Reforming tax breaks and subsidies for agriculture is necessary to moderate rising land prices. This is the recommendation of the Council for the Environment and Infrastructure (Rli) in its advisory report "Land for Improvement: On the Role of Land in Rural Areas."
The RLi presented the report today to outgoing Minister of Agriculture Femke Wiersma. In the report, the council states that various tax schemes and financial support are ineffective. Currently, the government is actually driving land price increases with these schemes, the report concludes.
Adjustments should make agricultural land less attractive as an investment. "For farmers who hold land for retirement, the government would be better off designing a pension scheme. This could be funded with money the government currently spends on tax exemptions," the council advises.
The RLi notes that the government is trying to solve rural problems with a budget. The retirement schemes are cited as an example. In the report, the council advises the government to make greater use of environmental policy, including spatial planning instruments.
Through robust redistribution of rural areas, the government can better distinguish between productive agriculture and social agriculture. The latter combines food production and social services. According to the council, only tax benefits and subsidies should be allocated to the latter.
Use of expropriation
To achieve this, RLi recommends using land consolidation, expropriation, preferential rights, and a land bank. These instruments should steer the land market in a different direction. High land prices and low land mobility hinder an effective approach to social challenges, the report concludes.
The council notes that provinces, water boards, and municipalities are not using land instruments sufficiently to force farmers to relinquish land. "They prefer voluntary land exchanges or, in the case of land purchases, 'amicable acquisition,' or voluntary sale. This works well for simple tasks. But for complex tasks, this caution often hinders achieving a result that adds value in the long run."
© DCA Market Intelligence. This market information is subject to copyright. It is not permitted to reproduce, distribute, disseminate or make the content available to third parties for compensation, in any form, without the express written permission of DCA Market Intelligence.
This is in response to it Boerenbusiness article:
[url = https: // www.boerenbusiness.nl/artikel/10915315/overheid-moet-dwingender-zijn-in-grondaankopen]'Government must be more forceful in land purchases'[/url]
Once the government actively intervenes in land policy, land will only become more expensive. The report also discusses the purchase of land from farmers under the cessation schemes, which will create scarcity.
It's now being reported in the media as the reason that land for building houses is too expensive because agriculture enjoys tax breaks. €199.000 per hectare is €19,90 per square meter. Building land costs at least €300 per hectare.
Female WUR director at agricultural post It can't be true. WUR has been conducting research for years that is giving farmers gray hair (1 example is strip cropping). The university is known as a left-wing and tree-hugger institution. In recent years, little sense has been done for the farmers. They also have a very bad reputation worldwide!!!!
Female WUR director at agricultural post It can't be true. WUR has been conducting research for years that is giving farmers gray hair (1 example is strip cropping). The university is known as a left-wing and tree-hugger institution. In recent years, little sense has been done for the farmers. They also have a very bad reputation worldwide!!!!
Perhaps it's a good idea to tax home equity as well! This is also purchased with private money! That would likely create more breathing room in the housing market.
farmer wrote:Every year, a civil servant comes to assess the surplus value. Stop it, stop it.Perhaps it's a good idea to tax home equity as well! This is also purchased with private money! That would likely create more breathing room in the housing market.