Jeremy Clarkson expressed his views at the farmers’ protest (Image: Getty)
has been demonised for suggesting in the past that buying farmland had allowed him to avoid inheritance tax – before ‘s latest tax raid was introduced, of course.
Yet how many of those calling him out for finding a legal loophole would do the same themselves if they came into wealth on his scale?
From paying accommodation costs for illegal immigrants at an annual cost per person that’s more than the average worker’s wages to the provision of Playstations to killer prisoners, the discontent about what taxpayers are forced to foot the bill for is widespread.
Meanwhile, there have been catastrophic failures in the NHS from jaw-dropping waits to see a doctor to the refusal to provide various life-prolonging cancer drugs as they are too “expensive”.
Yet the government still stretches our funds far enough to finance career criminals and illegal migrants. There are plenty of reasons to feel fury about how our taxes are misappropriated and how funding never seems to reach those who need it most.
In those circumstances, wanting to find a legal loophole to avoid paying a penny more than necessary is completely understandable. Until such times as the funds are used in a way that the majority of right-thinking people would agree with, I won’t be judging anyone for not wanting to fork out.
I think if I was in ‘s position and had a £55 million fortune of my own, I’d probably be tempted to do exactly the same thing. I’d be willing to bet many of those expressing mock outrage and indignation over it would too.
:
Jeremy Clarkson raged at the BBC during the protest (Image: Getty)
The star isn’t a bone idle heir to a fortune – he’s worked for decades and instead of criticising the game, he’s worked out how to play it to his advantage.
He shouldn’t be demonised for wanting an estate he’s already been taxed on to go to his children without the government taking yet another slice.
Some insisted that simply because he’d once benefitted from a tax loophole, it rendered every good intention and opinion he expressed at the recent farmers’ protest irrelevant.
I don’t think his tax history should makes his points any less legitimate when speaking alongside so-called “real” farmers – he’s using his platform to provide publicity and exposure for those who might not otherwise have had such a prominent voice.
Don’t miss… [HEALTH]
Jeremy Clarkson’s speech at a rally (Image: Getty)
Even if he does “diddly squat” when it comes to toiling the land himself, and even if sidekick is right that he’s a “f*****g idiot” when it comes to all things agricultural, he certainly has it spot-on when it comes to recognising the rights violations of the hard-working farmers.
His appearance at the protest was published in every media outlet, bringing it to the attention of those who might have turned the page if they hadn’t spotted a familiar face belonging to a high profile celebrity.
Whatever his reason was for buying a farm is his business and it in no way overshadows the important role his presence has had in raising awareness at a politically tense time.
Is his tax status really relevant? We’ve bitten the hands that feed us enough without taking aim at Jeremy as well.