updated on 04 November 2025
Question
To what extent should aspiring solicitors understand the impact of the APR/BPR shake-up?From 6 April 2026, the application of Agricultural Property Relief (APR) and Business Property Relief (BPR) will change significantly. These reliefs reduce the value of agricultural property and business property for the purposes of calculating inheritance tax. Currently the reliefs are applied at either 100% or 50% and there’s no limit on the amount of the relief that can be claimed. The changes limit the value of the reliefs and impose caps on the amount that can be claimed.
This article is targeted at students who want to be commercially aware, but it's also applicable to those preparing for interviews or writing applications. The changes to APR and BPR in the UK are worth understanding, especially if you're looking at private client, tax or family business law.
The APR and BPR have helped families to pass on agricultural assets and business assets by significantly reducing or eliminating inheritance tax (IHT) for years. Without these reliefs, many families will pay the 40% IHT on the value of the qualifying assets that fall into the estate of a person when they die. Agricultural property is land or pasture that’s used to grow crops or to rear animals. Business property includes shares in a trading company or business equipment.
These reliefs have underpinned long-term investment, retention of family ownership and succession planning. However, the government has introduced changes that confront decades of planning assumptions and pose new risks to family business continuity.
Below is a breakdown of the key changes.
The relief of 100% will be limited to the first £1 million of qualifying property in an individual’s estate. Any assets over this amount will only get 50% relief, rather than the full 100%.
Applying theory to a real-life situation, let us consider the following example.
The Jones Family Farm is a third-generation family-run mixed farm. It includes land, farm buildings, machinery and a small food business. The total estate is worth £3 million. Until now, the application of APR and BPR meant that the estate would’ve been passed down to the next generation without paying IHT.
As a result of the changes:
The £1 million allowance will not be transferable between spouses. That is, each spouse (or civil partner) must use their own allowance independently. But the allowance does refresh every seven years (see below).
Contrary to other parts of succession planning, the non-transferable nature of the allowance adds a degree of planning complexity: one spouse with a business or land heavy estate may use their full allowance, but the other spouse can’t borrow or share their unused allowance.
The reforms will also affect how qualifying property is settled into a trust: these new changes mean that only the first £1 million in assets settled into a trust will have no IHT entry charge, while any excess would be subject to IHT.
For example, if the Jones family put their farm into a trust, only the first £1 million would benefit from no entry charge into the trust, while the balance would be subject to IHT charges.
Another significant change is that shares listed on Alternative Investment Market (AIM) will no longer qualify for 100% BPR; they’ll now be restricted to 50% relief, even if the value is within the £1 million cap.
This is a major departure from previous practice and affects many growth businesses that have used AIM or similar structures.
The £1 million allowance is proposed to refresh every seven years (the same as how the IHT nil rate band refreshes)
From 6 April 2030, the £1 million cap will be linked to inflation, so it’ll increase with the Consumer Price Index (CPI) to avoid it being eroded by inflation.
Let's go back to the example of the Jones family. You may have heard the phrase, ‘land rich, cash poor.’ Besides receiving a £400,000 IHT bill on their estate, these new rules create a huge cash problem for families whose wealth is tied up in land or the business.
In extreme cases, to pay this new tax bill, the Jones' could be forced to exit (sell) the business during the owner’s lifetime. Some families would rather this than leave the burden to their children or other family members. This may result in ownership changes, job losses or business disruption, which is something most families want to avoid.
The Jones' may look to a change of ownership or securing investment to provide funds, but the land or business assets would no longer be family-owned. Some could feel compelled to reduce their ambition or scale down their operation in order to stay under the £1 million threshold. Or borrow heavily, which could put them under financial pressure. They’d need to pay this loan back with interest and also continue to sustain cashflow.
As a trainee or apprentice, to showcase commercial awareness, consider the strategic, operational and financial impacts these new rules could have.
Many families like the Jones' are considering reorganising the ownership of their assets, such as splitting ownership of the farm or business between spouses so that less of the asset is taxed. Or using lifetime gifting methods. This is because when you gift assets such as shares (eg, business
property) or land (eg, agricultural property) these are no longer part of the estate and therefore not subject to IHT.
As there’s a narrow window for making these changes, tax planning lawyers will be inundated with these tasks before April next year.
The rationale behind it is to target tax relief more fairly and prevent wealthy individuals from claiming millions of pounds in IHT relief. But critics argue that it penalises families who’ve built long-term businesses, discourages succession planning, and creates uncertainty for thousands of family businesses and farms across the UK.
Groups like Family Business UK and the National Farmers Union (NFU) have warned that the changes could result in:
While the Treasury expects to raise about £500 million per year, there could be serious economic consequences.
If you’re applying to law firms or for roles that specialise in private client, tax, commercial, or agricultural or property law, prospective employers will want to see that you know how to consider the effects of the law and policy on people and businesses.
Commercial awareness takeaways
Lawyers are already advising clients to:
With tighter rules and uncertainty around how assets qualify, disputes between beneficiaries (those entitled to assets upon death) and trustees may increase. That could mean more work in trusts and estates litigation or contentious probate.
Advisers are taking two approaches:
1. Proactive planning
Lawyers are helping clients act before April 2026, implementing solutions such as:
But these steps come with risks, including capital gains tax, anti-avoidance rules, and possible loss of control.
Some lawyers are advising clients to:
2. Caution
Because parts of the reforms are still under consultation, we could see changes before the April 2026 deadline.
What’s happening?
APR and BPR reliefs are being limited. Only the first £1 million of assets will get 100% relief from IHT.
When?
Changes start from 6 April 2026 (with some from 2025).
Who’s affected?
Mainly family farms and businesses with valuable land or business assets.
From an aspiring solicitor's perspective, recognise that this is urgent estate planning and tax law
will become more complex for family businesses. Clients may be seeking urgent advice in the run-
up to April 2026. It’s of the utmost importance to act decisively, but not recklessly, choosing strategies that preserve flexibility for families and guard against anti-avoidance risk.
In interviews or applications, show that you understand how these changes could affect businesses.
For example, many will now:
Fortunate Akinwunmi is a solicitor apprentice at Michelmores LLP.
1. What’s the new cap on Agricultural Property Relief (APR) and Business Property Relief (BPR) starting from April 2026?
2. What happens to assets above the £1 million threshold for APR and BPR?
3. How will the new rules affect spouses?
4. How might the Jones family mitigate the £400,000 IHT bill under the new rules?