Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Savings and Investments thread
Comments
-
Agree, I think flat tax relief is probably the easiest and most obvious change that will happen in future.redman said:
My suspicion is this is a temporary relief only and something will be brought in at some stage but perhaps in a slightly different format.Rob7Lee said:Whilst not wanting to turn this thread into anything remotely political, for those interested in Pensions it looks as if Labour have rowed back and will no longer be putting in their manifesto the bringing back of the LTA - one piece of good news this week!0 -
The other point to note here is that if it is for work carried out, the recipient should declare it for income tax purposes. Therefore you would need to be very careful before arguing this.Solidgone said:How do the authorities know if after I died that Ive given money to someone as a gift or whether this payment was for work that’s been carried out?5 -
Rob7Lee said:
Agree, I think flat tax relief is probably the easiest and most obvious change that will happen in future.redman said:
My suspicion is this is a temporary relief only and something will be brought in at some stage but perhaps in a slightly different format.Rob7Lee said:Whilst not wanting to turn this thread into anything remotely political, for those interested in Pensions it looks as if Labour have rowed back and will no longer be putting in their manifesto the bringing back of the LTA - one piece of good news this week!And justified. In my opinion it has always been perverse and not exactly progressive that a 20% tax payer gets 20% tax relief on pension contributions and a 45% tax payer gets 45% relief.A flat rate of 25% would be sensible.4 -
I must admit I had totally missed this fact. Can make a difference.Rob7Lee said:Just be careful on taper relief.
any gifts prior to death within 7 years come first, ie they will use up the IHT allowance before anything else.
so give away less than £325k and die within 7 years they’ll be no taper relief as it simply uses up an element of the £325k.
There is another assumption I've always made that you may be able to confirm or otherwise. First of all my estate goes solely to my wife and I know there is no IHT on that. However if I made a gift, die within 7 years of that gift, but my wife lives beyond the 7 years, then, am I right in saying, that there is no IHT on the gift made.0 -
Don’t disagree, they’ll have to unravel salary sacrifice though otherwise will make zero difference so maybe not actually that easy!bobmunro said:Rob7Lee said:
Agree, I think flat tax relief is probably the easiest and most obvious change that will happen in future.redman said:
My suspicion is this is a temporary relief only and something will be brought in at some stage but perhaps in a slightly different format.Rob7Lee said:Whilst not wanting to turn this thread into anything remotely political, for those interested in Pensions it looks as if Labour have rowed back and will no longer be putting in their manifesto the bringing back of the LTA - one piece of good news this week!And justified. In my opinion it has always been perverse and not exactly progressive that a 20% tax payer gets 20% tax relief on pension contributions and a 45% tax payer gets 45% relief.A flat rate of 25% would be sensible.0 -
Agree not progressive. However wouldn't it do serious damage to the pensions industry. Only 25% relief when paying in but maybe taxed at 40% when drawn down. Would need a whole new ballgame of calculations for golfie and his clanbobmunro said:Rob7Lee said:
Agree, I think flat tax relief is probably the easiest and most obvious change that will happen in future.redman said:
My suspicion is this is a temporary relief only and something will be brought in at some stage but perhaps in a slightly different format.Rob7Lee said:Whilst not wanting to turn this thread into anything remotely political, for those interested in Pensions it looks as if Labour have rowed back and will no longer be putting in their manifesto the bringing back of the LTA - one piece of good news this week!And justified. In my opinion it has always been perverse and not exactly progressive that a 20% tax payer gets 20% tax relief on pension contributions and a 45% tax payer gets 45% relief.A flat rate of 25% would be sensible.0 -
redman said:
Agree not progressive. However wouldn't it do serious damage to the pensions industry. Only 25% relief when paying in but maybe taxed at 40% when drawn down. Would need a whole new ballgame of calculations for golfie and his clanbobmunro said:Rob7Lee said:
Agree, I think flat tax relief is probably the easiest and most obvious change that will happen in future.redman said:
My suspicion is this is a temporary relief only and something will be brought in at some stage but perhaps in a slightly different format.Rob7Lee said:Whilst not wanting to turn this thread into anything remotely political, for those interested in Pensions it looks as if Labour have rowed back and will no longer be putting in their manifesto the bringing back of the LTA - one piece of good news this week!And justified. In my opinion it has always been perverse and not exactly progressive that a 20% tax payer gets 20% tax relief on pension contributions and a 45% tax payer gets 45% relief.A flat rate of 25% would be sensible.If it keeps Golfie in work and busy then win/win
The pension industry will be affected and managing draw down will need more care. Most occupational schemes have a matching employer contribution so even at 25% relief it's still a no-brainer for most people.2 -
In the gift scenario, one thing I've heard people do is have a dated letter signed between the donor and recipient declaring the money as a gift with no intention of it being paid back. And then a copy is left in attachment with the will, so that it helps the executors when they're going through the estate. That's what we're looking to do.0
-
if you are within the rules the date of transfer of funds will be evidence enough I would imagine?cafctom said:In the gift scenario, one thing I've heard people do is have a dated letter signed between the donor and recipient declaring the money as a gift with no intention of it being paid back. And then a copy is left in attachment with the will, so that it helps the executors when they're going through the estate. That's what we're looking to do.
Transfers made at the ‘11th hour’ can’t be readily justified I suppose as historic events however injust inheritance tax can be.0 - Sponsored links:
-
I agree too. It is currently inequitable but as an incentive to reduce dependence on the state and force personal responsibility it has some merit.Rob7Lee said:
Don’t disagree, they’ll have to unravel salary sacrifice though otherwise will make zero difference so maybe not actually that easy!bobmunro said:Rob7Lee said:
Agree, I think flat tax relief is probably the easiest and most obvious change that will happen in future.redman said:
My suspicion is this is a temporary relief only and something will be brought in at some stage but perhaps in a slightly different format.Rob7Lee said:Whilst not wanting to turn this thread into anything remotely political, for those interested in Pensions it looks as if Labour have rowed back and will no longer be putting in their manifesto the bringing back of the LTA - one piece of good news this week!And justified. In my opinion it has always been perverse and not exactly progressive that a 20% tax payer gets 20% tax relief on pension contributions and a 45% tax payer gets 45% relief.A flat rate of 25% would be sensible.The question in the election should be ‘what are your plans if any for pensions?’ To get an unambiguous response.I dream…0 -
I think there are many people getting 40% tax relief on their pension contributions who then only pay 20% on the pension income in retirement.redman said:
Agree not progressive. However wouldn't it do serious damage to the pensions industry. Only 25% relief when paying in but maybe taxed at 40% when drawn down. Would need a whole new ballgame of calculations for golfie and his clanbobmunro said:Rob7Lee said:
Agree, I think flat tax relief is probably the easiest and most obvious change that will happen in future.redman said:
My suspicion is this is a temporary relief only and something will be brought in at some stage but perhaps in a slightly different format.Rob7Lee said:Whilst not wanting to turn this thread into anything remotely political, for those interested in Pensions it looks as if Labour have rowed back and will no longer be putting in their manifesto the bringing back of the LTA - one piece of good news this week!And justified. In my opinion it has always been perverse and not exactly progressive that a 20% tax payer gets 20% tax relief on pension contributions and a 45% tax payer gets 45% relief.A flat rate of 25% would be sensible.
This is where I think Labour will target it. Easy sell to the general public earning average income of £30kpa.
The last couple of years inflation numbers have really benefitted public sector workers mainly for the increase in their final salary / career average schemes. Those workers in the private sector with DC schemes wont have seen increases to their pensions of 8% last year.1 -
Yes, I expect the bank accounts would show and make it clear - but getting a letter signed at least gives that concrete explanation of the purpose (ie - it’s a gift).valleynick66 said:
if you are within the rules the date of transfer of funds will be evidence enough I would imagine?cafctom said:In the gift scenario, one thing I've heard people do is have a dated letter signed between the donor and recipient declaring the money as a gift with no intention of it being paid back. And then a copy is left in attachment with the will, so that it helps the executors when they're going through the estate. That's what we're looking to do.
Transfers made at the ‘11th hour’ can’t be readily justified I suppose as historic events however injust inheritance tax can be.0 -
That is a good idea.cafctom said:
Yes, I expect the bank accounts would show and make it clear - but getting a letter signed at least gives that concrete explanation of the purpose (ie - it’s a gift).valleynick66 said:
if you are within the rules the date of transfer of funds will be evidence enough I would imagine?cafctom said:In the gift scenario, one thing I've heard people do is have a dated letter signed between the donor and recipient declaring the money as a gift with no intention of it being paid back. And then a copy is left in attachment with the will, so that it helps the executors when they're going through the estate. That's what we're looking to do.
Transfers made at the ‘11th hour’ can’t be readily justified I suppose as historic events however injust inheritance tax can be.
just remember the gifts applying first if you passed within 7 years. You could inadvertently therefore make the gifts tax free but other parts of your estate taxed.
i dealt with an estate where one child had in effect had their inheritance pre death. Due to the tax on the remaining estate meant the remaining children inadvertently received less.1 -
Come to Daddy .... 8115 this morning.Rob7Lee said:With just a few weeks to go, we're not looking as good this half year with everyone below where we currently are, but suspect everyone is happy that it's higher than all our predictions. Think TEL is running away with this.......FTSE100 Level 8,285.34 Name Level Variance % Variance @TelMc32 8100 185.34 2.24% MrWalker 8077 208.34 2.51% WishIdStayedInThe Pub 8047 238.34 2.88% Thread Killer 8016 269.34 3.25% cafcpolo 8011 274.34 3.31% guinnessaddick 8001 284.34 3.43% Solidgone 8001 284.34 3.43% bobmunro 7989 296.34 3.58% Redman 7988 297.34 3.59% holyjo 7979 306.34 3.70% aitchyaddick 7978 307.34 3.71% Pedro45 7975 310.34 3.75% blackpool72 7970 315.34 3.81% CharltonKerry 7966 319.34 3.85% PragueAddick 7965 320.34 3.87% HardyAddick 7951 334.34 4.04% Jamescafc 7950 335.34 4.05% wwaddick 7934 351.34 4.24% Salad 7918 367.34 4.43% Hornchurch 7902 383.34 4.63% meldrew66 7901 384.34 4.64% oohaahmortimer 7891 394.34 4.76% Rob7Lee 7891 394.34 4.76% Housty 7882 403.34 4.87% Bangkokaddick 7878 407.34 4.92% Lonelynorthernaddick 7870 415.34 5.01% Addick Addict 7864 421.34 5.09% Jon_CAFC_ 7864 421.34 5.09% valleynick66 7863 422.34 5.10% thecat 7850 435.34 5.25% CAFCWest 7839 446.34 5.39% TheGhostofTomHovi 7830 455.34 5.50% Huskaris 7825 460.34 5.56% Addickinedi 7824 461.34 5.57% LargeAddick 7824 461.34 5.57% IdleHans 7810 475.34 5.74% Daarrrzzettbum 7801 484.34 5.85% RalphMilne 7795 490.34 5.92% Morboe 7768 517.34 6.24% fat man on a moped 7758 527.34 6.36% StrikerFirmani 7720 565.34 6.82% golfaddick 7680 605.34 7.31% Covered End 7579 706.34 8.53% Fortune 82nd Minute 7450 835.34 10.08% Lenglover 7401 884.34 10.67% Er_Be_Ab_Pl_Wo_Wo_Ch 6999 1286.34 15.53%
Still a long way to go, in market terms.3 -
In the last couple of years I’ve been able to put some money away in an ISA with Vanguard and I’ve been impressed with them. I currently have my pension with Standard life and get charges of about £4,000 per year. I’m pretty much invested in US trackers with a couple of others thrown in. I’ve noticed the charges in a Vanguard SIPP are much lower and I think capped at £375. Worth switching? Seems like a no brainier but wondered if anyone had any thoughts to the contrary. I’ve overall been happy with Standard Life.0
-
I switched to Vanguard 2 years ago. I like them, the only thing you have to be aware of is you are restricted to their funds, but not an issue for me on my main pension.Nug said:In the last couple of years I’ve been able to put some money away in an ISA with Vanguard and I’ve been impressed with them. I currently have my pension with Standard life and get charges of about £4,000 per year. I’m pretty much invested in US trackers with a couple of others thrown in. I’ve noticed the charges in a Vanguard SIPP are much lower and I think capped at £375. Worth switching? Seems like a no brainier but wondered if anyone had any thoughts to the contrary. I’ve overall been happy with Standard Life.
Yes fee's are very very good once you have a decent sized pot, saves me a good few thousand a year.1 -
What charges are you paying ? Platform/policy charge ? Fund charge? And adviser fees ? If it's just the first 2 then you shouldnt really be paying much more than 1%....so I'm estimating your pension pot is c£400k ?Nug said:In the last couple of years I’ve been able to put some money away in an ISA with Vanguard and I’ve been impressed with them. I currently have my pension with Standard life and get charges of about £4,000 per year. I’m pretty much invested in US trackers with a couple of others thrown in. I’ve noticed the charges in a Vanguard SIPP are much lower and I think capped at £375. Worth switching? Seems like a no brainier but wondered if anyone had any thoughts to the contrary. I’ve overall been happy with Standard Life.
As @ Rob7Lee says, Vanguard might be cheap but they only offer their own funds. I wont comment further though as I'm not a great lover of tracker funds.0 -
Why don’t you like tracker funds? I’m sure I read somewhere that 95% of managed funds don’t outperform the S&P 500 over long periods. You’d have to be pretty lucky picking one of the 5% that did outperform it. I was mistaken my charges are about 2.5k on a pot of 220k so a bit above 1%.golfaddick said:
What charges are you paying ? Platform/policy charge ? Fund charge? And adviser fees ? If it's just the first 2 then you shouldnt really be paying much more than 1%....so I'm estimating your pension pot is c£400k ?Nug said:In the last couple of years I’ve been able to put some money away in an ISA with Vanguard and I’ve been impressed with them. I currently have my pension with Standard life and get charges of about £4,000 per year. I’m pretty much invested in US trackers with a couple of others thrown in. I’ve noticed the charges in a Vanguard SIPP are much lower and I think capped at £375. Worth switching? Seems like a no brainier but wondered if anyone had any thoughts to the contrary. I’ve overall been happy with Standard Life.
As @ Rob7Lee says, Vanguard might be cheap but they only offer their own funds. I wont comment further though as I'm not a great lover of tracker funds.0 -
Depends what managed funds you are talking about.Nug said:
Why don’t you like tracker funds? I’m sure I read somewhere that 95% of managed funds don’t outperform the S&P 500 over long periods. You’d have to be pretty lucky picking one of the 5% that did outperform it. I was mistaken my charges are about 2.5k on a pot of 220k so a bit above 1%.golfaddick said:
What charges are you paying ? Platform/policy charge ? Fund charge? And adviser fees ? If it's just the first 2 then you shouldnt really be paying much more than 1%....so I'm estimating your pension pot is c£400k ?Nug said:In the last couple of years I’ve been able to put some money away in an ISA with Vanguard and I’ve been impressed with them. I currently have my pension with Standard life and get charges of about £4,000 per year. I’m pretty much invested in US trackers with a couple of others thrown in. I’ve noticed the charges in a Vanguard SIPP are much lower and I think capped at £375. Worth switching? Seems like a no brainier but wondered if anyone had any thoughts to the contrary. I’ve overall been happy with Standard Life.
As @ Rob7Lee says, Vanguard might be cheap but they only offer their own funds. I wont comment further though as I'm not a great lover of tracker funds.
I know lots of single asset funds that have outperformed a like minded tracker fund. Currently it's only US tracker funds that seem to outperform US active funds.1 - Sponsored links:
-
You not met Warren Buffet yet ;-)golfaddick said:
What charges are you paying ? Platform/policy charge ? Fund charge? And adviser fees ? If it's just the first 2 then you shouldnt really be paying much more than 1%....so I'm estimating your pension pot is c£400k ?Nug said:In the last couple of years I’ve been able to put some money away in an ISA with Vanguard and I’ve been impressed with them. I currently have my pension with Standard life and get charges of about £4,000 per year. I’m pretty much invested in US trackers with a couple of others thrown in. I’ve noticed the charges in a Vanguard SIPP are much lower and I think capped at £375. Worth switching? Seems like a no brainier but wondered if anyone had any thoughts to the contrary. I’ve overall been happy with Standard Life.
As @ Rob7Lee says, Vanguard might be cheap but they only offer their own funds. I wont comment further though as I'm not a great lover of tracker funds.
I think for the vast majority of people who don't use an advisor Vanguard's funds are pretty good and certainly for me have performed exceptionally well the past two years, the anniversary coming up for two years and I've returned 28.78%. The S&P500 ETF is up over 40%.1 -
A tracker fund does what it says on the tin. Not many fund managers have beaten the S&P500 because of its growth over that period. But an investor shouldn't just be buying the S&P500 but having funds that cover worldwide equities, as well as Bonds and other assets. Great if you know what you are doing but not many people do.....or want the headache of doing so or tracking the returns.Rob7Lee said:
You not met Warren Buffet yet ;-)golfaddick said:
What charges are you paying ? Platform/policy charge ? Fund charge? And adviser fees ? If it's just the first 2 then you shouldnt really be paying much more than 1%....so I'm estimating your pension pot is c£400k ?Nug said:In the last couple of years I’ve been able to put some money away in an ISA with Vanguard and I’ve been impressed with them. I currently have my pension with Standard life and get charges of about £4,000 per year. I’m pretty much invested in US trackers with a couple of others thrown in. I’ve noticed the charges in a Vanguard SIPP are much lower and I think capped at £375. Worth switching? Seems like a no brainier but wondered if anyone had any thoughts to the contrary. I’ve overall been happy with Standard Life.
As @ Rob7Lee says, Vanguard might be cheap but they only offer their own funds. I wont comment further though as I'm not a great lover of tracker funds.
I think for the vast majority of people who don't use an advisor Vanguard's funds are pretty good and certainly for me have performed exceptionally well the past two years, the anniversary coming up for two years and I've returned 28.78%. The S&P500 ETF is up over 40%.0 -
Create a portfolio of ETFs that diversify your risk based on your own tolerance to risk.
Pretty easy for anyone who is financially literate.
Stay away from actively managed funds. They genuinely don't outperform the market in almost every case when fees are taken into account, and people that tell you otherwise often have a vested interest.
To give the other side, there are plenty of people wealthy enough to need an IFA who are financially illiterate.
1 -
Thank god for all those financially illiterate ones our there then 😂😂😂.Huskaris said:Create a portfolio of ETFs that diversify your risk based on your own tolerance to risk.
Pretty easy for anyone who is financially literate.
Stay away from actively managed funds. They genuinely don't outperform the market in almost every case when fees are taken into account, and people that tell you otherwise often have a vested interest.
To give the other side, there are plenty of people wealthy enough to need an IFA who are financially illiterate.4 -
I have my ISA with Fidelity and I've started switching all my funds to ETFs as fees are capped to £90 a year (+£7.50 per transaction):
https://www.fidelity.co.uk/estimate-my-fees/
You obviously still have the fees from the ETF, but for the S&P 500 (IE00B3XXRP09) for example, they are about 0.09% a year.
0 -
I use IE00B6YX5C33. 0.03%.Arthur_Trudgill said:I have my ISA with Fidelity and I've started switching all my funds to ETFs as fees are capped to £90 a year (+£7.50 per transaction):
https://www.fidelity.co.uk/estimate-my-fees/
You obviously still have the fees from the ETF, but for the S&P 500 (IE00B3XXRP09) for example, they are about 0.09% a year.
Across my entire portfolio, 0.11% are my total fees on the portfolio below. And before people point out that it's a 100% equity high risk portfolio, I am 33, the portfolio totals about 15% of total household wealth and my diversification is elsewhere (albeit 15% of it in even more risky investments
). Up 6.3% since I started in Feb.
I use investengine and they don't charge any fees for stocks and shares ISA, they do for SIPPs though. Thoroughly recommend them.
2 -
I still have a SIPP with Fidelity and kept a small amount in there, I use it to see if I can beat the funds with a bit of share trading (and so far winning! £28k has become £65k in the last 4 years), I used to have my main SIPP with them but at the time the fee's were a % and was quite expensive. My wife still has her SIPP and main S&S ISA with them.Arthur_Trudgill said:I have my ISA with Fidelity and I've started switching all my funds to ETFs as fees are capped to £90 a year (+£7.50 per transaction):
https://www.fidelity.co.uk/estimate-my-fees/
You obviously still have the fees from the ETF, but for the S&P 500 (IE00B3XXRP09) for example, they are about 0.09% a year.
Love the platform and a good company, used to pop into their investor centre on Cannon Street from time to time. When I managed a companies Pension we did a review and moved to them, streets ahead of the others on service. If you had over £250k you had your own personal contact, much like a private bank which I liked.
Interesting that a while back they changed their charges for ETF's making it very compelling, if that's all you invest in.
ii were also very good from an offering and cost perspective, they also pay a very good rate on cash compared to most.1 -
Good tips Huskaris. I'll look into IE00B6YX5C33, as it looks even cheaper than mine. Not sure if I will switch to investengine though as it would be a faff, but good to know.Huskaris said:
I use IE00B6YX5C33. 0.03%.Arthur_Trudgill said:I have my ISA with Fidelity and I've started switching all my funds to ETFs as fees are capped to £90 a year (+£7.50 per transaction):
https://www.fidelity.co.uk/estimate-my-fees/
You obviously still have the fees from the ETF, but for the S&P 500 (IE00B3XXRP09) for example, they are about 0.09% a year.
Across my entire portfolio, 0.11% are my total fees on the portfolio below. And before people point out that it's a 100% equity high risk portfolio, I am 33, the portfolio totals about 15% of total household wealth and my diversification is elsewhere (albeit 15% of it in even more risky investments ). Up 6.3% since I started in Feb.
I use investengine and they don't charge any fees for stocks and shares ISA, they do for SIPPs though. Thoroughly recommend them.
I also started investing in that India ETF, it seems a bit less correlated than the other indices.
1 -
Hargreaves Lansdown being sold to Abu Dhabi wealth fund
Britain's biggest stock broker is on the brink of a £5.4 billion take-over by a consortium spearheaded by private equity firm CVC Capital and Abu Dhabi's wealth fund. Bosses at Hargreaves Lansdown have told investors they would "be willing to recommend" such a deal if the suitors lay down a firm offer.
0 -
In layman terms what could this mean for my funds? I like the HL interface and have a reasonable amount invested via them but only one of their own funds. I'm tempted to go to another provider and open accounts with the providers of the funds I've invested in. Their dealer fee is high but other than that they have been fine especially for a relative novice like meLincsaddick said:Hargreaves Lansdown being sold to Abu Dhabi wealth fund
Britain's biggest stock broker is on the brink of a £5.4 billion take-over by a consortium spearheaded by private equity firm CVC Capital and Abu Dhabi's wealth fund. Bosses at Hargreaves Lansdown have told investors they would "be willing to recommend" such a deal if the suitors lay down a firm offer.1
