Purely hypothetical - banking of ~£20m

Malthusian

do you have a different view on any of the above?

No, I just don't consider the risk that we're wrong resulting in the permanent loss of a £20,000,000 fortune worth a return of 0.16% per annum.

grey_gym_sock wrote: »

but weren't you going to stick it all in a money market fund held on a UK investment platform?

Not one which would even consider handing my assets over to the UK Government. Most of the big platforms are run by multinational firms, they have no reason to hand over title to my funds if a newly formed tinpot dictatorship demands it.

There's a difference between holding your assets in one country and lending all your money to the government of one country.

atush

Wookey wrote: »

I'm fairly certain that the lottery give guidance on this when you win a large sum.

But, I would
ensure immediate family are financially secure 5m
max out premium bonds 50k
max out a sipp with a lifetime pension contribution asap 1.0m
buy a small busy viable business where next to no knowledge is required (cornershop/newsagent type shop) 150-300k
stocks and shares ISA to levels i was comfortable with circa 100k
long term bonds at a risk level/rate i was comfortable with circa 100k
small well managed property portfolio with a mix of commercial/domestic property in sought after areas 3-5m
buy a few holiday homes in various countries which could tie in within the managed property portfolio as holiday rentals 1m
keep around 2-5m as easy access working capital for opportunities arising
employ a dam good accountant, shop manager and property manager @50k per year each with a two week summer vacation at one of the holiday homes included for hitting and maintaining targets
spread the remainder over multiple accounts with varying banks up to 100k per bank

Quite a bit of this you cant actually do like

max out a sipp with a lifetime pension contribution asap 1.0m

as you would need relevant earnings of 160K this year just to use up your last 3 years plus this years allowance of 40K

Same with your isa strategy, you c an put in 20K per year only so it would take at least 5 years to get 100K in (but a spouse could do it as well).

adonis10

atush wrote: »

Quite a bit of this you cant actually do like

as you would need relevant earnings of 160K this year just to use up your last 3 years plus this years allowance of 40K

Same with your isa strategy, you c an put in 20K per year only so it would take at least 5 years to get 100K in (but a spouse could do it as well).

What bits couldn't they do and why?

TheShape

atush wrote: »

Quite a bit of this you cant actually do like

as you would need relevant earnings of 160K this year just to use up your last 3 years plus this years allowance of 40K

Same with your isa strategy, you c an put in 20K per year only so it would take at least 5 years to get 100K in (but a spouse could do it as well).

adonis10 wrote: »

What bits couldn't they do and why?

I think you've just posted the answer to your question.....with your question!

atush

adonis10 wrote: »

What bits couldn't they do and why?

Re read it. Annual allowances? Earned income?

grey_gym_sock

Malthusian wrote: »

No, I just don't consider the risk that we're wrong resulting in the permanent loss of a £20,000,000 fortune worth a return of 0.16% per annum.

the current short-term risk of the UK defaulting on its debts is basically insignificant. actually, i'd be more worried about the risks of holding a diversified sterling money-market fund, because that has a real risk of losing a small part of your money, in case 1 or a few of the underlying investments suffer from defaults.

Not one which would even consider handing my assets over to the UK Government. Most of the big platforms are run by multinational firms, they have no reason to hand over title to my funds if a newly formed tinpot dictatorship demands it.

dictatorships tend to change the law, so that their complying with their demands is mostly a matter of following the law. most firms (including firms which are part of international groups) are going to comply with that. it's not impossible they would try to avoid complying in some circumstances, but you can't rely on that. partly because there is never is clear line, after which the law is clearly utterly unconscionable - it's a usually series of small changes, starting with things you might just disagree with, eventually becoming much worse.

There's a difference between holding your assets in one country and lending all your money to the government of one country.

there's a difference. and in some countries, at some times, the risks of those 2 things are very different. but not in the UK, right now.

Malthusian

grey_gym_sock wrote: »

the current short-term risk of the UK defaulting on its debts is basically insignificant.

If you have £20m everything is significant. That is how wealth management works at that level, it's about preserving what you have rather than eking out a few thousand quid by investing in short-term gilts.

actually, i'd be more worried about the risks of holding a diversified sterling money-market fund, because that has a real risk of losing a small part of your money, in case 1 or a few of the underlying investments suffer from defaults.

Any sizable money market fund is spread over hundreds of short term instruments, if a few of the underlying investments default it will make virtually no difference. And when a few money market funds lost money ten years ago (due to being invested in mortgage-backed securities) the parent company made up the difference for the sake of a quiet life. After the Standard Life Cash Plus scandal you have to look really hard to find a cash fund that makes a loss over any time period (before deducting charges).

dictatorships tend to change the law, so that their complying with their demands is mostly a matter of following the law. most firms (including firms which are part of international groups) are going to comply with that. it's not impossible they would try to avoid complying in some circumstances, but you can't rely on that. partly because there is never is clear line, after which the law is clearly utterly unconscionable - it's a usually series of small changes, starting with things you might just disagree with, eventually becoming much worse.

People with £20m have no need to worry about "salami tactics", they have fled the country with all their assets long before the brown stuff hits the swirly thing. This was the case 100 years ago, let alone nowadays with modern fund platforms who hold their ownership records in the cloud.

If I was managing a £20m fortune I would not advocate holding it with a small UK-only platform that could not refuse the orders of a tinpot dictatorship.

Eco_Miser

Malthusian wrote: »

People with £20m have no need to worry about "salami tactics", they have fled the country with all their assets long before the brown stuff hits the swirly thing.

Isn't this thread about what to do with a windfall £20m in the period between getting the cheque (or whatever) and deciding what to do with the money?