Have £200 a month to invest for daughters Uni

innovate

chopper1400 wrote: »

......I have been a first direct customer since they started, so that 8% savings account would suit brilliant. No surprise that they didn't advertise it to their customers?!

chopper1400 wrote: »

....... i would always recommend first direct as a good bank.......

Surprised you call them a "good bank" just after you realised they hadn't pro-actively made you aware of their industry-leading Regular Saver, which they have had for several years now.

Sounds to me they treat their existing customers like most other banks

xylophone

First Direct Regular Saver

I am a higher rate tax payer

You are a higher rate tax payer so will pay 40% on the interest whereas your daughter would have earned 6% tax free in the Halifax JISA and have been able to transfer to an adult ISA when she became 18?

innovate

maybe chopper1400 wants to keep in control of the funds?

xylophone

OP says in an earlier post
I have been paying my ex-wife for a number of years for my children. My daughter has now finished her GCSE's and has started her A levels and she has made it clear that she will likely be going to Uni after this.

I have agreed with my ex that some of the money I pay to the children be put into some form of savings for Uni.

It seems to me in this case that it would be quite reasonable to use the JISA?

And it would be better value tax wise?

innovate

Sure, there would be less tax to pay if it goes into a JISA.

But the money is then the daughter's, and she can withdraw all of it on her 18th birthday and spend it as she sees fit.

If the intention of the father is to save money to support his daughter regularly whilst at Uni, he might want to remain the owner of the money.

xylophone

If the intention of the father is to save money to support his daughter regularly whilst at Uni, he might want to remain the owner of the money.

I can't quite see why the money didn't continue to go to mother? He doesn't say whether she is a higher rate tax payer - if she isn't, it would be more tax efficient for her to do as he is doing ,and if she is, the result is the same.

However, each to his own.