When you’re a billionaire with a 300-foot yacht, a French chateau, and enough farmland to fit 18,000 homes, complaining about inheritance tax might not win you much sympathy. But that hasn’t stopped Sir James Dyson from having a go.
The vacuum magnate has accused chancellor Rachel Reeves of “vindictiveness” over changes to inheritance tax rules, claiming they will “fleece” family businesses. Spoiler alert: the internet isn’t exactly on his side.
What’s Changing?
From April next year, agricultural property relief (APR) and business property relief (BPR) will be capped at £1 million. Assets above that value will be subject to a 20% inheritance tax rate – half the standard 40% rate for other estates. The tax can also be paid over ten years, which, let’s be honest, isn’t exactly a hardship for most.
The Treasury estimates these changes will bring in an extra £500 million a year by 2030. But for Dyson, who owns a whopping 36,000 acres of farmland, it’s a step too far.
Dyson’s Letter: A Billionaire’s Lament
In a letter to The Times, Dyson didn’t hold back. He argued that family businesses, which employ 14 million people and contribute billions in taxes, are being unfairly targeted.
“This is what Rachel Reeves will kill off with her budget,” he wrote. “It introduces a confiscation of 20% of all family companies at every generation.” He also claimed that the effective tax rate could rise to 40% because families would need to generate dividends to pay the bill.
Dyson pointed out that 60 of the UK’s top 100 taxpayers are family business owners, collectively paying £3 billion a year in taxes. “Why this vindictiveness only towards British families?” he asked.
The Internet’s Response: Sympathy in Short Supply
Unsurprisingly, Dyson’s complaints haven’t exactly sparked a wave of public support. Social media users were quick to point out the irony of a man with a £300 million yacht, a Georgian estate, and a French chateau moaning about tax changes.
One user quipped, “Imagine owning 36,000 acres and still feeling hard done by.” Another added, “Maybe sell the yacht if you’re worried about inheritance tax?”
The Bigger Picture
While Dyson’s concerns about family businesses are valid, his argument is somewhat undermined by his own vast wealth. After all, this is a man whose company is headquartered in Singapore – a move widely seen as a tax-saving strategy.
Rachel Reeves’ changes are aimed at creating a fairer tax system, and while they may hit some family businesses, they’re unlikely to leave billionaires like Dyson out of pocket.
You may also like: Jeremy Clarkson claims BBC weather warnings are ‘anti-Tory’
