We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
MSE News: Isa limits to stay, says Treasury financial secretary
Former_MSE_Guy
Posts: 1,650 Forumite
This is the discussion thread for the following MSE News Story:
"Mark Hoban has denied claims the Government is considering reducing Isa tax incentives in the upcoming spending review ..."
"Mark Hoban has denied claims the Government is considering reducing Isa tax incentives in the upcoming spending review ..."
0
Comments
-
Which effectively sticks two fingers up at the Labour MP that spouted out the lies last week and the quite news period decided to run with that scaremongering.I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). The comments I make are just my opinion and are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice and you should not treat them as such. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.0
-
if isa was lowered---there would be no tories left in uk£48515 interest £181 (2009)debt/mortgage-MFIT/T2/T3
debt/mortgage free 28/11/14
vanguard shares index isa £1000
credit union £400
emergency fund£500
#81 save 2018£42000 -
Surely someone able to put £10k a year into savings is significantly better off than a family earning £44k.
Don't see how they can justify keeping this limit but scrapping child benefit.0 -
JimmyTheWig wrote: »Surely someone able to put £10k a year into savings is significantly better off than a family earning £44k.
Don't see how they can justify keeping this limit but scrapping child benefit.
Easy, everyone has same ISA limit to utilise, sounds fair.
So why should the less well off pay for the child benefit of those earning more, when it would be better they had a chance to use their ISA limit?0 -
JimmyTheWig wrote: »Surely someone able to put £10k a year into savings is significantly better off than a family earning £44k.
Don't see how they can justify keeping this limit but scrapping child benefit.
Easy.
An ISA is basically a vehicle to assist people in saving (usually) for retirement.
Child benefit for reasonably well-off people cannot be justified.
BTW, the CB cut does effect us.In case you hadn't already worked it out - the entire global financial system is predicated on the assumption that you're an idiot:cool:0 -
I'm not saying it shouldn't be the same for everyone. I'm just saying that if they brought the limits back to what they were a few years ago then it would only be the well off that would suffer.Easy, everyone has same ISA limit to utilise, sounds fair.
And it really would be the well off in this instance. This beats any form of means-testing that you can think of. Because it is self-enforcing.
They shouldn't. The money should be raised by taxing the highest earners.So why should the less well off pay for the child benefit of those earning more
With the best will in the world, the "less well off" are never going to get close to saving £10k in a single year.when it would be better they had a chance to use their ISA limit?0 -
Cash ISA's are virtually worthless to anyone other than higher rate tax payers. You can get better rates 'net of tax'. The only people profiting from ISA's are the Banks.0
-
JimmyTheWig wrote: »Surely someone able to put £10k a year into savings is significantly better off than a family earning £44k.
Don't see how they can justify keeping this limit but scrapping child benefit.
I believe it's not based on family earnings, but based on 1 person earning over that.
So you can have 2x£39k and still get CB?
This is what I read in other posts anyway...0 -
Cash ISA's are virtually worthless to anyone other than higher rate tax payers. You can get better rates 'net of tax'. The only people profiting from ISA's are the Banks.
Hm, the highest instant access rate is 2.89% using moneysupermarket. After tax thats 2.3%.
My ISA is 2.8% instant access.
ISAs have gone down further than Non ISAs have, but you can still get a good deal out of them if you look around.0 -
Cash ISA's are virtually worthless to anyone other than higher rate tax payers. You can get better rates 'net of tax'. The only people profiting from ISA's are the Banks.
For a basic rate taxpayer:
Best instant access ISA: Halifax ISA Direct Reward (2.8% or 3%)
Best instant access non-ISA: Natwest e-Savings (2.28% net)
Which is better, 2.28% or 3%?0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.8K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.8K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.7K Spending & Discounts
- 245.9K Work, Benefits & Business
- 602K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.8K Life & Family
- 259.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards