Self employed, personal pension

atush

Geez Louise Fairleads.

Answer the questions put to you and give facts in support when asked. As opposed to bluster and obfuscation.

you never can or will support your prognostications with actual, real factual evidence.

fairleads

atush wrote: »

Geez Louise Fairleads.

Answer the questions put to you and give facts in support when asked. As opposed to bluster and obfuscation.

you never can or will support your prognostications with actual, real factual evidence.

I do, and every time but there's none so blind..............

However
Gbg, a BR tax-payer aged 29, contributes 100 p/m @ 6% AGR into a sipp for 36 years until retirement aged 65.
Assume no fees then final fund value 184K
Assume annual trail commission .5%, value now 163K, or alternatively
Assume one off set up fee of 2K, value now 164k
Reduction in value/yield is similar in each case at around 20K or 11% of fund value.
On retirement, Gbg ‘s IFA reorganizes the portfolio to produce an annual growth rate of 7% and, being a decent guy, gives him a good deal and takes a trail commission/fee of only .25% p/a. This is over and above the normal fund amc of 1.25% p/a.
Gbg now draws 786 per month – a drawdown of 5.75% - (from a fund valued at 164K) which, when combined with the basic state pension of 714, gives a total monthly income of 1500 or 1,365 nett of tax.
After 30 years of monthly drawings, without deduction of the extra .25% trail fee, the residue would be 93K.
If we now include the .25% trail fee the residue would be 69K.
The reduction in value/yield is thus 24K or 14.6% of 164K.
A grand total of 44K.
As to the feeless option, well, if we assume that the above fees are over and above what one would pay on an Isa-ed fund, then we could say that, by default , the Isa is feeless.
Cheers

jem16

fairleads wrote: »

I do, and every time but there's none so blind..............

However
Gbg, a BR tax-payer aged 29, contributes 100 p/m @ 6% AGR into a sipp for 36 years until retirement aged 65.
Assume no fees then final fund value 184K
Assume annual trail commission .5%, value now 163K, or alternatively
Assume one off set up fee of 2K, value now 164k
Reduction in value/yield is similar in each case at around 20K or 11% of fund value.
On retirement, Gbg ‘s IFA reorganizes the portfolio to produce an annual growth rate of 7% and, being a decent guy, gives him a good deal and takes a trail commission/fee of only .25% p/a. This is over and above the normal fund amc of 1.25% p/a.
Gbg now draws 786 per month – a drawdown of 5.75% - (from a fund valued at 164K) which, when combined with the basic state pension of 714, gives a total monthly income of 1500 or 1,365 nett of tax.
After 30 years of monthly drawings, without deduction of the extra .25% trail fee, the residue would be 93K.
If we now include the .25% trail fee the residue would be 69K.
The reduction in value/yield is thus 24K or 14.6% of 164K.
A grand total of 44K.
As to the feeless option, well, if we assume that the above fees are over and above what one would pay on an Isa-ed fund, then we could say that, by default , the Isa is feeless.
Cheers

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Well we all thought you were talking rubbish. Thank you for proving it :T:T

For the benefit of the OP, the exact same charging structures are available for both S&S ISAs and pensions and every other tax wrapper that you might wish to utilise.

atush

God, is there no stopping his ego?

The energiser bunny on steriods w/o a clue as to real life for all the world's citizens.

fairleads

jem16 wrote: »

For the benefit of the OP, the exact same charging structures are available for both S&S ISAs and pensions and every other tax wrapper that you might wish to utilise.

I agree, they are available from some providers. But that doesn't mean every sipper benefits. After all the only people privy to the real hidden fees levied on pension funds are the people who receive them. Either you're out of the loop. Or you are doing your damnedest to keep the lid on it.
Cheers

atush

What world do you live in I wonder? The brother's Grimm me thinks.

fairleads

atush wrote: »

What world do you live in I wonder? The brother's Grimm me thinks.

The real world, the one outside of these forums, where most investors are fleeced by those they place their trust in.
And what I have alluded to above is only the tip of the iceberg - and thats no fairy tale.

CannySaver_2

fairleads wrote: »

As to the feeless option, well, if we assume that the above fees are over and above what one would pay on an Isa-ed fund, then we could say that, by default , the Isa is feeless.
Cheers

ISA's are not feeless, for a Stocks & Shares ISA a fee is always payable whether it is a actively managed fund or a tracker.

With regard to a Cash ISA there is no explicit fee but the banks and building socities are clearly making a margin.

No such thing as a feeless retirement option, full stop.

The Canny Saver

CannySaver_2

fairleads wrote: »

The real world, the one outside of these forums, where most investors are fleeced by those they place their trust in.

"Most" evidence please? Or just a glib easy statement to make without the need to back it up with hard evidence?

jem16

fairleads wrote: »

After all the only people privy to the real hidden fees levied on pension funds are the people who receive them.

How many pensions have you had and when was the most recent?

Either you're out of the loop. Or you are doing your damnedest to keep the lid on it.

Neither.

Based on factual information of the 3 tax wrappers that I utilise, the highest RIY was on an ISA fund.