Investment advice wanted

[crookesey]

An ISA is simply a tax efficient wrapper for a variety of investment products. The ISA will only be as safe or risky as the underlying investment.

Gordon Brown has sysematically reduced the benefits of holding an ISA, so it may be that it doesn't make any difference whether to buy a product with or without the ISA wrapper

.

 

 

Nimrod

 

What do you mean by risky? How much are you prepared to lose? What sort of gains would you like to see?

 

If you are thinking about investing in a fund, I would advise you to look at on-line IFAs such as Bestinvest (http://www.bestinvest.co.uk) and a fund supermarket in order to reduce the initial commission from about 5% down to 0.25% or zero. They don't charge any fees for 'Execution Only' transactions. (This sounds more complicated than it really is)

 

It is still a good idea, firstly cash ISA's pay gross interest and secondly they don't have to be declared on a tax return.

 

Gordon Brown scrapped the tax roll up in respect of advanced corporation tax credits held in equity ISA's, so is not an issue with a cash ISA.

[LordChaverly]

No it is not incorrect, a double cash ISA means using your 2005/2006 and 2006/2007 allowances over a two day period.

 

£3,000 x 2 = £6,000 x 2 people = £12,000.

 

 

I suggest you re read your initial post. You make no mention of two tax years. Your post implies that two people could invest £12,000 in a tax year, which is incorrect. They can invest only half this amount in mini cash ISAs in any one tax year.

[crookesey]

I suggest you re read your initial post. You make no mention of two tax years. Your post implies that two people could invest £12,000 in a tax year, which is incorrect. They can invest only half this amount in mini cash ISAs in any one tax year.

 

LordChaverly is once again trying to force his over inflated opinion of himself on us. He simply has never heard of a double ISA, no implication was made that the investment would fall into a single tax year which I am sure that many of you understood.

 

He stated in a previous post that he would be reluctant to advise investment in stockmarket Isa's at the moment. I am certain that he does not possess the qualifications to offer advice but if I am wrong perhaps he could show us his and I could show you mine.

 

The none generic and 100% correct advice that I posted has been dismissed by his lordship on the grounds that he simply didn't understand it. What he does not know does not exist, only in his head though.

[LordChaverly]

LordChaverly is once again trying to force his over inflated opinion of himself on us. He simply has never heard of a double ISA, no implication was made that the investment would fall into a single tax year which I am sure that many of you understood.

 

He stated in a previous post that he would be reluctant to advise investment in stockmarket Isa's at the moment. I am certain that he does not possess the qualifications to offer advice but if I am wrong perhaps he could show us his and I could show you mine.

 

The none generic and 100% correct advice that I posted has been dismissed by his lordship on the grounds that he simply didn't understand it. What he does not know does not exist, only in his head though.

 

You are supposed to be giving advice to lay persons and your initial post was a classic example of how the former can be misinformed. Again, if you re-read your post, it clearly implies that two people could invest £12,000 in a tax year, which is of course wrong and indeed illegal (as many people who have made this mistake have discovered. I suggest that if you are a financial adviser, a re-training course is in order so that you can give, unambiguous advice to your customers.

 

As for investment in stock market ISAs, I know these are currently being pushed on gullible people by financial advisors such as yourself, who will no doubt receive hefty commissions for so doing. Many who have taken this advice in stock market boom periods are now sitting on huge losses (not of course the advisors or investment firms, who still get their commissions, regardless). If you do not understand that it is wise to tread very carefully indeed into stock market investment in boom periods, then you know nothing about how financial markets work.

[Tricky]

It is still a good idea, firstly cash ISA's pay gross interest and secondly they don't have to be declared on a tax return.

 

Gordon Brown scrapped the tax roll up in respect of advanced corporation tax credits held in equity ISA's, so is not an issue with a cash ISA.

 

I didn't intend to suggest that there was no benefit from having an ISA. I was trying to make the point that the underlying investment is what is important.

 

With £20,000 to spend, there is no way (now) to invest all of it in an ISA. In my view the most important thing to do first is to decide on a range of product types which fit in with the purchasers risk/reward objectives and then after that to fill in the details i.e. which provider, which funds, which product to have as the ISA.

[crookesey]

I didn't intend to suggest that there was no benefit from having an ISA. I was trying to make the point that the underlying investment is what is important.

 

With £20,000 to spend, there is no way (now) to invest all of it in an ISA. In my view the most important thing to do first is to decide on a range of product types which fit in with the purchasers risk/reward objectives and then after that to fill in the details i.e. which provider, which funds, which product to have as the ISA.

 

True but if the attitude to risk is very low then cash comes to mind and the best product is quite simply the one paying the highest rate (preferably one that guarantees X percentage over Bank of England Base).

 

There are no low risk equity investments, believe me. However a little selected reading on screen or on paper will help you to make an informed judgement.

[Tricky]

True but if the attitude to risk is very low then cash comes to mind and the best product is quite simply the one paying the highest rate (preferably one that guarantees X percentage over Bank of England Base).

 

There are no low risk equity investments, believe me. However a little selected reading on screen or on paper will help you to make an informed judgement.

 

This is why it is vital to pin down the attitude to risk.

 

For me personally, a cash investment equates to zero risk, which isn't quite the same thing as 'not risky'.

'Low risk' would include a number of equity based investment such as income funds and funds that include bonds.

'Risky' would be something like Japanese smaller companies.

 

It is a matter of how the individual (in this case the OP) defines risk.

[KS1234]

You seem to set great store by your status as a 'qualified' financial advisor. I humbly suggest that the reputation of this 'profession' hardly warrants unquestioning faith, as the huge volumes of complaints to the FSA against financial advisors shows. Indeed, given the huge amounts of bad, and often self serving, advice, given by many of these supposedly sagacious beings, I would suggest that a hefty degree of scepticism is in order whenever they open their mouths.

 

Please dont tar us all with the same brush, I have only recently started out in this career and I can assure you that my intentions are to help people and give the "best advice" without exception. It is disheartening to know that the profession I have chosen is so mistrusted, as always the minority ruin it for the majority and the good we do is not often if ever publicised.

[crookesey]

This is why it is vital to pin down the attitude to risk.

 

For me personally, a cash investment equates to zero risk, which isn't quite the same thing as 'not risky'.

'Low risk' would include a number of equity based investment such as income funds and funds that include bonds.

'Risky' would be something like Japanese smaller companies.

 

It is a matter of how the individual (in this case the OP) defines risk.

 

That's why it's so difficult, bonds are usually government bonds ie government debt. A new series of these has been launched and around 20 of the countries who's debt we are being encouraged to buy into are on the Foreign Offices 'don't go there' list.

 

Fund managers who were the first to buy big into British Rubber when AIDS became an issue are worthy of consideration. It's backing your own judgment that's important, if John Lewis were a listed share then I would feel far better with them than say TJ Hughes, but I could be wrong.

[cloudybay]

MOD NOTE. I have just cleaned up this thread after a few minor disagreements between posters. Please can we keep it civil this time.