asset in retaining the significant contribution family firms make today, and hopefully will continue to do so for generations to come, rather than businesses now finding themselves in a situation where the benefits of BPR have been significantly removed which creates uncertainty, additional costs and the opposite to the growth agenda that the Government is seeking.”

Perhaps the biggest surprise in the Budget was the extent of the restrictions imposed on two valuable inheritance tax reliefs, being Agricultural Property Relief (APR) and Business Property Relief (BPR). Is this the end of the road for BPR and APR? Accountants from Rickard Luckin share their thoughts. What Changes Were Made To BPR And APR In The Budget? The 'Current Rules' Until 30 October, anyone holding an asset on death, or who had given one away in the seven years before death, or to a trust, would not suffer an Inheritance Tax liability (IHT) if the asset fully qualified for 100% BPR or 100% APR (assuming the clawback rules did not apply in respect of gifted assets). 100% relief applies to most agricultural assets and to most business interests, including shares held for at least two years in a private company that was wholly or mainly a trading company/group. There was no cap on the amount of relief that could be claimed. The ‘New Rules’ From 6 April 2026, a new £1M combined APR and BPR allowance will be introduced, whereby 100% relief will only be available for the first £1M of qualifying assets. Any qualifying assets in excess of this allowance will be taxed at an effective rate of 20% (being half the normal 40% IHT rate). The tax can be paid in instalments over 10 years, but we expect it’s likely that interest will be charged if the instalment payment is late. The £1M allowance applies per person, so a married couple could potentially have a combined allowance of £2M. Added to this, both spouses will have their ordinary ‘nil rate bands’ of £325K each and, potentially, a further 'residence nil rate band’ of £175K each (provided that the conditions are met), giving them total combined allowances of up to £3M to set against their IHT estate (albeit for estates above £2M, there is a reduction in the residence nil rate band that can be claimed). Do The ‘Current Rules’ Still Apply Between Now And 5 April 2026? In theory yes, but there is a sting in the tail. For any gifts made between 30 October 2024 and 5 April 2026, the 'current rules' will apply at the time the gift is made. So, if a gift is made to a trust (a ‘chargeable lifetime transfer’) in this period, then no IHT will arise at that point if the assets fully qualify. But if the donor dies within seven years of the gift and after 5 April 2026, the ‘new rules’ will apply to that gift and to any assets held on death. However, if the donor dies by 5 April 2026, the current rules will continue to apply to both the gift and to assets held on death. Do The 'New Rules' Affect Gifts Made Before The Budget? No. The changes were not retrospective. The ‘clawback rules’ still need to be considered though, so for example, if the transferor dies within seven years and at that time the transferee no longer owns the asset, then BPR/APR may not be available. What Tax Planning Can Be Carried Out? Hold On To It? Holding on to qualifying assets worth around £1M until death could enable them to be passed on in a tax efficient way. This is because assets held on death are 'rebased’ to market value, which effectively wipes out the capital gain on the asset. So if a business is worth around £1M, the beneficiary would inherit it IHT free and could potentially sell it soon afterwards without suffering Capital Gains Tax (CGT) either. Any qualifying assets retained in the estate above the £1M allowance would be charged to IHT at 20%, and the beneficiary would inherit at market value. With the top CGT rate being 24%, if the beneficiary is planning to sell and, if original acquisition costs were very low, it may be tax effective to pass on those assets at death rather than by means of a lifetime gift. As the allowance isn’t expected to be transferable between spouses, wills would need to be revisited to ensure that this is not lost on first death (and, potentially, to prioritise the spousal exemption on the first death, even for business and agricultural property, where appropriate). There may also be a need to rebalance the assets between spouses to ensure both are able to fully use their £1M allowance. Give It To Family Members? For those with qualifying assets over the £1M allowance, gifting may seem like an attractive option. But when making a gift, both CGT (on the uplift in value of the asset since acquisition) and IHT charges could potentially apply. For gifts of ‘trading’ assets to individuals, a ‘S165 holdover’ election can potentially be made so that no CGT arises at the time of the gift. However, it is not possible to holdover investment gains, and so, for example, if shares are given away in a company that is ‘mainly trading’ but also has investment assets, a CGT charge is likely to arise on the proportion relating to the investment. For IHT purposes, no IHT will arise if the donor dies more than seven years after the gift. But if they die within seven years and the gift exceeds their allowances, IHT will become due (with the IHT rate decreasing gradually each year once they have survived three years by virtue of “taper relief”). Therefore, those with qualifying assets over the £1M allowance could consider gifting earlier than they may have originally intended in order to start the seven-year IHT clock. This will be particularly attractive where S165 holdover relief applies because neither CGT nor IHT will be payable at that point. Give It To A Trust? For gifts to trusts, a different type of CGT holdover election can be made (S260), which enables both investment and trading assets to be gifted without a CGT charge. But if the asset given to the trust does not fully qualify for an IHT relief, IHT will be payable (at 20%, with a further 20% payable if they die within seven years). As gifts between now and April 2026 should still get 100% APR/BPR at the point of transfer, considering gifts into trusts is imperative during this window because this can still potentially be done without suffering either IHT or CGT. Provided the donor survives seven years (or dies before 6 April 2026), no IHT will become due on the gift, and no CGT will be payable either. Use A Corporate Structure? The Balfour case established that assets that would not qualify for BPR in their own right could potentially qualify if they form part of a business that is 'mainly trading.’ This remains a tax effective way of shielding investment assets from IHT, even where the £1M allowance is exceeded, albeit that post April 2026 this would give a 50% IHT saving rather than a full one. Using a corporate structure to hold the assets can be a clean way of achieving this, particularly if the shares are then given into trust before April 2026 to ‘bank’ 100% BPR whilst it is still available. In such cases, an existing dormant company could prove useful for this purpose to ensure the two-year ownership test is met. Having a company in place also potentially enables minority interest discounts to be applied when looking at share values and may prove helpful when looking at values for the new £1M allowance. Using a company would also enable business owners to give away ‘growth shares’ to their descendants so that the increase in value of the company falls outside their IHT estate. There will normally be some value in that gift, but this is likely to be substantially less than a gift of ordinary shares, and so it can be a tax efficient way of passing on wealth. Sell? As the CGT increases announced in the Budget were not as bad as envisaged, bearing in mind the new BPR/APR restrictions and the phasing out of the 10% ’BADR’ CGT rate for trading assets from April 2025, this will undoubtedly persuade some family businesses to consider selling sooner than perhaps originally planned. Summary Whilst claiming 100% BPR/APR relief will undoubtedly be more challenging in the future, there are still actions that can be taken to maximise the allowances available and mitigate IHT liabilities, and particularly so in the period between now and April 2026. Please note that at the time of writing we are awaiting the legislation to be issued. If you have any questions about the above or would like more information specific to your circumstances, please get in touch with the team at Rickard Luckin

It is a while since we shared an update on the ongoing changes/lobbying activities with regards the changes announced in the last Budget and we have been asked for an update so here we go.  We continue to speak to as many people as possible to share the family business perspective and impact of the changes to inheritance tax rules and in particular APR and BPR but sadly we are not in a position to offer much in the way of positivity at this moment in time.  Sorry. The farming community continue to make lots of noise and plan more activity but they too cannot reveal any major changes to date. That said, the family business community needs to continue to make its voice heard otherwise the fear is that it will be assumed that there is acceptance of the changes and they could remain, irrespective of which party is in power, and there remains a belief amongst many that the issue is a 'Family Farm Tax' issue and does not affect the broader family business community which is clearly the case. We continue to write letters, emails and have conversations and there are ongoing activities that you may wish to be involved with as outlined below: Letter to the Chancellor Many of you forwarded your names and consent to sign a letter from the family business community, co-ordinated by GAP Group and supported by Family Business United, which ended up with over 200 signatures and this has now been submitted to the Chancellor.  Details can be found here Judicial Review A group of family farmers and family business owners have filed for a Judicial Review against the proposed changes to inheritance tax.  The lead claimant is Tom Martin, a sixth-generation farmer near Peterborough.  He is joined in the claim by his father, George Martin, and a representative association, formed by and for farmers and family-owned businesses who rely on APR/BPR to preserve business continuity, ensure food security, and sustain the UK’s rural economy and family businesses which form the backbone of the UK's economy.  Law firm Collyer Bristow LLP have conduct of the claim, with representation from leading counsel, Aparna Nathan KC. This Judicial Review is based on four principal grounds: Breach of Duty to Consult : The Treasury is under a public law duty to consult before major tax reforms and a failure to do so may be unlawful. Breach of Legitimate Expectation : Repeated Government policy documents have promised consultation. A failure to follow through once taxpayers have place reliance on a promise to their detriment may be held to be unlawful. Failure to follow Policy :  The failure by a public body to follow a policy that it has lawfully created is unlawful.  The Government’s failure to follow its own policy to consult on major tax changes is said by the Claimants to be unlawful. Breach of Principle of Legality (fairness) : The duty to act fairly is an important duty imposed upon any public body. The lack of transparency, absence of impact assessments, and disregard for sector-specific vulnerability (e.g., tenant farmers, elderly landowners) breaches the principle of legality. This case is strengthened by the EFRA Select Committee’s recent findings, which expressly called for consultation and highlighted the risks to family farms and rural resilience. A crowdfunding campaign has been set up and you can find out more about the campaign and donate or share the link to support it here We are in touch with the family business owners who are actively involved in the campaign so if you would like to speak to them directly to find out more about the campaign and getting involved please do get in touch and we will be happy to make the introduction. Pension Petition We have also been made aware of a pension petition that is now being conducted.  The Government are introducing inheritance tax to pension funds & death benefits from April 2027. When you die this may now result in a disproportionate and unfair double taxation on beneficiaries (income tax and inheritance tax) which we think results in a disincentive to funding a pension. The petition seeks to force a debate on the issue with the aim of stopping the double tax (IHT & Income Tax) of pension funds & death benefits.  Once 10,000 signatures are reached the Government has to respond and 100,000 signatures would see it considered for debate in Parliament.  You can find out more and sign the petition here Our Own Family Business Survey In order for us to continue to write about the challenges associated with family businesses and the family business agenda we need data and statistics.  To that end, our 2025 family business survey is short and to the point and should take less than 5 minutes to complete with a question about what you would like the Government to consider changing.  Obviously we know some of the answers but statistics in a survey provide evidence to create banners and write content to continue to amplify the voice and raise awareness of the challenges. If you have not done so already, please complete the short survey, and encourage others to do so here Politicians We know from the event at the London Palladium in December where I was co-hosting The BPR Summit with Olly Harrison and the farmers that Kemi Badenoch agreed that the Conservatives would reverse the APR and BPR tax changes should they get back in to power but we are yet to find out if the other major parties will do the same so keeping pressure on local MP's is important. New Business Minister With the recent Cabinet reshuffle there have been changes to both the Business Secretary and the Farming Secretary. From a family business perspective it is important to raise awareness of the issues with the newly appointed Rt Hon Peter Kyle MP who is the new Secretary of State for Business. Resend any letters previously sent to the Minister in order to keep the issues around APR and BPR firmly on the agenda. MP's We have spoken recently to a former MP who shared his thoughts on continuing to make noise and shared the following recommendation.  Everyone opposed to these changes should use https://findyourmp.parliament.uk  and enter every postcode they are linked to like the postcode of their home and business address and any depots/business locations beyond head/registered office.   We know that many of you have contacted your MP but if they have yet to respond, do so again and continue to do so until they respond. Wherever the MP comes up as Labour e-mail the MP and politely request to meet them – if your home MP request to meet at their next constituency advice surgery and if they’re the MP for a business postcode request to meet at the premises of your business in their constituency.  Meeting Labour MPs is the chance to tell them that this is a massive mistake and to urge them to lobby Starmer and Reeves to reverse the appalling decisions they have made given the devastating impact that the changes will have as quantified in the CBI report published earlier this year.  The more the local MP is concerned about the impact on their own constituency and the noise within it, and fear of losing voters at the next election, the more they may lobby for change.   CBI Findings: The study conducted by independent consultancy CBI-Economics, is the largest study yet into how the family business and farming sectors will respond to measures announced in the Budget. More than 4,000 businesses and farms across the UK took part in the research. The findings reveal that more than half (55%) of family-owned businesses and just below half (49%) of family farms have paused or cancelled planned investments since the budget and will continue to cut both investment and jobs before April 2026 when the changes to BPR and APR come into force. In total, the research finds that the changes to BPR and APR will result in more than 208,000 jobs being lost  by the end of the Parliament and GVA (a measure of economic value) being reduced by £14.9 billion. Taken together the loss of jobs and GVA directly from the activities of family businesses and farms, their employees and their supply chains, will produce a net fiscal loss to the Government of £1.9 billion by the end of the Parliament. If you are aware of any other activities that we should support or provide details to members to make them aware please do let us know.  We continue to do our best to represent and promote the sector but I think it is fair to say that "few people of decision making authority or responsibility seem to want to consult or listen at the moment" but it is important that we continue to raise the family business flag and do all we can to challenge the decisions, and  support the sector where possible too.

Emma Gross, Employment partner at law firm Spencer West LLP s ays: “The current situation involving employees who are stranded in the Middle East raises a number of important employment law and HR considerations. Employers will need to approach matters carefully, balancing legal obligations with operational realities and employee welfare." "The starting point is whether the employee is able to continue working remotely. If the employee can carry out their duties from abroad and is ready and willing to work, they should ordinarily continue to receive their normal pay. An employee who is prepared to work but prevented from physically returning due to circumstances outside their control will generally remain entitled to pay, subject to the terms of their contract." "Where the employee is unable to work at all, the position becomes more complex. Much will depend on the contractual terms and any applicable policies. In many cases, there is no express contractual right permitting an employer to withhold pay where the absence is involuntary and caused by external events (for example, airspace closures or conflict). Any unilateral decision to suspend pay could expose the employer to claims for unlawful deduction from wages or breach of contract." Employers should therefore consider practical and lawful alternatives, such as: Agreeing a temporary period of paid leave; Requiring or permitting the employee to take annual leave (subject to statutory notice requirements); Agreeing unpaid leave by mutual consent; or Considering whether any other form of leave under company policy may apply. "Each case will turn on its facts, including the reason for the employee being abroad, whether the travel was business-related or personal, and whether the employer required or authorised the travel." "Where the employee was travelling for work, additional considerations arise. Employers owe a duty of care to employees on business travel, which includes taking reasonable steps to safeguard their health and safety. In higher-risk regions, this may extend to maintaining regular contact, monitoring Foreign Office guidance, assisting with evacuation arrangements where appropriate, and ensuring suitable insurance and support mechanisms are in place." "Even where the travel was personal, employers should remain mindful of the implied duty of mutual trust and confidence. A rigid or punitive approach in circumstances involving conflict or emergency may carry employee relations and reputational risks, as well as potential legal exposure." There may also be practical HR considerations, including: Business continuity planning; Immigration implications if employees are stranded outside the UK for extended periods; Data protection and confidentiality risks if employees are working remotely from unfamiliar environments; Consistency of approach across the workforce to avoid grievances or discrimination allegations. "In short, employers should prioritise clear communication, consistency, and documented decision-making. Policies on business travel, emergency response, and remote working should be reviewed as a matter of urgency where necessary. Legal advice should be sought before taking any steps that could affect pay, employment status, or disciplinary action." "A measured and pragmatic response will be essential in navigating what is, ultimately, an evolving and fact-sensitive situation.”

An industry report by leading I&L property company Potter Space, in partnership with Savills, has revealed the scale of a decade of undersupply of sub-100k sq ft I&L space, also referred to as small to mid-box. Small to mid-box accounts for 95% of I&L units. However, occupiers are still struggling to find space as the undersupply is failing to meet resilient demand. At a national level, from 2014 to 2024, demand has been suppressed by 35%. This means that had it been available, businesses would have taken 35% more space to meet their needs, equating to 60 million sq ft, over the last decade. It is estimated that meeting this demand could have facilitated 48,000 jobs and £3.3bn of Gross Value Added (GVA) to the economy. The BIG Things in SMALL Boxes report is authored by Potter Space in partnership with Savills. It identifies essential steps to support the small to mid-box sector and calls on the Government to recognise sub-100k sq ft I&L properties as essential economic infrastructure in its growth strategies and proposed planning reforms. Jason Rockett, MD of Potter Space, said: “It is encouraging to see the Government acknowledge I&L as an integral part of the economy through the Modern Industrial Strategy and the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)." “However, as our latest BIG Things in SMALL Boxes research clearly demonstrates, the Government is missing a trick if it does not recognise the potential of the sub-100k sq ft I&L sector." “For years we have championed sub-100k sq ft I&L and celebrated its economic contributions and role as an engine for growth, yet it continues to face significant barriers. Our latest report shows that this is not only leaving occupiers struggling for space but also hindering the UK’s prosperity.” The report identifies the challenges restricting sector growth, including unclear Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards timelines, a strained planning system, poor understanding of sub-100k sq ft I&L among planning professionals and policy makers, and spiralling business costs. Jason continues: “More than ever, we need to recognise the role of sub-100k sq ft I&L as a facilitator of growth." “Getting small to mid-box in the NPPF, Planning and Infrastructure Bill and the upcoming Freight Plan is a starting point. Doing this will facilitate a joined-up local and national planning system which prioritises policies that redress supply shortages and help unlock the sector’s full potential.” Regional analysis shows that suppressed demand is not limited to a particular part of the country. In the South East, annual suppressed demand is at 34%, which equates to an additional 689,000 sq ft of missed occupation each year. The North West could have leased an additional 838,000 sq ft annually if it had been able to meet occupier demand. Resulting low availability has meant that on average, rents for sub-100k sq ft I&L units have increased by 79% on average since 2014, adding significant cost pressures to occupiers. Mark Powney, Savills director, Planning Economics: “Recognising suppressed demand strengthens the case for treating I&L as critical national infrastructure. It reinforces the need to support the sub-100k sq ft market in requiring local authorities to plan effectively for business needs in their area to support their local economic growth." "This includes recognising the particular locational needs of the sub-market and realising its importance to supply-chains facilitating the Government’s Industrial Strategy for a strong and growing British economy.” Clare Bottle, CEO of the UK Warehousing Association, added: “Warehousing is not just space, but a key factor in business decision-making. Within this, the sub-100k sq ft I&L space has a key role, providing essential employment land for businesses of all sizes and across all sectors, and it is vital that the market has champions." “That is why we welcome the latest BIG Things in SMALL Boxes report from Potter Space and Savills, which clearly sets out the challenges and helps the sector, and policy decision-makers, navigate a path forward.” For more information and to download the full BIG Things in SMALL Boxes report, visit here .   For further information please contact potterspace@prohibitionpr.co.uk . About BIG Things in SMALL Boxes 2026: In its fourth iteration of BIG Things in SMALL Boxes, Potter Space takes an in-depth look into the economic role of the mid-box I&L sector alongside the complex supply and demand dynamics affecting the market. Featuring data, analysis, opinion and occupier perspectives on the challenges and opportunities facing this underappreciated market, the report is available to download free here .

Commenting, Faye Church, Senior Planning Director at Rathbones, says: “The Spring Statement offered little immediate relief for business owners already grappling with a heavy tax burden and persistently rising costs. For many SMEs, the issue isn’t just what was announced, but what remains unresolved - not least the absence of an extension to business rates relief." “Our research shows that tax and cost pressures have already forced more than one in five SME leaders to cut staff, with business rates, employer National Insurance and regulatory costs weighing heavily on confidence and investment." "Against that backdrop, the renewed spike in oil and gas prices following the escalation in Iran risks adding another layer of strain at a time when margins are already thin." “Higher oil and gas prices can feed quickly into transport, utilities and supply chains, pushing up day to day operating costs across the economy. For smaller firms with limited pricing power, these external shocks are particularly hard to absorb - especially when they come on top of an already rising business tax burden." “In this environment, stability and targeted support matter. Without meaningful action to ease the cumulative burden on SMEs, there is a real risk that higher costs - now compounded by geopolitics and global energy shocks - could further dampen investment, hiring and growth at a time when the UK economy can least afford it.”

RH Amar has completed the move into its new purpose-built headquarters in High Wycombe, marking a major milestone in the company’s 80-year history. The new home for the third-generation family business provides increased warehouse capacity, brand new office space, and plenty of personal touches - including Henry’s Place, a social hub named in honour of Chairman, Henry Amar. The new site also includes expansive kitchen facilities, along with wellness rooms and a games area for colleagues to enjoy.   Rob Amar, RH Amar Managing Director, said: “The move to our new headquarters is a special moment for our family business, and for me personally. It has been a long journey to get to this moment, and it’s incredibly rewarding to see colleagues’ excited reactions to our new home, which has been designed to support our expanding operations and long-term growth ambitions. " "It is a modern working environment for colleagues to enjoy and excel, and we look forward to welcoming our brand partners, customers and other visitors.” The move follows a period of significant expansion for RH Amar, which has achieved double-digit revenue growth in each of the past five years. Recent business wins have seen brands such as Branston, Dunkin’, Hermesetas and Weetabix join RH Amar’s portfolio and further strengthen the company’s position in the market. RH Amar is a full-service food distributor which partners with brand owners to drive growth across the UK market through distribution, sales, marketing and technical expertise. The new headquarters maintain the company’s excellent transport links, located less than a mile from M40 Junction 4 on the outskirts of High Wycombe. About RH Amar RH Amar is one of the UK’s leading full-service distributors and growth partners for ambient foods - providing sales, marketing and technical support to successfully grow brands across the UK market. The company is a family-run business, founded in 1945, and now in its third generation. It retains family values at its core and treats every brand as its own. RH Amar’s brand portfolio includes some of the UK’s best-loved food brands such as Branston, Del Monte, Dunkin’, Ella’s Kitchen, Kikkoman, Mutti and Weetabix alongside smaller specialist brands. The company also owns the Camp Coffee, Cooks&Co and Mary Berry’s Dressings brands. The company donates 10% of its profits each year to charity, with more than £3m donated to charitable causes since 2013. View the RH Amar brand portfolio here .