Where land is leased to a solar power operator, it no longer qualifies for agricultural property relief so could be subject to inheritance tax of up to 40%.
With farm incomes under such pressure, attractive deals are available for solar developments, so it is not surprising that some farmers would prefer to lease the land and accept a regular rent, but they must be aware of the fiscal implications of doing so.
Typical rents for solar panels are about £1,000 per acre index linked for 20 years. As a rental activity rather than a trade, farmers are obliged to treat this income separately. Although a lease rent of £1,000 per acre may be attractive, farmers must take account of the full picture. The potential inheritance tax levy could be as much as 40% on the value of the land rented out, so farmers should ask themselves if the potential IHT exposure is worth the rental income.
Some farmers believe that by grazing sheep under the solar panels they can retain the agricultural property relief. However, this simply isn’t the case. You have to remember that the occupant of the land under a long lease will be the tenant, ie the solar company, not the farmer; therefore the primary use of the land is not farming.
Although the Balfour Court case may help to preserve IHT relief, farmers should not rely on it. Balfour does not provide a general relief for all farming businesses that incorporate non-trading income as part of their business return and is certainly not robust enough to guarantee IHT relief on solar assets.
Even were Balfour to apply, BPR may only be available at a rate of 50% of the value of the asset rather than the full 100%. This is particularly the case where the land is owned by an individual but leased to a farming partnership or limited company.
To mitigate the risk, farmers could consider taking out a life insurance policy to cover any potential IHT liability for the duration of the lease.
We are delighted to welcome senior associate Adam Hale to our agriculture & estates team this month. Adam, a specialist in agricultural law, estate planning and estate administration, joins the…
For prescriptive rights to arise over land, they have to have been exercised without force, secrecy or permission of the landowner. Winterburn v Bennet In the case of Winterburn v Bennett, the…
The High Court decision in Lancashire County Council v The Secretary of State for Environment is a salutary warning to landowners of the risks of not taking steps to prevent…
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL cookies.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through our website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorised as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyse and understand how you use our website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies but it may affect your browsing experience on our website. You can find our cookie policy here.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for our website to function and enable core functionality such as security and accessibility. These cookies do not store any personal information. You can block these cookies by changing your browser settings, but this may affect how the website functions.
We use performance cookies such as Google Analytics to help us count the number of visitors and to see how visitors move around our website when they are using it. This helps us to improve the way our website works, for example, by ensuring that users are finding what they are looking for easily. The cookies collect information in a way that does not directly identify anyone. For more information on how these cookies work, please see our cookie policy.