I am a dairy farmer planning to invest in additional slurry storage to meet nitrates regulations. The projected cost is around €75,000, and while grant aid will cover up to 60%, I am concerned about the cash flow gap between paying contractors and receiving the grant.
With rising costs across the farm, I am worried about tying up too much working capital at a critical time of year. I would like to understand the true cost of a slurry storage project, the financing options available, and how best to plan for the cash flow impact.
ANSWER: Slurry storage investment has become unavoidable for many Irish farmers, particularly dairy producers facing extended closed periods and increased storage requirements under the Nitrates Action Programme.
On paper, grant aid makes these projects look manageable. In practice, the timing of costs and repayments can create a significant cash flow challenge that needs careful planning.
A slurry storage project with a reference cost of €75,000 and 60% grant aid is often viewed as a €30,000 investment. However, that headline figure disguises the reality that the full cost must be funded upfront.
Contractors typically require payment over the construction period, long before inspections are completed and grant money is released. For many farms, this creates a six- to nine-month period where liquidity is under pressure.
Recent estimates suggest slurry storage costs of €600 to €900 per cow, excluding VAT. For a 100-cow dairy herd requiring approximately 20 weeks of storage, total project costs frequently fall between €70,000 and €80,000. While grant support is generous, it is based on reference costs rather than actual expenditure, which can further widen the funding gap if construction costs exceed the benchmark.
The importance of timing
In the first three months, contractors are typically paid in full. Construction and inspections usually follow over months four and five. Grant payments often arrive between months six and nine. During this period, the farm must continue to meet normal operating costs such as feed, fertiliser, loan repayments and household expenses, all while carrying the full capital outlay.
While VAT can be reclaimed, the timing matters. For large projects frequent VAT claims can significantly ease cash flow pressure. Where necessary, banks will often provide short-term VAT bridging facilities, usually over 12 months, to avoid tying up working capital unnecessarily.
Beyond the tank itself, there are often hidden or underestimated costs. Site preparation, access works, concrete aprons, roadways, engineering fees, planning costs and contingencies for ground conditions are commonly outside the scope of grant aid. These extras can add 15-20% to the overall cost, meaning farmers should budget closer to 120% of the tank cost when planning total expenditure.
How to manage cash flow
There are three options. First is working capital, using existing cash reserves. While this avoids interest costs, it can leave the business exposed if unexpected expenses arise or if spring cash demands are higher.
Second is bridging finance. Banks are well-accustomed to TAMS-related projects and typically offer six-12-month bridging loans to cover the grant and VAT gap. This approach protects working capital but comes at an interest cost, which effectively reduces the net benefit of the grant.
The third option is a longer-term loan to cover the net post-grant cost, often spread over up to 15 years. This smooths the financial impact and aligns repayments with the useful life of the asset, though it increases the overall cost due to interest.
Choosing between these options depends on existing debt levels, available cash reserves and upcoming capital commitments.
There is no one-size-fits-all solution, and the cheapest option on paper is not always the safest from a cash flow perspective. Tax relief provides a partial offset. Capital allowances can generally be claimed on the net cost over two years, delivering tax savings of roughly 20-25% of the farmer’s contribution.
For a €30,000 net investment, this could mean €6,000 to €7,500 in tax relief, although this benefit is delayed and should not be relied upon to solve short-term liquidity pressures.
Before committing to a contractor, farmers should model the full cash flow timeline from initial payment, through VAT reclaims and grant receipt, to the longer-term tax relief from capital allowances. Stress-testing working capital is essential: the key question is whether the farm can operate comfortably for six months without access to the funds being invested.
Slurry storage is a compliance-driven investment rather than a profit-generating one. The difference between a manageable project and a financial strain lies in early planning, realistic budgeting and choosing the right financing structure. Taking advice from both an agricultural adviser and an accountant before signing contracts can help ensure the investment meets regulatory requirements without creating pressure on farm cash flow.
Philip O'Connor is Ifac's head of farm support.
Philip O’Connor is ifac’s head of farm
support.
I am a dairy farmer planning to invest in additional slurry storage to meet nitrates regulations. The projected cost is around €75,000, and while grant aid will cover up to 60%, I am concerned about the cash flow gap between paying contractors and receiving the grant.
With rising costs across the farm, I am worried about tying up too much working capital at a critical time of year. I would like to understand the true cost of a slurry storage project, the financing options available, and how best to plan for the cash flow impact.
ANSWER: Slurry storage investment has become unavoidable for many Irish farmers, particularly dairy producers facing extended closed periods and increased storage requirements under the Nitrates Action Programme.
On paper, grant aid makes these projects look manageable. In practice, the timing of costs and repayments can create a significant cash flow challenge that needs careful planning.
A slurry storage project with a reference cost of €75,000 and 60% grant aid is often viewed as a €30,000 investment. However, that headline figure disguises the reality that the full cost must be funded upfront.
Contractors typically require payment over the construction period, long before inspections are completed and grant money is released. For many farms, this creates a six- to nine-month period where liquidity is under pressure.
Recent estimates suggest slurry storage costs of €600 to €900 per cow, excluding VAT. For a 100-cow dairy herd requiring approximately 20 weeks of storage, total project costs frequently fall between €70,000 and €80,000. While grant support is generous, it is based on reference costs rather than actual expenditure, which can further widen the funding gap if construction costs exceed the benchmark.
The importance of timing
In the first three months, contractors are typically paid in full. Construction and inspections usually follow over months four and five. Grant payments often arrive between months six and nine. During this period, the farm must continue to meet normal operating costs such as feed, fertiliser, loan repayments and household expenses, all while carrying the full capital outlay.
While VAT can be reclaimed, the timing matters. For large projects frequent VAT claims can significantly ease cash flow pressure. Where necessary, banks will often provide short-term VAT bridging facilities, usually over 12 months, to avoid tying up working capital unnecessarily.
Beyond the tank itself, there are often hidden or underestimated costs. Site preparation, access works, concrete aprons, roadways, engineering fees, planning costs and contingencies for ground conditions are commonly outside the scope of grant aid. These extras can add 15-20% to the overall cost, meaning farmers should budget closer to 120% of the tank cost when planning total expenditure.
How to manage cash flow
There are three options. First is working capital, using existing cash reserves. While this avoids interest costs, it can leave the business exposed if unexpected expenses arise or if spring cash demands are higher.
Second is bridging finance. Banks are well-accustomed to TAMS-related projects and typically offer six-12-month bridging loans to cover the grant and VAT gap. This approach protects working capital but comes at an interest cost, which effectively reduces the net benefit of the grant.
The third option is a longer-term loan to cover the net post-grant cost, often spread over up to 15 years. This smooths the financial impact and aligns repayments with the useful life of the asset, though it increases the overall cost due to interest.
Choosing between these options depends on existing debt levels, available cash reserves and upcoming capital commitments.
There is no one-size-fits-all solution, and the cheapest option on paper is not always the safest from a cash flow perspective. Tax relief provides a partial offset. Capital allowances can generally be claimed on the net cost over two years, delivering tax savings of roughly 20-25% of the farmer’s contribution.
For a €30,000 net investment, this could mean €6,000 to €7,500 in tax relief, although this benefit is delayed and should not be relied upon to solve short-term liquidity pressures.
Before committing to a contractor, farmers should model the full cash flow timeline from initial payment, through VAT reclaims and grant receipt, to the longer-term tax relief from capital allowances. Stress-testing working capital is essential: the key question is whether the farm can operate comfortably for six months without access to the funds being invested.
Slurry storage is a compliance-driven investment rather than a profit-generating one. The difference between a manageable project and a financial strain lies in early planning, realistic budgeting and choosing the right financing structure. Taking advice from both an agricultural adviser and an accountant before signing contracts can help ensure the investment meets regulatory requirements without creating pressure on farm cash flow.
Philip O'Connor is Ifac's head of farm support.
Philip O’Connor is ifac’s head of farm
support.
SHARING OPTIONS