ICICI 7.2% is NOT available any more

light

Why is everyone getting so worked up over this issue.

simpler put you will be protected for the first £50,000 joint 100,000 by the FSCS not the Indian government.

the Iceland banks where passported in to the UK. ICICI bank is a UK registered company.

I have read the results and various articles since yesterday and most brokers rate it as a buy.

RayWolfe

eeja wrote: »

unlike the BBC who only allow UK residents to access their i-player , other people being blocked.

No licence fee, no access. Seems reasonable to me!

isofa

light wrote: »

Why is everyone getting so worked up over this issue.
simpler put you will be protected for the first £50,000 joint 100,000 by the FSCS not the Indian government.
the Iceland banks where passported in to the UK. ICICI bank is a UK registered company.
I have read the results and various articles since yesterday and most brokers rate it as a buy.

You are talking about ICICI Bank UK (as per the original first post) - which is totally different to what eeja is discussing about ICICI Singapore - an off-shore bank, with different protection (not UK FSCS and not "passport").

light

I am sorry for the misunderstanding. !!

I thought the discussion was about the UK side.

Have a good day.

isofa

light wrote: »

I am sorry for the misunderstanding. !!

I thought the discussion was about the UK side.

Have a good day.

It was, until it was hijacked

You too :beer:

soulsaver

I'd put more in at 7.2 (but for sure stay within the FSCS limit and leave headroom for interest) but I can't get funds into my easy access account quick enough without 2 chaps payments which virtually negates the .9 %gain...
And in my experience Icici has been clearly saying that this fix finishes oct29th for some time.
What I find galling is that they're absolute sticklers to the rules even when they're illogical. Took me ages to open the account 'cos of identity docs & niggling picky jobsworth questions.

But they appear better now..
And the music on the helpline....:eek:

eeja

dancingdandare wrote: »

I am already a non resident for tax reasons, as i am not in the country more than 91 days a year and i work abroad. My understanding was if i go over the 5500k allowance (i think it is something like that) then i have to pay 20% tax on interest above that amount per financial year. Or is it different if the account is offshore...can someone help me, confused.....Thanks

The UK rules on residency / non residency, ordinary residency and ordinary non residency are quite complicated.There are many factors to consider ie if your work was for/with the UK government you would be fully taxable.
May I suggest you request the relevant booklet on residency available from any UK tax office and study it carefully . Not trying to avoid the issue but it is just too complicated a matter to deal with on this forum.

eeja

RayWolfe wrote: »

No licence fee, no access. Seems reasonable to me!

Really amazed that you spotted this issue hidden amongst taxation matters. You are dead right. Expats really miss out on the BBC's wonderful programmes by their blocking access to the i-player outside the UK ( or is it outside the British Isles ? ) done by the BBC's automatic checking of the IP address of the computer trying to access it. It is a well known fact however that experts/boffins can get round this block by paying for and connecting through a proxy server based in the UK ! I understand though that this is quite costly.

eeja

isofa wrote: »

Your posts are virtually all the same.

1. You are correct and giving fair information for ex-pats and off-shore residents - but you need to make that point clear, as a huge proportion of this site is read by onshore UK residents. Check the stats and page impressions for this site, and where traffic originates from.

2. In one post you actively encouraged people not to declare tax.

3. I'm well aware of deferred interest. But at some point, unless you do become a non-resident, you'll have to declare it. HMRC will be notified of accounts and it's clear to see they will monitor this in the future, having lost millions of pounds of revenue.

4. For many UK residents investing off-shore is bad news. Let alone wanting in these times to support our own economy rather than another country's.

5. The rating does matter - so we'll have to agree to differ. If ICICI did collapse, do you think the UK savers would be the first to get their money back from Sinagpore? I suggest you look at history, and the recent mess with missing money from Kaupthing, or Icesave and these with UK protection. Let alone the poor people that might lose all their money in IOM, and Gurnsey with actual off-shore accounts. You cannot predict what an Eastern company (with parent in India) would do.
(Iceland said they would paid the first 16K-ish if Icesave collapsed, but now they can't so the UK government are bailing them out.)

6. Investors are pulling out of ICICI because of the rating, and that can't be good for the bank in general, plenty of reports on money sites, FT etc. regarding this.

My dear Isofa,
PLEASE PLEASE do not speak of Singapore and Iceland in the same breath in this context. They are both islands and that's about it. Geographically and literally they are a world apart also, one being near the Equator and the other near the North Pole. Singapore is Triple AAA rated and a Commonwealth country, a first world nation currently no 1 in the honest non corrupt league enjoying the highest possible reputation all around the world and especially in finance.. Iceland is BUST and although a delightful country has fish as its main and almost sole export. PS I love Iceland and its saga history and have visited the place numerous times but when it comes to finance there is just NO comparison.

Baldur

See eMoneyfacts https://www.emoneyfacts.co.uk/news/savings-news.aspx?newsarticleid=177209