Comparison Guide · 2026-07-10
Farm Business Tenancy vs Contract Farming Agreement UK 2026
Landowners who cannot or do not want to farm their land themselves generally choose between two very different structures: letting it out under a Farm Business Tenancy, or entering a Contract Farming Agreement that keeps them as the farming business while a contractor does the physical work. The two involve fundamentally different levels of control, risk and — critically for many farming families — different implications for how the land is treated for Agricultural Property Relief and Business Property Relief on death. Neither is inherently better; the right choice depends on how involved the owner wants to remain, their appetite for yield and price risk, and their inheritance tax planning.
At a Glance
| Feature | Farm Business Tenancy | Contract Farming Agreement |
|---|---|---|
| Legal nature | A tenancy/lease of land under the Agricultural Tenancies Act 1995 | A business/services contract — not a tenancy |
| Who farms the land day-to-day | The tenant, entirely independently | A contractor, but the owner remains the farming business |
| Owner's income | Fixed rent, agreed in advance | Share of farming profit (or loss) via a first/second charge split |
| Yield and price risk | Borne by the tenant | Shared between owner and contractor |
| Owner-occupier IHT reliefs | Can weaken the owner's owner-occupier status — check with an adviser | Generally regarded as preserving owner-occupier status — check with an adviser |
| Typical term | Short (single season) to long-term (10+ years) | Usually rolling annual terms |
| Ease of ending the arrangement | Governed by lease terms and any break clauses | Generally simpler — a business contract, not a property lease |
When a Farm Business Tenancy Wins
- You want a fixed, predictable rental income and no exposure to farming yield or price risk
- You have no wish to remain involved in day-to-day farming decisions or management
- A tenant is willing to take on a longer-term commitment, giving you certainty over land use for the lease term
When a Contract Farming Agreement Wins
- You want to preserve your position as an actively farming owner-occupier, particularly for Agricultural Property Relief and Business Property Relief planning
- You want the upside of good harvests and prices, and are willing to accept the downside in poorer years
- You want more flexibility to end or renegotiate the arrangement on a rolling annual basis rather than being tied into a fixed-term lease
Why the Inheritance Tax Angle Matters So Much
For many landowning farming families, the choice between an FBT and a Contract Farming Agreement is driven less by the rental income difference and more by how each structure is viewed for inheritance tax purposes. Agricultural Property Relief reduces the taxable value of qualifying agricultural land, and Business Property Relief can additionally cover farm business assets — but the more generous owner-occupier treatment generally depends on the owner being seen as actively carrying on the trade of farming, not simply receiving rent as a passive landlord.
Because a Contract Farming Agreement structures the owner as the farming business (with the contractor supplying labour, machinery and expertise under contract), it is generally regarded as more likely to preserve the owner's active-farmer status than an FBT, where the tenant — not the landowner — is the one carrying on the trade. This distinction can materially affect how much relief is available on the land when it eventually passes on death or is gifted. Because the rules in this area are fact-specific and have been the subject of tightening scrutiny and recent legislative change to agricultural and business reliefs, anyone weighing this decision purely for tax reasons should take specialist agricultural and tax advice before choosing a structure, rather than relying on general guidance.
Worked Scenario: 200 Acres, Owner Retiring from Day-to-Day Work
A farmer with 200 acres wants to step back from daily physical farming but keep the land in productive use and protect their inheritance tax position for their children.
Choosing an FBT, they let the land to a neighbouring tenant for an agreed annual rent. Their income becomes simple and predictable, and they have no further farming decisions to make — but they become, in substance, a landlord rather than a farmer, which can weaken the case for owner-occupier agricultural relief on that land.
Choosing a Contract Farming Agreement instead, they engage a local contractor to carry out cultivations, drilling, spraying and harvesting, while they remain the entity that sells the crop, buys the inputs and takes the farming risk through the profit-share arrangement. Their income now varies with yields and prices rather than being fixed, but they retain a stronger claim to being an actively farming owner-occupier, which is often the deciding factor for families prioritising inheritance tax planning over income certainty.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a Farm Business Tenancy?
What is a Contract Farming Agreement?
Which arrangement keeps my Agricultural Property Relief position stronger?
Show 7 more questionsShow fewer questions
Who takes the financial risk of a bad harvest under each arrangement?
How long do these arrangements typically run for?
Does the landowner keep BPS/delinked payments or environmental scheme income under an FBT?
Can the tenant get security of tenure under a Farm Business Tenancy?
Who is responsible for capital investment in machinery and buildings?
Is VAT treated differently between the two arrangements?
Which is simpler to set up and exit?
Key Sources
Related Comparisons
Agricultural Property Relief vs Business Property Relief,Furnished Holiday Let vs Long-Term Let