To think Rachel Reeves patronised the public with her rhetoric on cash ISAs?!

The Afghan fiasco is an Xmas present for Reeves.

She can bury so much shit in that.

I bet she’s crying again (with laughter this time).

What utter naivety.

You do post some nonsense.

Looks like the same will do someone else to blame.

I doubt the public will follow their sell.

If tax rises needed, it'll be to pay for things like the 2022 huge data breach in the Afghan resettlement scheme, costing £1billion, resulting in 1000s of Afghans coming here, legal costs etc... all of which Sunak tried to cover up with a "Super injunction...."

The amounts these people have cost the UK tax payer is off the scale... HS2 has a net cost to the Tax payer of £31 billion..... yet not a single train has even run on it yet & thats before we look at the cost cancelling the northern leg resulted in - around £28 billion.

Haha, great news then. No tax rises in the Autumn, no enormous black hole, no rising unemployment. It's all a myth.

Good news then eastern, no tax rises yay!

If things are going well as some believe then Reeves / Starmer won’t put up taxes in Autumn, as per statement after last tax and borrowing hike budget.

There are some short (perhaps selectively so?) memories on here. It has only been possible to allocate one's full annual ISA allowance to cash savings accounts since July 2014. Prior to that - i.e. for more than half of the 26 year history of the ISA - the cash limit was lower. If the stories about the Reeves proposal are true, it is only restoring the idea that if you want to use your full ISA allowance then a proportion of it has to be in stocks and shares. And before ISAs, cash and equity investments were offered two completely separate tax-free wrappers and allowances.

Ultimately, I happen to agree that the government should not be offering incredibly generous tax breaks just for savings to sit in risk free cash accounts, if the idea is to stimulate the productive economy and deliver both growth and real (post-inflation) returns for investors. As a taxpayer, if I have to chose between subsidising risk-averse cash savers or stocks and shares investors, then I chose S&S investors every single time.

In all honesty though, I suspect that the histrionic reaction to the idea of reducing cash ISA allowances is because many people just don't understand investing and the markets and the "I just will not take any risks" attitude is actually a front for "I don't know any better". If people were better educated about finance, markets, and so on, and were personally invested in it, then there would be much less of an 'us and them' attitude. People would have far better understandings of decisions bosses make and of the consequences of irresponsible decision-making both at work and in government.

FTSE all share, at record highs.... up 9% over the last 12 months.... .

Yes stamp duty on transactions needs reform.... hopefully this will be announced on thursday as part of measures to make the 'city more competitive....long over due.

The FTSE 100 Index is going well, near record level. However the FTSE 250 is not doing so well. Who will make the choice for you?
Every transaction earns Stamp Duty for the Treasury. Even within an ISA.
In USA no tax on shares, and no commission either.

But you are better, in most cases, putting your money into a savings account with decent interest than a cash IS A. As I say the banks rip you off. Yes stocks aren't for everyone but I know people (because I worked for them) with tens of thousands in cash IS As and they won't invest in stocks because of the perceived risks yet they are in fact losing money as inflation is 2%ish and they are getting 1.5% (at best). Over the long run you will make money, in the short term maybe not.

If you need to access the money quickly shopping around should secure a better rate than most cash is as

4 interest rate cuts in the last 12months are helping individuals and businesses.....

BoE say that the NI increases have led to smaller pay rises, leading to lower inflation... more rate cuts....

All we got under the Tories was interest rises.....

Treading water on top of Labour policies already hitting businesses and individuals.

Truss caused gilt yields to increase by 300%...

So far, under Labour, yields have gone from 4.2 to 4.5

Inflation 11% under Sunak, food inflation running at 30% too.... but of course that will be due to external factors... no such largesse given to Labour.

4 interest rate cuts under Reeves, helping reduce mortgage repayments.

I usually look at my pension performance as a measure. I lost 20% of my pot between Covid and Truss, but made very decent gains over the past year.

The country needs to make a choice. Do we want to maintain/inprove existing levels of government spending? If so, we need to increase the tax take - penny on income tax, increase VAT, get rid of triple lock on pensions etc.

Or do we want to cut services - in which case we carry on as we are.

Labour boxed themselves into a corner by promising no increases in the big tax raising levers at the election. By tinkering around the edges they have left businesses and individuals treading water to see what will happen in October.

By the metrics they accused Truss of crashing the economy, they've crashed it twice!!

Yep, that tax not collected just means someone else has to pay more and/or another service gets cut.

"ISA Wrap" is a term used in the financial sector as a means for an investor to avoid all tax on their savings.

In just 5 years a couple will have £200,000 protected from all tax on gains, the cany and wealthy investor has been taken advantage of ISAs for 26 years, albeit at lower allowances prior to 2017.

If thats not bad enough, S&S ISA's are often invested overseas, so the UK tax payer is helping other countries economies.

Sadly no single government in my memory hasn't broken a manifesto. The Tories obviously the most as they have been in power the longest.

@Notreallyme27 How is the UK tax payer paying tax that was never due in the first place? You mean indirectly? If so then let’s target those people who use Premium Bonds, pensions, giving away £3K a year…I could go on. It’s all perfectly legitimate so I don’t see the problem.

So you put £20k in a bank account at 4%. After a year you’ve got £20,800. You pay £320 tax on your £800 interest and you’re still almost £500 up on the year before. You have £20,480 after tax. They’re not taxing the capital. Nobody is taking away their savings.

Please tell me why the UK taxpayer should foot the bill for the tax rather than the person who has made the gains?

Also, assuming this is a person’s only savings account they’d get the first £1k tax free anyway so they’d still pay no tax.

She's a moron. Not everyone wants to take risk especially as they get to pension age. We are lucky enough to be able to have 20k spare to put into ISA and yes we do put majority into stocks and shares. But unless you're in the position to be comfortable seeing the up and down swings and accept you could lose a chunk of your money investing in stocks and shares, frankly you would be better off with the safe options which is cash ISA. I've known people committing suicide because of playing stocks during the turbulent times.

They are reporting and commenting on "What if......" same as they did on all the scare stories pre election.

You nor anyone else can point to any announcement made by Reeves on ISA's, no press release, no statement by a junior minister and nothing said by a Civil servant.

All you've got is Hearsay..... & gossip.

BTW Pls don't take this as i don't believe the Govt hasn't looked at all forms of investment and tax breaks given, these should be reviewed regularly, BUT that is not the same as a decision has been made to scrap cash ISA's is it...

As i'm sure you re aware.