"Elite Greedy Pigs"
- Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
4 April 2012 18:26163297BARRYW
Post 551 not pointless, it may be your employment
that doesn't mean others on here dont also have financial knowledge(this is the nice version lol)ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS - 4 April 2012 18:34163299BarryW.
Genuine question.
How many of your customers are on Benefits?"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum" - Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
4 April 2012 18:35163300thats a good question garyALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS - 5 April 2012 07:23163362Quite a lot actually Gary. The average gross household (household, not individual) income of my active client bank is £41,000 p.a. so that means quite a lot are in the Tax Credit bracket (those who claim, I am often taking clients to task for not claiming). That does include investment income, incidentally, where it applies along with state benefits where they are paid.
I also have quite a few on disability benefits. That of course excludes those who find themselves temporarily on benefits like jobseekers and short term incapacity, a fluctuating total. I am currently helping two to find a new job who have recently been made redundant or about to be.
It may surprise you that very ordinary people pay for advice, it is a misnomer that fee based financial advice is only for the rich and I have no 'additional rate' taxpayers at all among them. - Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
5 April 2012 08:05163366lot of differing expertese on this forumALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS - 5 April 2012 09:17163389BarryW.
Thank you very much for this informative reply; this is the type of response I have been waiting for.
The only way to have constructive dialog, not just on here but also outside of the forum, is to gain as much knowledge as you can about everything you can.
No one knows everything; everyone knows something, the more you listen to those who know something, the more knowledge you gain.
Two things I can pick up on from your post.
One is a question, am I right in saying then, that a household with a combined income of £41,000, can claim Tax Credits and take advantage of the legal loopholes and avoid paying all due tax?
If that is true, then how do you defend that?
Second, I think it fair to say that you do not have anyone on your books that are on benefits, who have no savings.
I fall into this category as do millions more, add to those the millions more on basic wage with no savings, there are millions of people out there that you have very little first hand knowledge of.
Please don't tell me you were one of them, I have already congratulated you for achieving your success, I also pointed out that not everyone has ambitions to be like you.
The large majority of people on benefits are there because they have to be, not because they want to be.
Yes there are bludgers that need sifting out, we all agree on that and as we all agree on that, leaving them out of this thread would give it some clarity?
Millions of workers on basic wage are the bedrock of this country and without them this country would collapse. They don't care about politics and they don't have aspirations to be in the rat race, they just want a fair wage, for them and their families to survive, without having to struggle. They will only pop their heads up and complain, when they are struggling to make ends meet and read about individuals getting £millions in bonuses and the very companies that they are striving to pay their bills to, are announcing record profits.
The result in treating people this way is totally negative, they do not want confrontation but when forced into it, they will defend their position. These people are not stupid,we are not stupid, you can spin it any way you want to but they will not take much more of this abuse.
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum" - 5 April 2012 09:40163396Gary - I had a client visit me last week for his regular review (on a two yearly review cycle) who comes down from Maidstone. He is a long standing client who was retired on medical grounds. He and his wife have 'funds under advice' of about £20,000 from life savings prior to disability plus some money in bank accounts, that's all and an income made up mostly of benefits.
The simple fact is that I do have clients who have never invested a penny through me though investment advice is my primary role. I have some who join my basic service once they get a job to start with a little saving to build it up and to progress through my advice levels. I have had people in this way go from having nothing to six figure amounts invested. There are many things that I do for clients, much of which is not tax or investment related. You are right, if someone is long-standing on benefits and have absolutely no savings then there is little I can do for them and I cannot justify my fees. But anyone in work and even on what you refer to as a 'basic wage' can and should save and invest for their future while also protecting their families and this is where I come in. None of my clients who have a 'change of health' will be left without any savings and/or protection providing more for them than state benefits. You would be very surprised, Gary, at who get advice from me and how they are able to improve their lot through good planning - it is the very hard working people to whom you refer.
Clients with a family income of £41,000 or less (gross) do get Child Tax credits at least - remember though it has been reduced recently the level was around £50,000. Everybody can take advantage of the tax rules to minimise the tax they pay. From using ISAs and Pensions, to putting savings in a non-earning spouse's name and yes, that includes many with a family income of under £41,000. You talk about 'legal loopholes' and avoid paying 'all due tax'. I am not talking about that, I talk about using allowances and thresholds along with appropriate tax wrappers to minimise tax. As I have said before everyone can organise their affairs so they only pay the tax they really have to pay. - 5 April 2012 14:37163440City trader who went on a £ 200,000 champagne spree has been arrested on suspition of unauthorised trading.........
.........surprised.....bet he also avoids paying tax ...........legally. - 5 April 2012 14:41163441I am wondering what your actual point is.........
- 5 April 2012 15:17163451Chief Executive of JJB in court for £ one million alleged fraud,Serious Fraud Office confirm he also faces
two charges of money laundering and giving false information under the Theft Act............bet he also avoids paying
tax ...............legally. - 5 April 2012 17:04163478BarryW.
You are right to say there are disabled people and people who have recently lost their jobs who have savings and need advice from you. I agree with you and have no problem with that.
You are also right to say that people should prepare themselves for the future, if they can. Many should, many don't but far more today simply can't.
What you cannot say is that "Everybody can take advantage of the tax rules"
This is where you refuse to see what is in front of you.
Many workers, for many reasons, not just these cuts but with increase in fuel, rent, food, utility bills etc. they simply do not have enough money coming into their households to pay the bills, let alone invest for their future.
When someone gets a letter, telling them that, because of the cuts, their resources have been pulled on their core service's for their disabled child, and then reads in the paper that this Government is spending £250million on a tiny runway, on a tiny island, thousands of miles away. How do you think they will react to that or how do you think they should react to that?
Or course, there are many more comparison's I could use, so please don't turn this into a thread about the runway, you know the point I am trying to make."My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum" - 5 April 2012 17:46163499not heard that about a runway far away gary, do you have any details?
- 5 April 2012 18:10163513Howard.
Of course it might not be true because I read it in the Mirror but the link is below.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/government-spends-250m-of-our-money-to-fund-778075"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum" - 5 April 2012 18:19163517it does seem a lot of money to spend on a population of just over 4000, i remember reading that they were at the mercy of weather conditions being good enough for ships to bring them supplies.
it could be a good investment if it helps bring tourists there to spend money to keep the islands economy going. - 5 April 2012 18:58163529GaryC #571 - often it is a matter of how people prioritise their spending. Some people choose to pay into ISAs and pensions, for instance, instead of smoke or get Sky. I believe in free choice so I am not saying there is anything wrong with that and neither am I saying it is in every case, but it is a fact that I have seen often in my 20 odd years in this business. I remember some years ago, when I worked for an insurance company and visited people's homes, someone with Sky TV (not as common as now) who, in an hour, smoked 2 cigarettes and had two children, tell me he cannot afford £10pm for life insurance. I would suggest it is his priorities that were wrong.
Worth adding that I have had people with a similar income to him who do have sensible priorities and are of have accrued a fair amount of investment dosh, while I have also had someone earning six figures and aged 64 who has never bought a house and has never invested a penny anywhere. So I have seen all types. - Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
5 April 2012 23:42163609is legal tax avoidance moraly right?ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS - 5 April 2012 23:52163614Yes. If you don't like it, change the tax laws or change your morals.I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
- Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
5 April 2012 23:53163616well well peter interesting answerALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS - 6 April 2012 06:53163619If you don't agree with that it might be a bit like saying that because the government accrues tax money from cigarettes we should all smoke. I avoid that tax by choosing not to smoke...........
- Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
6 April 2012 07:33163626bern,the tax on tobaco produts is niether here or there,like the tax on petrol/diesal.i dont drive so dont pay that tax,so all's well in lifes chain of advents.
and just to add the tax/duty on both are to high anyway.