MSE News: Cash Isas: Should you use this year's allowance, even though rates are low?

Former_MSE_Helen

"Savers need to weigh up gambling on higher rates now versus building up a bigger tax-free savings pot in future..."

Read the full story:

Cash Isas: Should you use this year's allowance, even though rates are low?



Click reply below to discuss. If you haven’t already, join the forum to reply. If you aren’t sure how it all works, read our New to Forum? Intro Guide.

innovate

Reading that article, you could be left thinking that S&S ISAs don't even exist as an alternative to cash ISAs. Which might be just as well since some dangerously out of date linked MSE article suggests HL would be the top broker to use. When we have been discussing for weeks that HL might now be one of the worst options for people's investments.

Of course, for many people an S&S ISA is a very valid alternative / complement to a cash ISA.

MSE, it is ok if you do not wish to get involved in investments, S&S ISAs and platform choices, but please declare your hand, and please stop telling people HL is the top choice.

There is no mention of JISAs either - might this mean that MSE suggest people should invest in S&S JISAs only?

If we accept that the - unspecified - scope of the article is cash ISAs for adults only, and for such adults who have already decided on sticking with cash, the principles discussed in the article are sound. It is, however, rather disappointing that out of the some half a dozen current accounts that can pay 3% or more, only one is mentioned as an alternative to stash some cash into.

For those interested in S&S ISAs and/or alternatives to the 123 and/or HL: there is a huge amount of information on the MSE savings forum board.

nick65g

Well done innovate! I like your sharp but true position. Someone have to stand up against biased suggestions.

jimjames

innovate wrote: »

Reading that article, you could be left thinking that S&S ISAs don't even exist as an alternative to cash ISAs.

If we accept that the - unspecified - scope of the article is cash ISAs for adults only, and for such adults who have already decided on sticking with cash, the principles discussed in the article are sound. It is, however, rather disappointing that out of the some half a dozen current accounts that can pay 3% or more, only one is mentioned as an alternative to stash some cash into.

Completely agree. I had the same frustration with a similarly poor article on the Guardian website yesterday. By all means highlight that ISA rates are low but missing out the most valid alternatives is just sloppy journalism.

For MSE it is even worse than the Guardian as you only need to read the forum here for a few minutes to find the info you want. Why not mention...?

1) Current Accounts paying more than 3%
2) Regular savers paying 6%
3) S&S ISAs that can contain bonds not just shares and can contain funds of pretty much any risk level you want