Reeves' ISA review

clairec666

2010 said:

The Mail for example has had ISA limit cuts as down to £4/£10/£12 thousand, so far.

Ever a trustworthy source of information 

The_Green_Hornet

2010 said:

The Mail for example has had ISA limit cuts as down to £4/£10/£12 thousand, so far.

I know the Mail is a source of fun but then the Financial Times has also run similar stories.

For example, a recent article contained the following:

"In recent weeks the Treasury has privately floated a level of £12,000 a year, down from the current £20,000 but higher than Reeves’ initial £10,000 proposal, according to people familiar with the plans."

Rachel Reeves considers less dramatic cut to cash Isa allowance (Firewalled).

So the FT are inferring that the source of these rumours is the Government itself.

masonic

So about 75% of ISA subscribers will not be impacted as they don't use more allowance than that ordinarily. Seems well worth the political heat.

poseidon1

masonic said:

So about 75% of ISA subscribers will not be impacted as they don't use more allowance than that ordinarily. Seems well worth the political heat.

Interesting article below from A J Bell which backs up your statement. Particularly interesting how the total value in stocks and shares isas completely dwarfs that of cash isas by a magnitude of 7 times.

https://www.ajbell.co.uk/group/news/isas-unpacked-who-holds-them-and-how-much-do-they-have#:~:text=Around 1.8 million use up their full,60% contributing less than £5,000 a year

Obviously a large chunk of the population cannot afford to get anywhere  near the maximum £20k annual contribution, so our little echo chamber of forumites in no way reflects the wider saving public.

I fear for that reason, other than the inevitable backlash from the Tory press, reducing cash isas to £10k annually will still be a generous limit for the vast majority. 

Personally as long as the £20k overall  annual limit is retained, I won't be bothered either way.

Alpine_Star

2010 said:

The Mail for example has had ISA limit cuts as down to £4/£10/£12 thousand, so far.

To be fair, I think that just reflects the different proposals being considered by the Treasury at various points over the last few months.

subjecttocontract

masonic said:

So about 75% of ISA subscribers will not be impacted as they don't use more allowance than that ordinarily. Seems well worth the political heat.

Yes but I'm so not interested in wether the changes create political 'heat' or keep 75% of ISA subscribers happy. I'm interested in how changes are going to affect me personally.

SnowMan

poseidon1 said:

masonic said:

So about 75% of ISA subscribers will not be impacted as they don't use more allowance than that ordinarily. Seems well worth the political heat.

Interesting article below from A J Bell which backs up your statement. Particularly interesting how the total value in stocks and shares isas completely dwarfs that of cash isas by a magnitude of 7 times.

https://www.ajbell.co.uk/group/news/isas-unpacked-who-holds-them-and-how-much-do-they-have#:~:text=Around 1.8 million use up their full,60% contributing less than £5,000 a year

Obviously a large chunk of the population cannot afford to get anywhere  near the maximum £20k annual contribution, so our little echo chamber of forumites in no way reflects the wider saving public.

I fear for that reason, other than the inevitable backlash from the Tory press, reducing cash isas to £10k annually will still be a generous limit for the vast majority. 

Personally as long as the £20k overall  annual limit is retained, I won't be bothered either way.

The data is all at the link below although it's only available up to the 2021/2022 tax year

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/annual-savings-statistics-2024#full-publication-update-history

Of the 22 million UK residents who had an ISA (cash or stocks and shares) at all (so many don't even have one and so aren't represented in the chart below at all) the percentages contributing over 10K pa is only 14% (of which 8% contribute the full 20K)

clairec666

SnowMan said:

poseidon1 said:

masonic said:

So about 75% of ISA subscribers will not be impacted as they don't use more allowance than that ordinarily. Seems well worth the political heat.

Interesting article below from A J Bell which backs up your statement. Particularly interesting how the total value in stocks and shares isas completely dwarfs that of cash isas by a magnitude of 7 times.

https://www.ajbell.co.uk/group/news/isas-unpacked-who-holds-them-and-how-much-do-they-have#:~:text=Around 1.8 million use up their full,60% contributing less than £5,000 a year

Obviously a large chunk of the population cannot afford to get anywhere  near the maximum £20k annual contribution, so our little echo chamber of forumites in no way reflects the wider saving public.

I fear for that reason, other than the inevitable backlash from the Tory press, reducing cash isas to £10k annually will still be a generous limit for the vast majority. 

Personally as long as the £20k overall  annual limit is retained, I won't be bothered either way.

The data is all at the link below although it's only available up to the 2021/2022 tax year

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/annual-savings-statistics-2024#full-publication-update-history

Of the 22 million UK residents who had an ISA (cash or stocks and shares) at all (so many don't even have one and so aren't represented in the chart below at all) the percentages contributing over 10K pa is only 14% (of which 8% contribute the full 20K)

That's an interesting pie chart. Presumably it would be harder to collate that data for more recent years when we were able to pay into more than one ISA per tax year.

wmb194

clairec666 said:

SnowMan said:

poseidon1 said:

masonic said:

So about 75% of ISA subscribers will not be impacted as they don't use more allowance than that ordinarily. Seems well worth the political heat.

Interesting article below from A J Bell which backs up your statement. Particularly interesting how the total value in stocks and shares isas completely dwarfs that of cash isas by a magnitude of 7 times.

https://www.ajbell.co.uk/group/news/isas-unpacked-who-holds-them-and-how-much-do-they-have#:~:text=Around 1.8 million use up their full,60% contributing less than £5,000 a year

Obviously a large chunk of the population cannot afford to get anywhere  near the maximum £20k annual contribution, so our little echo chamber of forumites in no way reflects the wider saving public.

I fear for that reason, other than the inevitable backlash from the Tory press, reducing cash isas to £10k annually will still be a generous limit for the vast majority. 

Personally as long as the £20k overall  annual limit is retained, I won't be bothered either way.

The data is all at the link below although it's only available up to the 2021/2022 tax year

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/annual-savings-statistics-2024#full-publication-update-history

Of the 22 million UK residents who had an ISA (cash or stocks and shares) at all (so many don't even have one and so aren't represented in the chart below at all) the percentages contributing over 10K pa is only 14% (of which 8% contribute the full 20K)

That's an interesting pie chart. Presumably it would be harder to collate that data for more recent years when we were able to pay into more than one ISA per tax year.

Shouldn't be. To open an Isa you have to supply an NI number so it should be easy to analyse these data using this as a unique identifier.

clairec666

wmb194 said:

clairec666 said:

SnowMan said:

poseidon1 said:

masonic said:

So about 75% of ISA subscribers will not be impacted as they don't use more allowance than that ordinarily. Seems well worth the political heat.

Interesting article below from A J Bell which backs up your statement. Particularly interesting how the total value in stocks and shares isas completely dwarfs that of cash isas by a magnitude of 7 times.

https://www.ajbell.co.uk/group/news/isas-unpacked-who-holds-them-and-how-much-do-they-have#:~:text=Around 1.8 million use up their full,60% contributing less than £5,000 a year

Obviously a large chunk of the population cannot afford to get anywhere  near the maximum £20k annual contribution, so our little echo chamber of forumites in no way reflects the wider saving public.

I fear for that reason, other than the inevitable backlash from the Tory press, reducing cash isas to £10k annually will still be a generous limit for the vast majority. 

Personally as long as the £20k overall  annual limit is retained, I won't be bothered either way.

The data is all at the link below although it's only available up to the 2021/2022 tax year

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/annual-savings-statistics-2024#full-publication-update-history

Of the 22 million UK residents who had an ISA (cash or stocks and shares) at all (so many don't even have one and so aren't represented in the chart below at all) the percentages contributing over 10K pa is only 14% (of which 8% contribute the full 20K)

That's an interesting pie chart. Presumably it would be harder to collate that data for more recent years when we were able to pay into more than one ISA per tax year.

Shouldn't be. To open an Isa you have to supply an NI number so it should be easy to analyse these data using this as a unique identifier.

Well, not impossible, but for earlier years you could just analyse data from individual accounts, without grouping them by NI number