Subscribers iconSite access

home subscribe

Community Q&A forum

Print
Email
Text size
Comment

Money Clinic - An inconvenient restriction

Answered by Andrew Merricks
1 October 2007 [0 comments]

Q: 

A panel of independent experts answers readers’ financial planning and investment queries

A: 

An inconvenient restriction

I am aware of the facility to hold cash for a short time in Equity ISAs, such as during transfers, but why not for a longer period?

During the last fall in the market, from the peak of 1999/2000, I wanted to avoid the large drop in value by cashing my ISA investments and returning to the market once it had bottomed out. I could not do this without losing my ISA ‘shells’, which I had accumulated over the years.

This seriously affects my investment strategy, but for what reason? Could you please explain the Chancellor’s reason for not giving ISA investors the freedom to hold cash for an extended period?

R Bryant, Poole, Dorset

Andrew Merricks replies:

I couldn’t agree more with Mr Bryant about the irritation caused by not being allowed to treat cash as an investible asset within the wider ISA arena. It would appear that HMRC is paranoid about us receiving tax-free returns on our cash.

For this reason, we have to accept the nonsensical situation of tax-free losses as well as tax-free gains on our ISA investments, despite the fact that the tax-efficient wrappers provided by ISAs are supposed to be an incentive for us to save more. I suspect that we lost a generation of savers during the bear market of 2000-03 simply because investors were unable to protect their savings from punishing falls.

You might well ask,‘Where is the incentive to save?’ It would appear that HMRC’s paranoia is deepening, however, as from next year we will be able to transfer from cash to equities within our ISAs, but not in the opposite direction. The suspicion is that in allowing cash to exit to equities, HMRC wants all tax-free cash to be a thing of the past, thus creating a major barrier to anyone who does not want to accept risk for their savings.

Andrew Merricks is head of investments at Skerritts Consultants

There are currently no comments on this post.

 
Other questions answered by Andrew Merricks

Advertisement

Q&A  More Q&A forumspacerQ&AAsk a question

Disappearing trust 

15 August 2008 [0 comments]

Q: 

I wish to draw your attention to the ‘Resources Investment Trust’, which is listed in What Investment in the sector entitled ‘Specialist: Liquidity’.  In fact, this trust should be in the sector entitled ‘Specialist: Commodities & Natural Resources.
The trust was correctly listed in ‘Specialist: Commodities & Natural Resources’ up to and including August 2007, issue 293, but in the next issue, September 2007, it had been moved to ‘Specialist: Liquidity’.
Also, the performance figures in issue 302 of What Investment, May 2008, for the Resources Investment Trust appear to be somewhat excessive – far outperforming the Merrill Lynch World Mining Trust. Are you certain that these figures are accurate? The reason I query the figures is because I have seen performance figures for these trusts in
other publications where the Resources Investment Trust mostly underperforms the
Merrill Lynch World Mining Trust.
Derek Crawford
Via email

 
 

Recommendations Recommendations

 

Q&A Investors' blog

There’s no time like the present

20 August 2008 [0 comments]

Keiron Root reminds readers of one of the fundamental rules of successful investing 

Land of confusion

19 August 2008 [0 comments]

Guy Monson guides investors through the shocks currently affecting the global economy

European sector review

14 August 2008 [0 comments]

Henk Potts sees value beginning to appear among the financial stocks

 
 

Q&A Events