Is the cash ISA dead?

veryintrigued

bowlhead99 wrote: »

The article offers a counterpoint to the notion that a tax wrapper that sits around cash (as distinct from one which sits around investments) has no place whatsoever in the suite of financial products available in the UK and is forever dead in the water.

Actually Martin, as a savvy financial journalist, has been able to identify some reasons why ISAs could be valid choices for some people and do not need to stay "out of sight, out of mind" in the public consciousness. So, he poses an "are they really dead" question, suggests they may not necessarily be, makes sure he lays out a number of products that offer higher rates than ISAs in the interests of balance - and explicitly says that most people would find those better as "money saving experts" - and invites debate.

I don't have a problem with that. The fact that most people don't have a lot of cash and don't need tax planning should not prohibit him from writing an article which ensures people are aware of the reasons that ISAs may be used. As rates change, the reasons may be more relevant to more people or they may not.

You can't hand on heart say that MSE always says that *you* should have an ISA regardless: it is factually incorrect, even though lots of people bang on about it in an unthinking parrot like fashion without actually reading the articles...

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=67824038&postcount=3931

Herbalus

I think most statements of "cash ISAs are dead" are more specifically "cash ISAs are dead for my circumstances and way of financial planning".

I personally don't have any*, and discussed the idea at length with Virgin customer service when withdrawing my last one. But then again I bought a house in December, and my extension will take everything I have left. I needed short-term rates, and got 150-200% more interest than ISAs through multiple current accounts and regular savers.

*I do have the HSBC Loyalty Saver for an interest rate of 40%+