The UK government’s decision to limit Business Property Relief (BPR) starting in April 2026 has significant implications for business owners, particularly those whose business value exceeds £1 million. While BPR remains a valuable tool for tax efficiency, a recent case serves as a timely reminder to regularly evaluate whether your business qualifies for this relief in the first place. This article provides an overview of the changes, the intricacies of qualifying, and key lessons from recent case law.
What Is Business Property Relief?
Currently, BPR offers relief of 100% or 50% on the value of “relevant business property” for lifetime transfers or transfers upon death. There is no cap on the relief, making it an invaluable tool for reducing inheritance tax (IHT) liabilities on business assets. However, from April 2026, the government will introduce the following restrictions:
- £1 million cap on 100% relief: This cap will apply collectively to both business property and agricultural property.
- 50% relief on excess value: Any value exceeding £1 million will attract relief at 50%.
- No spousal transfer: Any unused portion of the £1 million cap cannot be transferred to a surviving spouse.
These changes may prompt business owners to restructure ownership, make lifetime transfers, or explore other strategies to ensure they maximise the available relief. However, as highlighted in recent case law, meeting the qualifying conditions is not always straightforward, particularly for businesses with investment elements.
Qualifying for Business Property Relief: The Trading Condition
To qualify, the business must meet several conditions, including the crucial requirement that it must not consist “wholly or mainly” of investment activities. This is commonly referred to as the trading condition.
Key legislative provisions under the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 (IHTA 1984) specify that BPR does not apply to businesses engaged “wholly or mainly” in:
- Dealing in securities, stocks, or shares.
- Dealing in land or buildings.
- Making or holding investments.
The term “wholly or mainly” is generally interpreted as a 51% threshold, though case law often takes a broader view, considering the overall context of the business rather than relying solely on quantitative measures. Factors such as the nature of activities, allocation of resources, and business intent play a pivotal role in determining eligibility.
Recent Case Law: Key Lessons
Case 1: Demetriou v HMRC (2024)
This case involved the estate of Mrs Longina Pearce (LP), who operated a fishing business. Initially a stocked fishery, the business evolved into managing a wild fishery due to licensing restrictions. While LP provided hospitality and equipment to visitors, the primary activity was maintaining land to generate rod fees—a clear investment activity, according to the tribunal.
Outcome: The business was deemed “mainly” investment-based, and relief was denied.
Key Takeaway: Even if a business involves active management, its primary purpose—whether investment or trading—determines eligibility.
Case 2: Farmer v HMRC (1999)
In Farmer, the deceased owned a substantial farm with both agricultural land and let properties. Although rental income was higher than farming income, the overall context—short-term leases, significant farming activity, and the probate value of the farm—convinced the tribunal that farming was the primary activity.
Outcome: Relief was allowed for the entire business.
Key Takeaway: Profitability alone does not define a business. A holistic view of operations, resource allocation, and intent is essential.
Case 3: Powell v HMRC (1997)
In Powell, a caravan park’s activities included maintaining facilities and providing services. However, many services were legally required under tenancy agreements and tied directly to the investment activity of renting pitches.
Outcome: Relief was denied as the services were ancillary to the investment activity.
Key Takeaway: Services must go beyond supporting investment activities to qualify.
Seeking direction or exploring opportunities?
Contact us by using the form below.
How to Prepare for the 2026 Changes
With stricter eligibility requirements coming into force, business owners must take proactive steps to secure their entitlement to BPR:
1. Review Your Business Structure
- Assess whether your business meets the trading condition. If it has a significant investment element, consider restructuring to enhance the trading aspect.
2. Conduct a Detailed Activity Analysis
- Break down activities to determine whether more than 50% are non-investment-related. This includes analysing resource allocation, employee activities, and revenue streams.
3. Monitor Land-Based Assets
- If your business involves land or property, evaluate whether these assets are primarily used for investment or trading purposes. Land-based businesses often face greater scrutiny.
4. Plan for Lifetime Transfers
- To make the most of the £1 million cap, consider transferring business assets during your lifetime. This can reduce inheritance tax (IHT) exposure and simplify estate planning.
5. Seek Expert Guidance
- Given the complexities of Business Property Relief qualification, professional advice is crucial. A specialist can help navigate the rules and optimise tax positions under the new regulations.
Conclusion
The introduction of a cap on Business Property Relief from April 2026 marks a turning point for business owners. However, as recent case law demonstrates, meeting the trading condition remains the critical first step in qualifying for relief. Regularly reviewing business activities, understanding the nuances of HMRC’s interpretation, and planning ahead are essential to ensuring you maximise the benefits while minimising risk.
At WellTax, we specialise in helping businesses navigate complex tax legislation, including Business Property Relief. If you’re unsure about your eligibility or need help preparing for the 2026 changes, contact us today to schedule a consultation.
