Cuts to import tariffs, a huge boost for farmers, a consultation on the tax treatment of predevelopment costs is delayed and the dark side of a cyberattack
Let’s take a look at the government’s cut to zero in import tariffs, review a financial boost for farmers, explore a delay in a consultation on the tax treatment of predevelopment costs and the huge financial implications of a cyberattack. Read on to find out more!
Cuts to import tariffs
Amidst all the news about increased tariffs in the US, the UK government has announced a cut to zero in import tariffs on a range of 89 foreign products.
Plywood and plastics, as well as pasta, fruit juices, coconut oil, pine nuts, agave syrup and plant bulbs are all included. Construction, food and hospitality, and garden-related businesses could all benefit from reduced costs as a result.
The changes relate to goods where the UK Global Tariff applies, i.e. where the goods entering the UK don’t qualify for preferential treatment under, for example, a free trade agreement. The government anticipates that businesses will save at least £17 million because of these cuts.
The suspension to the import tariffs on these products will last until July 2027.
See: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-cuts-price-of-everyday-items-and-summer-essentials
£45 Million Tech Boost Aims to Help Farmers Increase Profits and Productivity
Farmers across the UK could soon benefit from a major new investment in agricultural technology, with the government announcing £45.6 million in funding to support innovations that boost food production, improve profitability, and protect the natural environment.
Announced on 14 April, the funding will support a wide range of technologies. These include fruit-picking robots, livestock health monitoring systems, and irrigation systems that maximise water use. The goal is to move these solutions from research labs to real farms, making them accessible and practical for everyday farming operations.
Support at every stage of development
The funding is spread across three special funds and will help at different stages of innovation, from early research to on-farm trials.
The first opportunity is the new Accelerating Development of Practices and Technologies (ADOPT) competition, opening on 28 April. This programme will commit up to £20.6 million in 2025-26 to help farmers test new technologies on their own farms. It’s aimed at bridging the gap between new ideas and real-world applications.
To support farmers through the process, the ADOPT Support Hub will provide guidance and a £2,500 support grant to help with applications and trial setup.
Two more competitions open in May
From 5 May, two further funding rounds will launch under the Farming Innovation Programme (FIP).
The first will provide £12.5 million for collaborative research into reducing emissions from farms, supporting sustainability and climate resilience. The second also offers £12.5 million and will fund research into precision-bred crops to improve yields, reduce the need for chemical inputs, and strengthen resistance to disease. This builds on the opportunities created by the Genetic Technology (Precision Breeding) Act 2023.
What this means for farmers
These funding opportunities could help farms of all sizes adopt technology that improves efficiency, reduces emissions, or opens up new income streams.
The ADOPT Support Hub can be found here.
Delay to Consultation on the Tax Treatment of Predevelopment Costs
At Autumn Budget 2024, we were promised a consultation on the tax treatment of predevelopment costs. However, following the Court of Appeal’s decision on a recent case, the government is postponing publication of the consultation while it considers the implications of the decision.
The case, which is known as Orsted West of Duddon Sands (UK) Ltd and others v HMRC [2025] EWCA Civ 279, marked a victory for taxpayers and provides clarity on how capital allowances are treated on pre-construction development costs.
Capital allowances are a form of tax relief that businesses can claim when they pay out on capital expenditures. This particular case arose because of a capital allowances claim for expenditure on pre-construction development work in the years before the resulting buildings became operational. H M Revenue & Customs (HMRC) contended that this expenditure did not fit within the legal definition of what can qualify as a capital allowance and so denied the claim.
The Court of Appeal, however ruled that HMRC’s view was too narrow and upheld the taxpayer’s claim. The Court developed a ‘three-limb’ test for whether expenditure can qualify, as follows:
- The taxpayer can demonstrate that the expenditure informed the design or installation of the asset in question.
- The asset in question was actually acquired or constructed.
- The expenditure wasn’t because of the particular circumstances of the taxpayer. This would, for instance, rule out financing costs.
The decision meant that costs for environmental impact assessments, geophysical and geotechnical studies and other design and installation work could qualify for capital allowances.
Is this the end of matters?
Possibly not. HMRC may appeal the case to the Supreme Court. However, the government has committed to looking at how to provide greater clarity on what qualifies for different capital allowances and simplifying the law and tax treatment of predevelopment costs.
Therefore, once the government has digested the results of the decision, they may move to adjust the legislation rather than continue to pursue the matter through the courts.
If you need any advice on how the appeal decision may affect predevelopment expenditure you have made or are planning to make, please get in touch. We would be happy to help you!
See: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/tax-treatment-of-predevelopment-costs-update-on-consultation
£60,000 Fine for Law Firm Offers Key Lessons in Cybersecurity for All Businesses
A recent £60,000 fine issued to Merseyside-based law firm DPP Law Ltd (DPP) by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has highlighted the serious consequences businesses can face when cybersecurity measures fall short. The fine followed a major cyber attack in 2022 that resulted in highly sensitive and confidential client information being stolen and later published on the dark web.
While DPP operates in particularly sensitive legal areas – such as crime, military, family fraud, sexual offences and actions against the police – the lessons from this incident apply broadly to any organisation that handles personal data.
What went wrong?
The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) found that DPP failed to implement appropriate security measures to safeguard electronic data. The attackers gained access via a little-used administrator account that did not have multi-factor authentication (MFA) enabled. From there, they were able to move across the firm’s network and exfiltrate over 32GB of data.
DPP became aware of the breach when the National Crime Agency informed them that stolen client data had surfaced on the dark web. However, they did not consider it to amount to a personal data breach and so did not report the incident to ICO until 43 days after they became aware of it. The law requires breaches to be reported within 72 hours of awareness in most cases.
Lessons for all organisations
This case serves as a clear reminder that data protection is a legal obligation – not a technical afterthought. According to the ICO’s interim Director of Enforcement and Investigations, Andy Curry:
“Our investigation revealed lapses in DPP’s security practices that left information vulnerable to unauthorised access… This penalty should serve as a clear message: failure to protect the information people entrust to you carries serious monetary and reputational consequences.”
There are several key lessons organisations can take from this incident:
- Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) is essential – Especially for administrator or privileged accounts. It adds an extra layer of security that could prevent unauthorised access even if passwords are compromised.
- Legacy systems need regular attention – Even if systems are infrequently used, they still pose a risk if left unpatched or unsecured.
- Monitor for unusual access or activity – Regular security scans and alerts can help spot intrusion attempts early.
- Know your breach reporting obligations – If there is a risk to individuals’ rights or freedoms, breaches must usually be reported to the ICO within 72 hours.
- Cybersecurity is an ongoing responsibility – The law expects organisations to proactively assess and update their cybersecurity measures.
Are there any resources available to help?
The ICO provides guidance to help organisations of all sizes understand their responsibilities around data security. You might find it helpful to look at their cyber report: Learning from the mistakes of others.