The heart of London bore witness to an unusual spectacle on November 19, 2024, as thousands of farmers descended on the city in protest against the UK government’s proposed inheritance tax reforms. Children led the march on toy tractors, their presence a poignant reminder of the future at stake. Supported by public figures like television presenter Jeremy Clarkson, demonstrators demanded a reconsideration of policies they claim will devastate family farms and threaten the nation’s food security.
Organized by grassroots farming groups and the National Farmers Union (NFU), the protests directly responded to the Labour government’s October budget announcement. At their core lies a question resonating beyond the UK’s borders: how can governments balance fiscal responsibility with the survival of rural communities?
Chancellor Rachel Reeves introduced the controversial tax reforms as part of Labour’s broader fiscal strategy. Under the plan, which takes effect in April 2026, estates valued up to £1 million will remain exempt from inheritance tax, while assets exceeding this threshold will face a 20% effective tax rate after partial relief. Reeves defended the measures as essential for addressing fiscal deficits and redistributing wealth fairly. “This reform ensures that those with the broadest shoulders contribute their fair share, while protecting the majority of family farms,” she said.
Yet farming communities see a different picture. Critics argue the £1 million threshold is insufficient, given the soaring value of agricultural land. Many fear families inheriting farms will face crippling tax bills, forcing them to sell land and disrupt their operations. For protesters, the stakes extend far beyond finances—they touch the heart of rural life and food security.
“The government doesn’t understand the realities of farming,” one protester lamented. “This isn’t just about money; it’s about the survival of our communities and ensuring Britain can feed itself.” Food security experts echo these concerns, warning that reduced domestic production could increase reliance on imports and expose the UK to global supply chain risks. At a time when climate change and geopolitical instability already threaten food systems worldwide, critics see the tax reforms as a gamble the country cannot afford.
The Labour government now faces a delicate challenge. While the reforms aim to bolster public finances without raising income taxes, they have ignited fierce opposition from rural communities. Critics accuse Labour of catering to its urban base while neglecting agricultural workers, a claim that highlights the broader tension between urban and rural priorities.
Food Security and Farming in South Korea
The UK farmers’ struggle offers a striking parallel to challenges faced by South Korea. Though the specific policies differ, the broader themes of agricultural sustainability and rural livelihoods are alarmingly similar. In South Korea, food security is an urgent concern, as the nation relies heavily on imports, with over 70% of its grain supply coming from abroad. This dependence exposes Korea to the volatility of global markets, supply chain disruptions, and geopolitical instability. As climate change intensifies, the need for a robust domestic agricultural sector has never been clearer.
However, Korea’s farming sector faces its own crises. Chief among them is the aging farmer population: over 40% of Korean farmers are aged 65 or older, and younger generations are reluctant to take up farming due to low profitability and unstable market conditions. Without meaningful intervention, Korea risks a severe decline in its agricultural workforce, further jeopardizing its food self-sufficiency. Policies that encourage farm inheritance and incentivize young people to continue farming are essential for reversing this trend.
Debates around the Grain Management Act reflect similar tensions to those seen in the UK. While British farmers worry about losing farmland due to tax burdens, Korean farmers have protested inadequate government interventions to stabilize crop prices. The Grain Management Act, which mandates government purchases of surplus rice under specific conditions, has drawn criticism from both sides. Farmers argue it is necessary for protecting incomes amid fluctuating prices, while the government warns it could encourage overproduction and strain public finances.
For Korea, investing in domestic agriculture goes beyond supporting farmers; it is about safeguarding the nation’s food future. Targeted financial support, infrastructure improvements, and market stabilization measures are essential steps to reduce reliance on imports and strengthen the agricultural sector’s resilience.
Farmers Hold the Key to National Food Security
The cases of the United Kingdom and South Korea underscore a critical truth: farmers are the backbone of national food security. In both countries, policy missteps that fail to account for the realities of agriculture risk undermining not just rural communities but the very stability of domestic food systems.
In the UK, proposed inheritance tax reforms threaten to force farmers to sell or fragment their land, weakening agricultural productivity and pushing the nation toward greater reliance on imports. This gamble could jeopardize the country’s food sovereignty at a time when global supply chains face mounting uncertainties.
In South Korea, debates surrounding the Grain Management Act highlight similar risks. Without adequate support, falling rice prices and the aging farming population could lead to a sharp decline in agricultural output. Given Korea’s heavy reliance on imports for staple crops, any further erosion of domestic farming capacity could have profound consequences for the nation’s food security.
The lesson is clear: governments must place farmers at the center of their agricultural and economic policies. Farmland must not be seen as mere taxable property, nor should farmers be treated as budgetary burdens. Instead, they must be recognized as strategic partners in safeguarding a nation’s self-sufficiency and resilience.
Both the UK and South Korea must strike a balance between fiscal discipline and rural sustainability. This means crafting policies that protect farmland, incentivize younger generations to continue farming, and ensure that agricultural livelihoods are not only viable but thriving. For both nations, the path forward must prioritize the long-term stability of domestic agriculture as a cornerstone of national security.
At its core, the debate is about more than just taxes or subsidies—it is about ensuring the survival of a sector that feeds nations and sustains communities. In the end, safeguarding farmers is not only an investment in their future but in the future of every citizen who depends on a stable and secure food supply.
