LOCAL MP Henry Tufnell has denied claims that he provided his father with inside information regarding upcoming changes to Inheritance Tax and Agricultural Property Relief, which were announced in the autumn Budget.

The controversy arose after reports that Mr Tufnell’s father placed part of the family’s multi-million-pound agricultural estate in a trust weeks before Chancellor Rachel Reeves confirmed the tax changes.

Speaking to The Times last weekend, Mr Tufnell revealed that part of his family’s Cotswold estate had been placed in a trust, with his brother Albermarle as the beneficiary. While entirely legal, the move could save the estate £4m in Inheritance Tax if Mr Tufnell’s father lives another seven years.

The Times reported that Henry Tufnell’s father’s legal tax arrangements could significantly reduce the family’s future tax burden. However, the Mid & South Pembrokeshire MP insists he had no inside knowledge of the Chancellor’s plans.

‘Absurd’ to suggest insider knowledge

In the Times interview, Mr Tufnell defended his actions, stating: “It’s just absurd to suggest that I had concrete knowledge of what was going to be in the Budget as a backbench MP.”

The interview continues: “He admits, though, that he had heard rumours of a change in the offing and did discuss it with his father.

“My dad was the president of the Country Landowners Association, he sits on the board of Natural England, he’s all over what goes on in the industry.

“So when it’s being briefed out that there might be changes, of course I talked to him.”

Taking those words at face value, Mr Tufnell describes a situation in which he heard speculation about a change in Inheritance Tax and Agricultural Property Relief and mentioned it to his father. Mr Tufnell states that his parents’ actions were based on industry speculation and professional advice rather than any conversation he had with them. We accept, without reservation, that Henry Tufnell’s parents acted on that independent advice following widely reported speculation over potential changes to Inheritance Tax and Agricultural Property Relief.

A spokesperson for Mr Tufnell said: “There was talk about changes to IHT, which had been in the media for some time, and industry had been raising concerns about the possibility of it being looked at ahead of the Budget announcement. So, of course, as an MP representing a rural constituency, and as an MP from a farming background, Henry engaged constructively with the farming sector as soon as concerns were raised.”

The Herald asked Henry Tufnell’s office when he discussed the issue with his father and how many other farmers he spoke with regarding potential IHT and APR changes before the Budget. At the time of publication, no response had been received, although Mr Tufnell’s representatives had confirmed that a substantive response was forthcoming shortly. However, since publication, Mr. Tufnell’s representatives have clarified that he views discussions of publicly available information as an important part of engaging with his constituents and that there was nothing improper about discussing media speculation with his father.

At the time of writing, at 6:00pm on Wednesday, we had not received a response to either question.

Legal intervention before response

Before we received answers to our questions, Mr Tufnell’s legal team at Carter-Ruck intervened. In an email at 5:00pm on Wednesday, they urged us not to publish anything until they had received further instructions from their client.

The email referenced correspondence between this article’s writer and Joshua Beynon, Mr Tufnell’s Senior Communications Officer.

We accept that any suggestion that Henry Tufnell had privileged information and acted upon it to benefit a family member is categorically untrue. As his interview made clear, the MP did not possess insider knowledge.

To avoid any doubt, we accept the most favourable possible interpretation of his actions: namely, Henry Tufnell did no more than gossip with his father about rumours, the foundations for which were unknown to him. That is entirely different from having concrete information and acting upon it inappropriately.

If The Times is accurate, his father’s estate has avoided a potential £4m future tax liability. Henry Tufnell will not benefit personally from the arrangements made regarding the family’s Cotswold estate.

Tax avoidance and political contradictions

Despite not raising concerns in Parliament before the Budget, Henry Tufnell is now calling for a “review” of the tax changes.

His family’s estate, worth an estimated £20m, has legally shielded part of its assets from the new tax rules, saving a potential £4m. His gilded background was underlined in a gushing profile in society magazine The Tatler. In the profile, Mr Tufnell was described as having the good looks of a Jilly Cooper antihero, while the article referred to his education at Radley public school and Brown University in the USA.

In far less privileged circumstances, thousands of farming families across the UK now face financial uncertainty, including many in Pembrokeshire.

Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves has come under repeated fire for her abject failure to understand basic farm economics. Instead of targeting land speculators who invest in agricultural land for tax relief, the Chancellor’s changes risk breaking up family farms and damaging the UK’s future food security. The spectacle of Labour MPs, including Henry Tufnell, calling upon farmers to act now to avoid paying their “fair share”, as members of the Cabinet call it, is politically “interesting”.

Mr Tufnell never raised the issue in Parliament. On social media this week, he called for “a review” of the policy.

NFU Cymru has lobbied against the changes since the media speculated about the possibility following the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s interview with the BBC on July 30. The union confirmed to us that they heard rumours of the change and lobbied Wales’s MPs to head off Rachel Reeves’s tax grab.

“We face an incredibly difficult situation, but there is still time for the Treasury to stop and think again,” NFU Cymru President Aled Jones said.

“The legitimate proposal we put to the Minister and his officials remains on the table for their consideration, and I urge them to reconsider. It will still enable the Treasury to raise further funds, it will offer a fairer and more balanced way forward, and remove much of the jeopardy for our agricultural sector, including the significant emotional and financial pressures—not forgetting the risks to national food security.”