The position now in force: from 6 April 2026, agricultural property relief and business property relief are capped at £2.5m of combined qualifying assets at 100% relief, with 50% relief above (an effective IHT rate of 20% on the excess). The £2.5m allowance is per individual, transferable between spouses, and currently fixed until CPI indexation begins in April 2031. IHT on qualifying assets can be paid over up to 10 interest-free annual instalments. For most farming families, the £2.5m allowance and spousal transfer cover the great majority of the estate. For families with significant holdings, where land values run well above the combined £5m, IHT is now a real planning conversation rather than a theoretical one.

Lifetime gifts remain useful planning, but the rules around them have changed. Gifts of APR or BPR qualifying assets made on or after 30 October 2024 may reduce the £2.5m allowance available on death if the donor dies on or after 6 April 2026. Lifetime gifts also need to survive the donor by seven years to fall outside the estate entirely for IHT purposes. The interaction between gifting strategy and the new allowance is more technical than under the previous regime, and the wrong gift in the wrong year can leave the family worse off. We model the position carefully before any documentation gets drafted.

Often, yes, but the partnership agreement matters more than it did. The structure continues to support BPR on the partnership share, allows working assets to sit with the working generation, and gives flexibility on profit allocation. After April 2026, the documentation that supports the BPR claim is going to face HMRC scrutiny. Many partnership agreements we see were drafted twenty or thirty years ago and have not been touched since. The current policy environment is a sensible moment to take a fresh look.

The Sustainable Farming Incentive reopened in June 2026 as SFI26, following the pause that ran from August 2025. The new structure has 71 actions (down from 102), a £100,000 cap per annual agreement, and one agreement per farm business. Window 1 (for small farms up to 50 hectares, and for farms without an existing ELM agreement) opens 30 June 2026 for around two months. Window 2 opens in September 2026 for all eligible farms. Existing SFI23 and SFI24 agreements continue at their original payment rates. The forecasting and budgeting work for farming clients now needs to reflect the SFI26 structure rather than the historic Basic Payment Scheme or earlier SFI position.

In some cases, yes. Genuine innovation in farming methods, agri-tech development, animal feed formulation or process improvement can qualify under the merged R&D scheme. The bar is the same as for any sector: scientific or technological uncertainty resolved through systematic work. Claims that succeed tend to be in agri-tech, controlled environment agriculture, biological inputs and novel processes. Claims that fail tend to be for general operational improvements that look innovative from inside the business but are standard practice across the sector. HMRC scrutiny on agri-related R&D has been heavy over the past two years, and the documentation now matters as much as the underlying work.

The shape is broadly similar to other sectoral sales: preparation, vendor due diligence, buyer outreach, offers, full DD, contracts, completion. The detail in agribusiness is where the work sits. Buyers will look closely at the manufacturer relationship and the dealer agreement, the parts and service revenue mix, the used equipment book and how it has been provisioned, and the customer concentration. Family-owned dealerships that have run for two or three generations often need a longer preparation period than expected, because the personal cost base and the family dynamics need separating from the underlying business performance. The preparation period (ideally two to three years) is where the value gets built.

With a disciplined ageing and provisioning policy that gets applied consistently and reviewed at least annually. Used equipment values move with the market, and aged stock is the single most common source of unexpected losses at year-end. New equipment held too long ties up working capital and risks model-year price drops. Parts inventory typically has a long tail where small lines accumulate dust faster than they earn margin. Both the audit team and any prospective buyer will look hard at this area. So will the parent manufacturer when reviewing dealer performance.

It depends on the structure. If panels are owned and operated by the farming business, the income sits in the trading accounts and the equipment qualifies for capital allowances, but the BPR position on the underlying land and the asset can become more complex. If the land is leased to a third-party operator under a long lease, the income is generally treated as investment, which affects APR and BPR. If a separate trading company is established to operate the renewables, that brings its own tax position. The right structure depends on the family's longer-term plans for the farm, and is one of the conversations we tend to have early in the planning piece.