Elite 11+ shopping and chat thread part 2½

Saversue

silvercar wrote: »

I agree this doesn't look right. Are they using old software from 2008?

curl_girl wrote: »

I've asked about this in branch.
Apparently it's not interest but is a reward, so it's taxable.
This was last year when I asked.

mhoc wrote: »

Interesting.
Did this come as a letter or was it one of your online messages?
I thought as it was classed as a "reward" rather than an interest payment there was no tax applicable - so it does not count towards your personal savings allowance.

You could try contacting them via the message facility on FB (or twitter) might be quicker than waiting for a response from your local branch

And then I found this old article

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/saving/article-3595338/HMRC-robs-savers-tax-perk-monthly-bank-account-bonuses-claiming-count-annual-payments.html

Thanks for all the replies. Hadn't noticed it before, but just looked at last years statement and it's the same, except the rate was higher £5.00 permonth.
Understand their system now, but in M.O. it's crazy.

Wheres_My_Cashback

Savvybuyer wrote: »

Thank you!
Thanks for showing up Halifax's claim in my view as incorrect. So, either Halifax are required by legislation to pay tax and NatWest is breaking the law (assuming the situations to be identical) or Halifax aren't required by legislation to pay tax are making a misleading claim that they are. Which of these two alternatives is it to be?

To my mind, the fact you've told me the NatWest reward account rewards aren't taxed shows up Halifax's statement as being wrong. I'm not confused at all - I disagree with Halifax and, in my mind, you've just shown my disagreement to be fully and completely valid. The statement allegedly on Halifax's website (I have not checked!) seems to be out-of-date - in my view Halifax are not required to pay tax at all and if they are paying tax they are not obliged to do so. If they are, then why is NatWest failing to comply with this alleged requirement of legislation? In my view, no such requirement exists any more.

If I were making a complaint to the ASA about Halifax, I would now be adding that I also understood that the NatWest rewards account does not tax the rewards, which, in my view, would strengthen such a currently hypothetical complaint.

However:
You can have, within a set of legislation, a range of reasonable views as to what response to the legislation to make. It may be that Halifax are simply taking a different approach to NatWest, but both approaches are justified within the legislation. However, either there is a requirement of the legislation to pay tax over to HMRC or there is not. The fact (if it is one) that NatWest are not paying tax over seems to suggest this isn't a requirement. It may be that Halifax are interpreting the legislation in a way that makes them think there is a requirement; however their interpretation may be wrong and if there is in fact no requirement of legislation, then there is no requirement regardless of what Halifax say to the contrary and regardless of how they are interpreting the legislation. Either they are right about it being a requirement of legislation or they are not: it can't be both!

Perfectly legitimate as approved by HMRC. What would have been wrong is if Halifax stated the reward was £3.75, but you only got £3. It's marketed as £3 so you expect £3 and that is exactly what you'll get.
What happens in the background to get that £3 is of no concern to the account holder and totally irrelevant. It's only displayed so HMRC can track it.
If it wasn't in the summary the account holder wouldn't be any the wiser. This is a case of giving the customer too much information.

Savvybuyer

A little old but the MSE article (the older of the two) does seem to take into account changes to the Personal Savings Allowance so seems to be in date (although the amount of the "reward" has been reduced since).

https://performanceaccountancy.co.uk/tax-bank-rewards/

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/banking/2016/07/halifax-barclays-or-co-op-bank-customer-you-may-need-to-pay-tax-on-your-rewards

Seems Halifax are right. NatWest may be different: are their "rewards" cashback on payments made from the account?

However, in my long-running disagreement with Halifax, when they appeared to be saying their rewards were not treated like interest when HMRC seemed to treat them that way, I still don't drop my view:wall:. (I am very obstinate and sometimes I hold onto the wrong things until I am shown to be wrong.) HMRC says that the rewards aren't covered by the PSA. However, that is just what HMRC says: it doesn't automatically make it a fact that there is a legal requirement: it could just be that HMRC thinks there is one when in fact there isn't and a court of law has not ruled that there is. I don't know about the legislation that says there is a requirement and would like to see it before I make up my view.

On one occasion in the long past, on a completely different subject, I wrote to HMRC querying something - I remember exactly what and could do into details together with legal authority but it would be boring - and they wrote back with a reply in which they made a couple of claims. However, I wrote back pointing out that there was no legal basis to what they were saying. The Act of Parliament actually defined it in the terms that HMRC claimed that it was not. As usual with any organisation when you've hit the nail on the head, I don't think they had any reply to my saying what they'd told me had no legal basis because [statute etc. section number...] says the opposite to what you've said...:rotfl:

Savvybuyer

Surely if someone as big as Halifax were saying something that wasn't, it would have been noticed before now and changed if it ws incorrect?:think:

Wheres_My_Cashback wrote: »

Perfectly legitimate as approved by HMRC. What would have been wrong is if Halifax stated the reward was £3.75, but you only got £3. It's marketed as £3 so you expect £3 and that is exactly what you'll get.
What happens in the background to get that £3 is of no concern to the account holder and totally irrelevant. It's only displayed so HMRC can track it.
If it wasn't in the summary the account holder wouldn't be any the wiser. This is a case of giving the customer too much information.

Yes, indeed - I've just added more above, from what I've found suggesting Halifax is correct. However, "as approved by HMRC" - that is the very point. It may well be "approved" by HMRC but that fact does not show that HMRC are correct. HMRC could be wrong in their interpretation of the law and I dispute their interpretation until I am shown that it is correct.

Remember, in the Asperger's world of "always being right" (incidentally I do not make that claim), I will dispute and challenge everything until I am shown to be wrong:rotfl:. I don't accept at face value - or have done so so often before, only for things that people say often turn out to be incorrect. I'm not saying that it's not legitimate if it is approved by HMRC. However, it could be a requirement of HMRC rather than actually a requirement of the law or legislation.

Perhaps we are losing sight of the bigger picture though - which is that ordinary people, who may not be liable to pay tax, may not think that tax is taken off and may not take the effort needed to reclaim it (if indeed they can). Perhaps that's the real point - and that people, who are not aware whether they can reclaim or who do not reclaim because it is too much effort, would be being shortchanged. It would also benefit and not be of concern to HMRC as HMRC would have payments that could be reclaimed, but if no-one does so, then it's not a problem for HMRC. You say it's of no concern and totally irrelevant to the account holder. That is the average person though - it is the entire point of concern and total relevance to me. With me there is no "too much information", there never can be too much! Most people there is too much information. In autism, it's said it's a world of too much information - I perceive everything (except for body language), so in an environment, everything, including the colour of the carpet, even if it is totally irrelvant, is noticed. Especially the "irrelevant" as they are the "distractions", that divert me into tangents. From my point however, there is no irrelevant. Nothing is irrelevant as everything has its use and is relevant. As for the "too much information" - see the National Autistic Society campaign that specifies this - it may be too much for everyone else, but isn't too much for me as I have a brain for information and can probably hold it in everything that no-one else would be able to. Possibly:rotfl:.

It's irrelevant and of no concern to account holders that they are paying tax that they don't have to or can reclaim but don't or don't know they can (if they can - I don't know about this myself)? Is that what you are saying? It's concerning and worrying that people are unaware and not concerned that they are paying tax that they don't have to if that is the case.

It may be marketed as £3 but it's actually £3.75 gross (which, to be fair, Halifax do point out on their website I am told - although probably only if you go looking for it). Therefore, people who are not taxpayers should be able to claim it back. Indeed, the fact it is marketed as £3 makes the matter worse - as it means people are unaware something is not being paid to them that they should reclaim.

The summary is there to help people. It's not too much information if it informs them they could claim the 75p back. Or is the suggestion that the information should not be included as it is "too much" and that people should therefore be none the wiser? I think being none the wiser is a bad thing, although that's just me. Maybe people generally don't care and are happy to overpay tax and not bother getting back what they are entitled to? As money-saving though, we should claim what we are entitled to. The "problem" is that it is "just" 75p per month which makes it hardly worthwhile to bother reclaiming. But imagine the numerous accounts if that's so - and how much in total across all customers is being paid to the tax people.

In my view the reward should be £3.75 and Halifax should pay £3.75 without passing any of it over to HMRC - and should not have had this tax arrangement approved which seems to me to pass over unnecessarily as "tax" something which is not due. HMRC should not enter deals with companies, that are against our interests. On a wider point, that does not refer to Halifax, the tax authorities should operate in the public interest, that is the interests of the general public as a whole, and not have discussions with big corporations that allow them to avoid tax. Imagine myself, as individual, negotiating my own tax with the tax authority - it does not happen! But, international corporations it seems can do so and agree not to pay tax that they are liable to pay. Again, imagine me picking up the phone to the tax people: "can I agree not to pay tax this year?" I think not. Can you imagine the response to that?

Savvybuyer

In fact the amounts paid on most bank accounts now - even if you don't need to have any money in the account, just £750 in and out and payments for the DDs in and out - is hardly worth the bother. Even with 3% interest rates of some accounts, I've ended up with about £77 in a year. The interest is derisory in a world of low interest rates and even though at one stage there was thought to be going to be an increase but then inflation slowed down, the rates are brought down. Far better are the switch incentives, whilst those are available - it pays more to switch and then ditch than it does to keep money in accounts on even 3 or 4% interest a year.

£3 a month is just £36 all year. I could get more than that in wombles in two or three weeks or just switch to NatWest earlier in the year, get £125 within two months and then it's all done and paid and no need to bother. Interest is almost worthless - disloyalty and switching pays (until unfortunately you've switched to everywhere before and can no longer get the incentives again).

However, I've decided not to go for the Barclay's switch as that would require 2 DDs through the year. Unfortunately I have not got enough and don't have any more scope to set up more DDs and would lose the interest on one of my other accounts. I think I've worked out that I would gain £40 through having the switch incentive from Barclay's instead of that but lose £60 from having the money in Barclay's and not elsewhere gaining interest. Plus all the additional work of setting up the new account, complying with all the hoops etc. So I'm best staying where I am and moving my money around between the accounts I currently have.

I am already losing my Club Lloyds interest as of this month onwards through not having DDs anymore (I really should have opened up a Tesco account before they imposed their requirement for DDs and then would have had enough but what was done was done) - so I am now zero balance in Club Lloyds, putting the faff of £1500 in and then straight back out each month to avoid £3 and just paying in for transfers to regular savers. Instead I am keeping the money in the 1.35% account opened at Tesco a few months ago - allows up to £1 million - for the sake of 0.15% interest in months to come very soon as Club Lloyds will be coming down and no requirement for DDs on the Tesco saver, I have effectively decommissioned my Club Lloyds - just picking up the cinema tickets and keeping the account on near-zero balance as a gateway to the Club Lloyds saver that requires me to have the account. Virgin Money will let you open one new account of each issue of its regular saver at 2.25% interest so £250 a month comes out of Tesco internet saver and going to each of those as well as slowly going to the 5% regular savers elsewhere throughout the year (where the main accounts again, where they don't give interest, are stuck on 1p balance the vast majority of the time - just money in time for any DDs and transfers to the 5% savers).

I have opened up Santander 1-2-3 Lite (still haven't got not enough DDs:rotfl:) to order to have the 5% regular saver - I'll be charged £1 a month - again, as not giving any interest due to being Lite account, it is on one penny balance the vast majority of the time with just the saver transfer money and the £1 each month. You can open up a regular saver without it but the interest is lower - it works out better at 5% even after the £12 a year fees on the Lite account, so is always better to open a Lite account and then the Saver if you are saving the maximum allowed amount in that.

I have a Halifax Reward account but it has no DDs and no payments in or out these days either (as both needed for the 'reward') - it exists solely as a means to open up an Everyday account for me to switch immediately to elsewhere as and when needed to get switch incentives. I would never close my accounts entirely but always remain with 1p everywhere so that I can easily open another account there if required without having to go through all the new ID checks etc. In fact I never left Santander after they reduced the interest on 1-2-3 that made me ditch the account and put all the money elsewhere. I remained with a penny in an Easy Saver, which by that point had remained as it was opened when I had a 1-2-3 so was still able to keep it after that closed - obviously the interest on that became so low that I took all but one penny to elsewhere but kept it open with the penny (it probably costs banks more just to keep my accounts open:rotfl:) so that, as I have never ceased to be a customer, I could open the new Lite and 5% regular savers almost immediately when I needed them. Never leave them entirely - I am best in my view keeping something with them so it is much easier to open a new account in the future.

I'm getting no CB on the Santander Lite account as I don't have any DDs on the account and aren't paying £500 a month into the account (although that could be easily done in and back out again each month) but, as I don't have any household bills coming out of the account anyway, the CB isn't relevant as there are no DDs on the account (and they are needed to have the interest rates elsewhere). I will relook at this to see what's better - but when I was getting CB on the main 1-2-3 account and the monthly fee was being charged there, the CB wasn't fully covering it (since my household bills, thanks to switching to the cheapest energy, are so low). I need the 1-2-3 Lite account anyway to get 5% on the regular saver instead of the lower rate and a regular saver on lower rate would cost more than the fee for the Lite account even with no CB on it. So the Lite account is there solely for the regular saver and without it I would be worse off. It's basically £12 a year off the interest rate, but that is better than the lower rate of interest from having a free-standing regular saver. So, never a good idea, if you are saving the maximum per month in that, to have it without at least a Lite account. I may start using it for CB after the terms for 5% savers on other accounts at other banks come to an end and free up some DDs from the main accounts I have at the other banks for those.

Savvybuyer

The reason I have a penny in my bank accounts is because, if the accounts don't pay any interest, I see no reason to keep anything other than the minimum possible in them. It's because I am tight and also because I am someone who rigidly follows rules. I don't let them have zero balance in case that causes them to close the accounts as they have nothing in them. Instead I will keep a penny in there at most times. Even when I was putting £750 into the Halifax reward account and having DDs there and getting what was then a better £5 "reward" each month, I had a penny in the account the vast majority of the time as it does not pay interest. It was £5 for saving virtually nothing in the account and just paying a couple of my household bills (by which I don't mean council tax and energy that were then with Santander but more general "bills" - for other things not covered by CB there). I haven't had enough DDs to have any "reward" from the Halifax account for several months and it now exists solely so I am still with them and can open up another account to switch when needed - although I did get one payment of £3 during a period when I was switching suppliers on my DDs and had a moment of overlap so took the opportunity to move one other bill forward into the month and squeeze £3 out of the account before it (and the new supplier) then returned to the other account to keep getting the monthly interest there - in fact I think that was Club Lloyds when it's interest rate was higher and then I did have the maximum £5,000 there for the entire month. See, I do give them money sometimes. Only when it pays:p. Basically this post is another way of just saying I'm a tightarse:D:rotfl:.

Right, enough of my financial affairs:rotfl:. And I didn't mention M all night (:doh: - I have mentioned M now:rotfl:). They clearly did make some change yesterday (Wednesday) - and they've changed some items I didn't have as expiring (because they are not online and I didn't have an expiry date for them for that reason or else they are online but I didn't have an expiry for them) and some items that were due until the day before yesterday seem to have continued on their offers - at least in every one of my (limited number of) stores. Some it seems have ended as planned, some it seems haven't - I will make the changes later, as and when I can.

Bye for now!:wave:

EDIT: Actually, looking at the definition of "the T word", it says one meaning is a "miser". However, a miser, to me, suggests someone who isn't happy and doesn't enjoy their life because they miss out on many things. However, I am happy (fairly, most of the time:rotfl:). I don't think money buys happiness does it? Or doesn't necessarily do so. I just get many things for the cheapest cost, unless, like us all, we just have to pay a cost because there is no time to find a cheaper alternative or one doesn't exist, and it doesn't mean forgoing essential things.

elainemn

Good morning

curl_girl

Saversue wrote: »

Thanks for all the replies. Hadn't noticed it before, but just looked at last years statement and it's the same, except the rate was higher £5.00 permonth.
Understand their system now, but in M.O. it's crazy.

Ss
What did Halifax say when they phoned you back last night please?


Morning peeps.

tweets

Good Morning :hello:

Must have needed that sleep slept 9-45pm to 6-30am no wakes inbetween

diluvsdiscounts

TrulyMadly wrote: »

That might come in handy for me:)

You don't need it I've sold your kitchen to pandoraskids :rotfl:

Good morning