To think there's no point saving in children's names?

[MrsHazel]

I thought there was some kind of tax advantage to saving for children in their names, but it seems it's only £100 of interest per parent, which at current rates is only £2k per parent.

Above this, it seems pointless, as it's more difficult to keep track of multiple accounts, so I'm just better off using ISAs if I need to go above my personal saving allowance, and then see what savings I want to give my kids at key points (say 16, going to university, moving out etc) from the family pot of savings at the time?

The rates aren't any better on kids only accounts either.

Am I missing anything? For those with savings in your kids' names, what advantage do you see?

We have a Stocks & Shares ISA for DC through Hargreaves Lansdown; we have separate ISA’s under my name for him for a university fund (or other use if he doesn’t go) and a mortgage deposit, and a SIPP.

The reason for not having more than one ISA in his name is because we don’t want him having access to large sums of money at 18 - he could be a sensible young adult then or he could be feckless and lazy or have manipulative friends who get him to spend money on them etc. We do S&S ISA’s only, not through High St banks, as the return is poor in comparison (although there is an element of risk to investing of course).

I’ve been wondering this and I also don’t want my DC to be access saved money at 18 which they may then spend on literally anything

We just save in our names then we can give it out as we wish

But there can be tax implications in doing this.