Transfers from S&S ISA to be scrapped

hallmark

QrizB said:

hallmark said:
I know many people who don't go online at all who are livid, and they're all "working people".

How many of those "working people" were planning to put more than £12k into a cash ISA in 2027?

Or are they just livid because their offline sources of information have told them they should be?

Not sure if you're aware but the changes to ISAs were just one measure in the budget, there were many others.

QrizB

hallmark said:

QrizB said:

hallmark said:
I know many people who don't go online at all who are livid, and they're all "working people".

How many of those "working people" were planning to put more than £12k into a cash ISA in 2027?

Or are they just livid because their offline sources of information have told them they should be?

Not sure if you're aware but the changes to ISAs were just one measure in the budget, there were many others.

Not sure if you're aware but this thread is about S&S ISA transfers.

If they're livid about something else, perhaps you could post on their behalf in one of the threads that's relevant to whatever-it-is that they're livid about?

Section62

EthicsGradient said:

Here's what people who want lots of cash in ISAs can do:
1) transfer what they have now in S&S ISAs and want as cash to cash ISAs before 2027. Add 20k in the 26/27 year to them (and up to 20k this year if they haven't already)
2) add another 12k each year to those cash ISAs after that. The source for that could be profits taken from your S&S ISAs. You still get to add another 8k back into the S&S ISAs.
3) if  they reach 65, add 20k each year.

This will enable you to build up a large amount of tax-free savings. If you're using ISAs to fund your retirement, then use pensions instead. You can also use gilts and bonds in the S&S ISA. If your need for cash is still unsatisfied, then save and pay income tax on the interest. But how much cash do you need?

Which is a rather oversimplified way of looking at the issue, and ignores the point people have been making about plans needing to be changed to reflect circumstances outside the individual's immediate control.

Nothing in the above solution would help someone who has built up a pot in a S&S ISA and (unexpectedly) finds themselves wanting/needing to move a significant portion (e.g. more than £12k) of that across to cash.  For amounts less than £12k, your option 2 still results in the individual losing a proportion of their ISA allowance.

EthicsGradient

Section62 said:

EthicsGradient said:

Here's what people who want lots of cash in ISAs can do:
1) transfer what they have now in S&S ISAs and want as cash to cash ISAs before 2027. Add 20k in the 26/27 year to them (and up to 20k this year if they haven't already)
2) add another 12k each year to those cash ISAs after that. The source for that could be profits taken from your S&S ISAs. You still get to add another 8k back into the S&S ISAs.
3) if  they reach 65, add 20k each year.

This will enable you to build up a large amount of tax-free savings. If you're using ISAs to fund your retirement, then use pensions instead. You can also use gilts and bonds in the S&S ISA. If your need for cash is still unsatisfied, then save and pay income tax on the interest. But how much cash do you need?

Which is a rather oversimplified way of looking at the issue, and ignores the point people have been making about plans needing to be changed to reflect circumstances outside the individual's immediate control.

Nothing in the above solution would help someone who has built up a pot in a S&S ISA and (unexpectedly) finds themselves wanting/needing to move a significant portion (e.g. more than £12k) of that across to cash.  For amounts less than £12k, your option 2 still results in the individual losing a proportion of their ISA allowance.

Why would you unexpectedly need more than an extra 12k in a savings account? I can see you might need more than 12k of actual cash to spend, but that's about needs, not a wish for a high account balance.

Yes, they use some of the ISA yearly allowance. I think the point here is that people who can save/invest over 12k per year are doing OK, and the government wants the income they get from the large amounts saved to be taxable. As some have pointed out, few other countries are as generous with the tax-free interest we'll be able to get, even after this change, as the UK is.

kempiejon

I read only 40% of people eligible have an ISA, under 10% of those subscribing use to full allowance, half of subscribers add only £3k a year. 
And of course the patriarchy. Over 40% of male ISA holders paid into a stocks and shares account, compared to just 26% of female ISA savers. 

hallmark

QrizB said:

hallmark said:

QrizB said:

hallmark said:
I know many people who don't go online at all who are livid, and they're all "working people".

How many of those "working people" were planning to put more than £12k into a cash ISA in 2027?

Or are they just livid because their offline sources of information have told them they should be?

Not sure if you're aware but the changes to ISAs were just one measure in the budget, there were many others.

Not sure if you're aware but this thread is about S&S ISA transfers.

If they're livid about something else, perhaps you could post on their behalf in one of the threads that's relevant to whatever-it-is that they're livid about?

My reply was to a comment on this thread about the budget as a whole, not about ISA transfers.

Either you know that already and are just choosing to try to start an argument to get the thread closed, or you are being argumentative without having to even bothered to read the thread.

Eyeful

1. If the government really wanted to change the investment culture here they can educate them,
Investing could be introduced into maths and history classes.
They could commission TV programs on investing.


2. But the present government thinks now is a good time to encourage people who know little to nothing about investing to invest (when markets are very near their highest ever point). It does make you think the reason is other than just changing the investing culture.

LHW99

kempiejon said:

I read only 40% of people eligible have an ISA, under 10% of those subscribing use to full allowance, half of subscribers add only £3k a year. 
And of course the patriarchy. Over 40% of male ISA holders paid into a stocks and shares account, compared to just 26% of female ISA savers. 

I seem to remember that when interest rates were low, some commentators were saying that cash ISAs were no longer worth using. Those who took notice of that will have missed out on the opportunity to accumulate a significant untaxed cash amount.

One more example of "use it or lose it" (while it's still available).

cloud_dog

My only gripe really is in how they have made using ISAs so unreasonably complicated re allowances, transfers, holdings, etc.

It is the transfer situation which probably raises the biggest risks; not allowing people to adequately mitigate risk at points where they need to. 

It going to put our young 'uns S&S LISA in a bit of a pickle, insofar as they are investing but they had a small inheritance which they didn't want to risk (sentimentality and all that) so it was decided to simply put that money into a STMMF  Until the specific details of these changes are printed in black and white there is little point in me looking in to options, but I can forsee it being a PIA. 

mebu60

Eyeful said:

To think, at one time the ISA and its rules where once simple.
Yet each government comes along and cannot resist the need to make it complicated.

Simple like having maxi and mini ISAs?