Because the Govt and their business buddies need to figure int a way to get another slice of our money.
boomerxl on
Because the Government would shit itself inside out if it could only tax a citizen’s money three times.
caisdara on
They’re already being attacked as evil for allowing middle-class people save money this way. British-style ISAa would have the Soc Dems comparing them to Hitler.
Hardtoclose on
Because it would be seen as too generous. I’d be happy with the Swedish model. Anything is better that just leaving it on deposit.
Ill_Celebration_4215 on
Swedish model is a good model. Fair also. Lets not overthink things.
EyeOrRay on
Yea they want a guaranteed 1% minimum on any savings we have
PeteForsake on
The most important line in that article is the last one. Perhaps the writer could have outlined how much money his company stands to make from a UK model rather than a Swedish one?
daveirl on
It’s not difficult to understand at all, the UK scheme is one of the most generous when it comes to reducing tax burden. Our proposed scheme is like Sweden. The French equivalent looks closer to our proposed one etc.
I’d love the UK scheme but I also live in the real world where the current proposed scheme is already being attacked by the opposition as being too generous.
Teaanu on
TLDR: Swedish model is way better than ISAs for almost everyone in Ireland except people who sell investment products, so no surprise an investment product salesman is advocating against it
i can see why a broker like him would prefer the ISA system, as its to 20k of contributions a year and anyone with more cash would still need his help unless they want to tackle our complicated tax rules themselves (it’s not impossible but much more complicated than most people will want to handle)
if we follow the Swedish model, it’ll wipe out low value finance intermediaries as there are no limits to contributions, so someone with 300k just sitting there can bung it into the account and put it into an ETF for 1 percent taxes rather than buy a packaged product in the current market and pay the same or more in management fees AND have to pay exit taxes.
The argument about the tax on total funds is completely bogus – if you achieve more than about 4 percent growth it’s cheaper than CGT over the life of the investment for most people (but not all scenarios – you’ll need to do your homework).
muttonwow on
Because the wealthy do *not* need a tax break for their fat savings, and this is only being done as FFG want the votes of the wealthy who don’t give a fuck about the problems the country is facing since they’re making off like bandits.
12 commenti
Because its British, should be enough
Because the Govt and their business buddies need to figure int a way to get another slice of our money.
Because the Government would shit itself inside out if it could only tax a citizen’s money three times.
They’re already being attacked as evil for allowing middle-class people save money this way. British-style ISAa would have the Soc Dems comparing them to Hitler.
Because it would be seen as too generous. I’d be happy with the Swedish model. Anything is better that just leaving it on deposit.
Swedish model is a good model. Fair also. Lets not overthink things.
Yea they want a guaranteed 1% minimum on any savings we have
The most important line in that article is the last one. Perhaps the writer could have outlined how much money his company stands to make from a UK model rather than a Swedish one?
It’s not difficult to understand at all, the UK scheme is one of the most generous when it comes to reducing tax burden. Our proposed scheme is like Sweden. The French equivalent looks closer to our proposed one etc.
I’d love the UK scheme but I also live in the real world where the current proposed scheme is already being attacked by the opposition as being too generous.
TLDR: Swedish model is way better than ISAs for almost everyone in Ireland except people who sell investment products, so no surprise an investment product salesman is advocating against it
i can see why a broker like him would prefer the ISA system, as its to 20k of contributions a year and anyone with more cash would still need his help unless they want to tackle our complicated tax rules themselves (it’s not impossible but much more complicated than most people will want to handle)
if we follow the Swedish model, it’ll wipe out low value finance intermediaries as there are no limits to contributions, so someone with 300k just sitting there can bung it into the account and put it into an ETF for 1 percent taxes rather than buy a packaged product in the current market and pay the same or more in management fees AND have to pay exit taxes.
The argument about the tax on total funds is completely bogus – if you achieve more than about 4 percent growth it’s cheaper than CGT over the life of the investment for most people (but not all scenarios – you’ll need to do your homework).
Because the wealthy do *not* need a tax break for their fat savings, and this is only being done as FFG want the votes of the wealthy who don’t give a fuck about the problems the country is facing since they’re making off like bandits.
Because Irish banks are greedy and useless