AI-assisted, written by a non-specialist, not independently verified. Not tax, legal, or financial advice. Author has a personal interest. Method · Contact · Corrections

The Longer Look exists for questions that public debate treats too quickly. There is no schedule. Pieces appear when they are ready.

Latest

The ten most recent pieces, newest first. The full publication is in the archive; entry points for a new reader are under Start here, below.

·

The April 2026 reform of Business Property Relief and Agricultural Property Relief: what it does, who it affects, and the positions on the timing-and-mechanism question.

From 6 April 2026, qualifying business and agricultural assets above £2.5 million per individual (£5 million per couple, transferable) receive 50 per cent rather than 100 per cent inheritance tax relief — an effective 20 per cent rate above the threshold, payable over ten years interest-free. HMRC estimates up to 1,100 estates affected per year. The reform raises questions both about the amount and about when the tax should fall: at death (the mechanism the reform adopts, with the ten-year interest-free instalment regime designed to address illiquidity); or at realisation (the alternative used in some comparator jurisdictions, including Australia for inherited assets). The publication's operational analysis presents the design positions on the timing-and-mechanism question — implement the reform as written, which is the actual government position and the reference case the others can be weighed against (E); hold the existing mechanism with practical fixes (A); switch to capital gains tax on realisation for the affected asset class (B); defer the mechanism question pending evidence (C); or raise the threshold for qualifying unlisted trading-company shares (D) — and a sixth position offered into the same space on 9 May 2026: a per-company estate election between the death-event regime and a bounded ten-year deferred-realisation regime (F). The publication does not pick between them.

15 featured pieces. Different readers want different ones.

Tech-founder version. Five-minute version. Journalist source-quality reference. Tax-practitioner technical version. Plain-language explainer. Both-sides principle piece. Both-sides timing piece. Funding-stack technical companion with a 25-year fiscal model. Long-form article. Interactive model. The reading guide names which piece is for whom.

If you came here looking for the inheritance tax rules, this is not the right place.

For that, read primary law (Finance Act 2026, IHTA 1984), HMRC's Inheritance Tax Manual, the GOV.UK tax information and impact note, the House of Commons Library briefing, or any of the major professional firms (KPMG, BKL, Hatchers, Royal London, PKF Francis Clark, Deloitte, Saffery, BDO). They will explain the rules better than the publication can. What this publication is for is the argument underneath the rules. The full source stack is on a dedicated page.

Sources and authority →

A cohort-by-cohort technical treatment of UK tech and the reform.

How the reform interacts with the UK tech funding stack — founders, angels and EIS, VCs, growth equity, private equity in tech, LPs in UK venture funds, early employees with vested equity. SAV mechanics. LP-interest illiquidity. EIS-portfolio diversification effects. Closes with a 25-year fiscal model.

If you are sceptical of what you find here, start here.

A standalone page that engages openly with the strongest AI cross-critique sessions the publication has run on its own work — including the verdict that the work is "advocacy-adjacent policy essay pretending harder than it should to be neutral analysis." (No human external reader has reviewed the publication; the critiques engaged with on this page are all from AI sessions.) Most of the critique lands. The page names the lean, names the model-consistency problems, and concedes where the corrections-and-disclosures discipline has not been enough to fix the issues a sceptical reader would identify.

A note on how this was made.

Doug Scott was the architect. The publication was produced by Doug running parallel conversations with four AI tools — Claude (Anthropic), ChatGPT (OpenAI), Grok (xAI), Gemini (Google) — and routing work between them by hand: pasting Claude's argument into ChatGPT for critique, taking ChatGPT's pushback to Grok for a different angle, feeding Gemini the resulting text and asking it to find what was missing. The cross-critique was a loop Doug routed manually. He held the publication's intent across every piece, chose the structure, decided which output to keep, decided which output to feed to which AI next, and decided when the loop had converged. Doug is a UK technology founder, not a lawyer, accountant, or labour economist; he did not edit the prose, check citations against primary sources, or verify model math. No human expert with relevant domain expertise reviewed any of this work before publication. The publication invites corrections from any specialist reader who finds errors AI cross-critique did not catch — see the corrections page.

Start here

Four pieces, picked by the editors, for a reader who wants to know what this publication is about. One overview, one new analytical piece on a question the news is asking now, one entry point to the publication’s first body of work, and one shorter cross-cutting essay.

The Moon — a five-piece set

See all 5 pieces in The Moon — a five-piece set →

On UK migration

See all 31 pieces in On UK migration →

Building Mars — a seven-document set

  • 10 May 2026  ·  5-min read

    The Bear Looked Up

    A small picture book companion to the Building Mars section. Seven evenings in a small field on a small hill, plus one Wednesday afternoon in a small library while the rain wouldn't stop…

    MarsBear book
  • 9 May 2026  ·  17-min read

    Should We Build Mars? — A Public Brief

    Document 5 of the Building Mars set. A thirty-minute brief for general readers. What is being proposed for Mars, what the strongest arguments for and against the project are…

    MarsPublic brief
  • 9 May 2026  ·  14-min read

    Mars Industrialisation — Investor Memo

    Document 1 of the Building Mars set. A decision memo for capital allocators evaluating whether to deploy investment into the operating entity, the supply chain…

    MarsInvestor
  • 9 May 2026  ·  21-min read

    Mars Industrialisation — Policy White Paper

    Document 2 of the Building Mars set. The regulatory and international framework. Written for policymakers, regulators…

    MarsPolicy

See all 8 pieces in Building Mars — a seven-document set →

A notebook of things that may or may not be connected

See all 5 pieces in A notebook of things that may or may not be connected →

On venture capital

See all 13 pieces in On venture capital →

On the April 2026 UK IHT reform

More on this site

Read everything

  • Archive — every piece, in chronological order, with one-line standfirsts. 89 articles.
  • Topics — browse by topic. Tags grouped, with article counts.
  • Search — type-as-you-go search across every article's title, standfirst, body, and tags.
  • Translations — four structural pieces in Deutsch, Français, Español, Italiano, 中文, 日本語. Plus original-language analyses for Germany and France.

By body of work

  • The April 2026 UK IHT reform — reading guide and routes for founders, journalists, tax practitioners, family-business owners, and policy advisers. The publication’s first body of work.
  • On venture capital — 13 pieces across three tiers, from the short front-door pieces to the deep evaluative treatment.
  • Building Mars — a seven-document set on whether to industrialise Mars: a public brief, an investor memo, a policy white paper, a technical reference, the case against, an ethical analysis, and a reference appendix.
  • On UK migration — a reference on UK migration and benefits policy as of May 2026: the data foundation, the policy options, party briefings written from inside each party's worldview, seven framings of the same evidence base from different intellectual traditions, a costed cross-party companion that takes each party's stated proposals and prices them, and a focused deep-dive on why Britons themselves are leaving (three threads, three kinds of evidence). Twenty-nine pieces.
  • The Race Against Itself — the cross-category piece linking the IHT and venture-capital analyses to the broader UK fiscal question. Sister analyses available in German and French.
  • The notebook — pieces that may or may not be connected to each other or to the rest of the publication. The connections are for the reader to make.

Reference

  • IHT model — interactive financial model for the April 2026 BPR reform.
  • Sources — full source list with notes on confidence and contestation.
  • Frame — the analytical frame the publication uses, set out at depth.
  • For government — the version aimed at UK policy advisers specifically.

Methodology and accountability

  • About — what the publication is, who wrote it, what conflicts of interest are disclosed.
  • Eight hours, four AI tools, one founder — the methodology piece on how the publication was produced.
  • The AI fan-out — the four AI tools used (Claude, ChatGPT, Grok, Gemini), what each did, where they disagreed.
  • Corrections — full corrections log. The publication records every substantive change to its claims.