Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Savings and Investments thread

1221222224226227283

Comments

  • Wtf have I just heard.

    Politics Live seconds before they went over to PMQ's a point was raised that Kier Starmer has HIS OWN UNLIMITED  LTA under a specific piece of legislation FOR HIM when he was head of the DPP.

    What  !!!!!
  • If true the Tories are going to spin on that for a long time!
  • Citation needed…
  • Wtf have I just heard.

    Politics Live seconds before they went over to PMQ's a point was raised that Kier Starmer has HIS OWN UNLIMITED  LTA under a specific piece of legislation FOR HIM when he was head of the DPP.

    What  !!!!!
    As the DPP I'm assuming he was part of the Judicial Pension Scheme arrangements - i.e. exempt from LTA.
  • bobmunro said:
    Wtf have I just heard.

    Politics Live seconds before they went over to PMQ's a point was raised that Kier Starmer has HIS OWN UNLIMITED  LTA under a specific piece of legislation FOR HIM when he was head of the DPP.

    What  !!!!!
    As the DPP I'm assuming he was part of the Judicial Pension Scheme arrangements - i.e. exempt from LTA.
    Thats what I first thought but the way the question was asked (to the Labour MP) it seemed a special piece of Legislation just for him as head of the DPP.  But the questioner could have just been causing trouble / not knowing the full facts. 

    In any case, KS has already benefitted from a unlimited LTA - a law that he is going to vote against this afternoon for the rest of the UK population. 
  • Seems bonkers, but then that's the world we currently live in....... 
  • Should former chief prosecutors be given tax free LTA is more the question, rather than anything to do with the labour leader. A quick win from starmer would simply to say he'd get rid of it if he becomes PM.
  • Wow.....just wow.

    His own special scheme that doesn't impact on his LTA. 

    Shame the masses don't really understand it all as it should really bring him down as Labour Leader. Not forgetting it was him that inserted into the Labour manifesto before the 2019 GE that they would have a 2nd referendum on Brexit.....which was the main reason why Labour lost last time out. 

    Bloke keeps shooting himself in the foot. 
    "Man shoots himself in the foot by becoming extremely successful lawyer years before probably becoming PM"
  • Sponsored links:


  • Sounds like this applied from his time as DPP, was put in place by the Conservative government of Cameron/Osborne and was comparable to similar conditions benefits available to judges. 
  • TelMc32 said:
    Sounds like this applied from his time as DPP, was put in place by the Conservative government of Cameron/Osborne and was comparable to similar conditions benefits available to judges. 
    Got the tory boys wetting themselves though  ;)
  • Chaz Hill said:
    TelMc32 said:
    Sounds like this applied from his time as DPP, was put in place by the Conservative government of Cameron/Osborne and was comparable to similar conditions benefits available to judges. 
    Got the tory boys wetting themselves though  ;)
    Tories might be shooting themselves in the foot if they push the subject seeing as they were the ones who introduced it then :P
  • Wow.....just wow.

    His own special scheme that doesn't impact on his LTA. 

    Shame the masses don't really understand it all as it should really bring him down as Labour Leader. Not forgetting it was him that inserted into the Labour manifesto before the 2019 GE that they would have a 2nd referendum on Brexit.....which was the main reason why Labour lost last time out. 

    Bloke keeps shooting himself in the foot. 
    "Man shoots himself in the foot by becoming extremely successful lawyer years before probably becoming PM"
    No.....shoots himself in the foot by publicly saying (after last weeks Budget) that the Chancellor was targeting the rich for "tax giveaways" when he had precisely the same thing. In fact, he has his own personal pension scheme that falls outside of the LTA rules. 

     hypocrisy at its finest. 
    it's not his own personal one though is it? It's for any former chief prosecutor.
  • Wow.....just wow.

    His own special scheme that doesn't impact on his LTA. 

    Shame the masses don't really understand it all as it should really bring him down as Labour Leader. Not forgetting it was him that inserted into the Labour manifesto before the 2019 GE that they would have a 2nd referendum on Brexit.....which was the main reason why Labour lost last time out. 

    Bloke keeps shooting himself in the foot. 
    "Man shoots himself in the foot by becoming extremely successful lawyer years before probably becoming PM"
    No.....shoots himself in the foot by publicly saying (after last weeks Budget) that the Chancellor was targeting the rich for "tax giveaways" when he had precisely the same thing. In fact, he has his own personal pension scheme that falls outside of the LTA rules. 

     hypocrisy at its finest. 
    it's not his own personal one though is it? It's for any former chief prosecutor.
    Correct. But that’s not a large number of individuals is it and are we struggling to fill that role if the LTA applied? 

    The point is he presumably accepts that there is merit in not penalising contributions as he hasn’t waived his right to it but wants to stop anyone else from benefitting. 

    Im not sure this proposal costs the country much if anything in lost tax as individuals impacted take advice to mitigate the penal rate of tax if they exceed the LTA. Yes we may lose tax if they already carry on working and in future will get tax relief on contributions.  but equally they may pay more tax by continuing to work for longer. I’m not convinced it’s at the expense of anyone else. 
  • golfaddick said:
    Foxycafc said:
    £100 bonds return! Over the moon
    ?????
    Premium bonds. Guess the letter has been sitting on the kitchen table for a while
  • Evening all,

    my workplace has sent an email this evening regarding upcoming changes to CGT, this is in respect of their Save As You Earn scheme. They talk about the annual exempt amount in 23/24 being £6,000 and reducing to £3,000 in 24/25 and subsequent years.

    They mention however, if you were to transfer directly into a stocks and shares isa within 90 days of the share exercise then there is no CGT is payable.

    my question therefore is, if moving the shares at the maturity of the SAYE scheme as long as within normal ISA limits how long must they be held before proceeds could be removed - is there a time limit applied 
  • Jon_CAFC_ said:
    Evening all,

    my workplace has sent an email this evening regarding upcoming changes to CGT, this is in respect of their Save As You Earn scheme. They talk about the annual exempt amount in 23/24 being £6,000 and reducing to £3,000 in 24/25 and subsequent years.

    They mention however, if you were to transfer directly into a stocks and shares isa within 90 days of the share exercise then there is no CGT is payable.

    my question therefore is, if moving the shares at the maturity of the SAYE scheme as long as within normal ISA limits how long must they be held before proceeds could be removed - is there a time limit applied 
    There is no time limit if you transferred your shares into an ISA.
  • Jon_CAFC_ said:
    Evening all,

    my workplace has sent an email this evening regarding upcoming changes to CGT, this is in respect of their Save As You Earn scheme. They talk about the annual exempt amount in 23/24 being £6,000 and reducing to £3,000 in 24/25 and subsequent years.

    They mention however, if you were to transfer directly into a stocks and shares isa within 90 days of the share exercise then there is no CGT is payable.

    my question therefore is, if moving the shares at the maturity of the SAYE scheme as long as within normal ISA limits how long must they be held before proceeds could be removed - is there a time limit applied 
    There is no time limit if you transferred your shares into an ISA.
    Interesting, thank you, so could literally put in and take out? And do capital gains count toward annual income calculations do you know 


  • Sponsored links:


  • Jon_CAFC_ said:
    Jon_CAFC_ said:
    Evening all,

    my workplace has sent an email this evening regarding upcoming changes to CGT, this is in respect of their Save As You Earn scheme. They talk about the annual exempt amount in 23/24 being £6,000 and reducing to £3,000 in 24/25 and subsequent years.

    They mention however, if you were to transfer directly into a stocks and shares isa within 90 days of the share exercise then there is no CGT is payable.

    my question therefore is, if moving the shares at the maturity of the SAYE scheme as long as within normal ISA limits how long must they be held before proceeds could be removed - is there a time limit applied 
    There is no time limit if you transferred your shares into an ISA.
    Interesting, thank you, so could literally put in and take out? And do capital gains count toward annual income calculations do you know 


    No, capital gains don't count as income.
    You could always keep the shares without transferring to an ISA & just ensure that you only cash in a certain amount each tax year to stay within the£3K limit.
    I previously did this over a number of years and never paid CGT.
  • Jon_CAFC_ said:
    Jon_CAFC_ said:
    Evening all,

    my workplace has sent an email this evening regarding upcoming changes to CGT, this is in respect of their Save As You Earn scheme. They talk about the annual exempt amount in 23/24 being £6,000 and reducing to £3,000 in 24/25 and subsequent years.

    They mention however, if you were to transfer directly into a stocks and shares isa within 90 days of the share exercise then there is no CGT is payable.

    my question therefore is, if moving the shares at the maturity of the SAYE scheme as long as within normal ISA limits how long must they be held before proceeds could be removed - is there a time limit applied 
    There is no time limit if you transferred your shares into an ISA.
    Interesting, thank you, so could literally put in and take out? And do capital gains count toward annual income calculations do you know 


    No, capital gains don't count as income.
    You could always keep the shares without transferring to an ISA & just ensure that you only cash in a certain amount each tax year to stay within the£3K limit.
    I previously did this over a number of years and never paid CGT.
    Or work for a company like Lloyds Bank where you have little chance of making a profit, on an SAYE.
    Yeah, tell me about it. 
    I did and still have Lloyds shares thanks to Gordon Brown/HBOS bail out. 
  • edited March 2023
    Wow.....just wow.

    His own special scheme that doesn't impact on his LTA. 

    Shame the masses don't really understand it all as it should really bring him down as Labour Leader. Not forgetting it was him that inserted into the Labour manifesto before the 2019 GE that they would have a 2nd referendum on Brexit.....which was the main reason why Labour lost last time out. 

    Bloke keeps shooting himself in the foot. 
    "Man shoots himself in the foot by becoming extremely successful lawyer years before probably becoming PM"
    No.....shoots himself in the foot by publicly saying (after last weeks Budget) that the Chancellor was targeting the rich for "tax giveaways" when he had precisely the same thing. In fact, he has his own personal pension scheme that falls outside of the LTA rules. 

     hypocrisy at its finest. 
    it's not his own personal one though is it? It's for any former chief prosecutor.
    The link on here earlier shows it was his own scheme. It wasn't called "The DPP Scheme" it was the "Kier Starmer" scheme......with just 1 member ! Opened for him personally when he became DPP and then closed once he left - all under an Act of Parliament. Any funds in it do not count towards the LTA.  Nice if you can get it. 
  • Wow.....just wow.

    His own special scheme that doesn't impact on his LTA. 

    Shame the masses don't really understand it all as it should really bring him down as Labour Leader. Not forgetting it was him that inserted into the Labour manifesto before the 2019 GE that they would have a 2nd referendum on Brexit.....which was the main reason why Labour lost last time out. 

    Bloke keeps shooting himself in the foot. 
    "Man shoots himself in the foot by becoming extremely successful lawyer years before probably becoming PM"
    No.....shoots himself in the foot by publicly saying (after last weeks Budget) that the Chancellor was targeting the rich for "tax giveaways" when he had precisely the same thing. In fact, he has his own personal pension scheme that falls outside of the LTA rules. 

     hypocrisy at its finest. 
    it's not his own personal one though is it? It's for any former chief prosecutor.
    The link on here earlier shows it was his own scheme. It wasn't called "The DPP Scheme" it was the "Kier Starmer" scheme......with just 1 member ! Opened for him personally when he became DPP and then closed once he left - all under an Act of Parliament. Any funds in it do not count towards the LTA.  Nice if you can get it. 
    So does Rishi have a similar scheme, seeing as he is a former DPP too?
  • Interest rates up 0.25% to 4.25% today.
  • Wow.....just wow.

    His own special scheme that doesn't impact on his LTA. 

    Shame the masses don't really understand it all as it should really bring him down as Labour Leader. Not forgetting it was him that inserted into the Labour manifesto before the 2019 GE that they would have a 2nd referendum on Brexit.....which was the main reason why Labour lost last time out. 

    Bloke keeps shooting himself in the foot. 
    "Man shoots himself in the foot by becoming extremely successful lawyer years before probably becoming PM"
    No.....shoots himself in the foot by publicly saying (after last weeks Budget) that the Chancellor was targeting the rich for "tax giveaways" when he had precisely the same thing. In fact, he has his own personal pension scheme that falls outside of the LTA rules. 

     hypocrisy at its finest. 
    it's not his own personal one though is it? It's for any former chief prosecutor.
    The link on here earlier shows it was his own scheme. It wasn't called "The DPP Scheme" it was the "Kier Starmer" scheme......with just 1 member ! Opened for him personally when he became DPP and then closed once he left - all under an Act of Parliament. Any funds in it do not count towards the LTA.  Nice if you can get it. 
    Starmer wanted the removal of the cap limited to doctors because there is such a shortage. In the same way as the scheme was introduced for the judiciary because of the number that were leaving.

    It's also "nice" though, as you put it, though if you can get away with paying an effective tax rate of 22% on earnings of £4.76m over a three year period. Means you can afford to have a special electricity line put in to heat your swimming pool. You also don't have to worry about the fact that you and your Government has left the NHS so underfunded that you have to wait three months to have an urgent operation to remove a cancerous lump - because you can afford to see the very same NHS doctor privately within a week. Amazing how these doctors can do these ops privately but can't do them as overtime working for the NHS isn't it. I expect they were all fully trained by the likes of BUPA too.

    And if you happen to be a banker, as Sunak was, you can not only avail yourself of the removal of the pension cap but, if your bank happens to go bust, then the Government or another bank will bail you out - and you still get paid your bonus days after the bank has been declared insolvent. As you say "nice if you can get it". 




  • I don’t understand that thing about free markets finding their own levels.
    Surely if a bank goes bust that’s it, just as if the Barbers shop down the road goes bust.
    How come we bail banks out?
  • seth plum said:
    I don’t understand that thing about free markets finding their own levels.
    Surely if a bank goes bust that’s it, just as if the Barbers shop down the road goes bust.
    How come we bail banks out?
    We have to bail the banks out to protect the thousands of people that use them.
    Imagine if you retire and get a lump sum of say 70k.
    You put this in your bank and then the bank goes bust.
    How would you feel if you lost the lot.
    That's why our savings are protected by the government up to 85k per bank.
    Bailing the banks out is more to do with protecting the savings of thousands of ordinary people. 
    It has to continue surely. 
  • seth plum said:
    I don’t understand that thing about free markets finding their own levels.
    Surely if a bank goes bust that’s it, just as if the Barbers shop down the road goes bust.
    How come we bail banks out?
    We didn’t bail out SVB. It was acquired by HSBC. 

    In 2008 very different. We would all have lost money if the governments globally didn’t step in because of the interbank positions. The likelihood of that now is much reduced. 


Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!