the law relating to gifting

jamescredmond

Tiggs wrote:

then you have applied neither common sense nor anything other than 30 seconds of research to the topic.

no, I have to concede that I too was unaware of the restrictions to gifting, due to the fact that Ihaven't been in a financial position to consider this matter until now.
I gave the matter about 10 mins thought before deciding to consult mse before undertaking any serious research.
the advice from chrismaths/edinvestor is, as usual, helpful and informative.
your posts, however, could improve after you've 'researched' martin's guidance re courtesy helps - somewhere at the top of the page.

Tiggs_2

jamescredmond wrote:

your posts, however, could improve after you've 'researched' martin's guidance re courtesy helps - somewhere at the top of the page.

My post will remain as they are, but thanks for you thoughts.

Chrismaths

Like I say Ed, the sum assured on the WoL policy would be significantly more than £100k - it would be actuarily calculated based on life expectancy and a growth rate.

I'm not saying (unlike you seem to be with your "stick it in a high yield equity portfolio, b****r the tax" method) that this is a solution to all people's circumstances. In fact, we've never actually done one, because most people want to retain some sort of access to the capital or income of their hard earned cash, and as an investment manager, using an AIM portfolio works much better.

The point is that there are many solutions, and many different circumstances. You seem to say that "investment product = lose all your money, HYP= solution to L, U & E". When you say that against good advice from a professional (for FREE!) you create confusion.

EdInvestor

Like I say Ed, the sum assured on the WoL policy would be significantly more than £100k - it would be actuarily calculated based on life expectancy and a growth rate.

Interested to hear (roughly) how much more: of course I was being fairly conservative on the capital growth over 10 years.

Tiggs_2

So someone with 10 years life expectancy invests into a med/high risk investment with no guarantees and hopes to create enough growth to combat the 40% tax hit?

If an adviser skipped over the investments level of risk and assumed growth in the same way they would be hung by their complaince dept!

I am very anti WOL for IHT planning but it does have its place - and when its used right to try and beat its effectivness is no different to beating any insurance......some will and some wont, hence insurance exists because crystal balls dont. Add onto that the WOL paying out free of IHT versus the estate assets and you have a med/high risk investment trying to out "perform" a guarnateed, tax free insurance payout.


To provide WOL quote figures is pointless because they would be produced based on FSA approved calculations and any figures you used to compare would not.

EdInvestor

There wasn't any mention of levels of risk in the original query.My strategy would be low/medium risk not medium/ high.

Tiggs_2

i think a "portfolio of shares" for someone of an age where IHT is an issue is unlikley to be described as low/medium by anyone sensible. Except maybe a commision hungry FA trying to play down the risk.

EdInvestor

I think a "portfolio of shares" for someone of an age where IHT is an issue is unlikley to be described as low/medium by anyone sensible.

Clearly you don't do drawdown then Tiggs, more of a traditionalist are you?

Tiggs_2

EdInvestor wrote:

Clearly you don't do drawdown then Tiggs

I have never advised on pensions of any type so no is the answer - still doesnt make £100k on equites low risk.