DIY Investor Magazine
| August 2017
52
MOORE ABOUT MONEY: WHY DID IT ALL GO SO
WRONG WITH ELECTION?
Like many I predicted a landslide conservative victory;
in fact we got a hung parliament with the Conservatives
shoring up a marginal government with the help of the
DUP.
A hostage to fortune? We will see in terms of the BREXIT
negotiations.
So why did we get it wrong? I think it comes down to
lies; at the last election Nick Clegg courted the student
vote and did not deliver. This time Jeremy Corbyn
courted the student vote, did not win and dumped them
- again.
So is the key to electoral success about students
galvanising younger voters? Could students get it wrong
three times in a row? I guess the answer is yes!
Whether you support or oppose student loans, there
are questions to answer - just who benefits from student
loans and by how much and why? Moore about Money
will conduct a deep investigation, and I have a horrid
feeling we are going to be appalled.
What will the election mean for personal tax and
benefits?
All appears to be is on hold as Spreadsheet Phil
consolidates his power base at HMT and forms alliances
with foremost Brexiteers to shore up negotiations;
meanwhile, his predecessor has used his daily
mouthpiece at the Evening Standard to express his
opinions from the other end of the spectrum.
The savings industry does not like vacuums, so summer
stories of more cuts to the pensions life time allowance
and pensions relief trickle out.
SAD TO SEE THE CREDIBILITY OF PENSIONS HAS FALLEN TO
AN ALL TIME LOW
It is sad to see the credibility of pensions has fallen to
an all time low after the flexibility introduced by George
Osborne (GO); having trashed the annuity market he
went on to make the pensions market more flexible
around payments in retirement but it has become a
fraudsters charter with bogus investment opportunities.
A blanket ban on cold calling has been proposed – but
what about the chap in the pub or golf club? What about
texts or emails?
Meantime, Defined Benefit (final salary) Schemes
have been trying to reduce membership by offering
incentives to leave so high as to make it a no brainer.
The FCA position is spurious; an advisory firm has
to ensure that there are appropriate investments
recommended before the transfer takes place. When
applied to wrappers such as SIPPs this makes no sense
– the whole idea should be to take a poorly performing
and expensive pension and put it in a fully flexible
account.
Not all transfers are advised. So what about the insistent
client? If the client is to receive £400,000 for a £20,000
pa income transfer then this is an attractive offer; 20
years payout plus investment growth.
The non - advised client is not required to nominate his
investment strategy, go execution only; schemes should
be contributing to financial advice and the cost need
not be high. There are many very honest and supportive
independent intermediaries, but we are also running out
of financial advisers at a time when demand has never
been so high.
