|
|
Post by stevefindlay on Apr 4, 2018 6:52:29 GMT
(3) subscribe to our upcoming IF ISA product... Roughly how soon do you expect to be offering this? June. All going well.
|
|
savernake
Member of DD Central
Posts: 174 
Likes: 142
|
Post by savernake on Apr 4, 2018 15:33:20 GMT
Roughly how soon do you expect to be offering this? June. All going well. will you also be offering a non-ISA version of these bonds?
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Apr 4, 2018 15:45:30 GMT
Touché. (Can't do an accent off hand). Here you are! Copy and paste and I'll zap my post  I refuse to pay a 1.5% fee to BM for their middleman activity. That works out at nearly 2% when I add the tax to the fee (and I'm still only on 20% tax)!
|
|
|
|
Post by stevefindlay on Apr 4, 2018 16:36:52 GMT
stevefindlay will you also be offering a non-ISA version of these bonds? That's the plan. You can chose if you want them in an ISA or not.
|
|
ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,814
Likes: 1,092
|
Post by ashtondav on Apr 4, 2018 19:05:18 GMT
Touché. (Can't do an accent off hand). Here you are! Copy and paste and I'll zap my post I refuse to pay a 1.5% fee to BM for their middleman activity. That works out at nearly 2% when I add the tax to the fee (and I'm still only on 20% tax)! Quite so, old grumps. Why. BM can’t devise a product suitable for 20% and 40% taxpayers is beyond me. I guess the ISA goes some way toward that admirable goal. But that non tax deductible fee is a killer. I can only imagine that most of their investors are companies, non taxpayers or tax dodgers, because otherwise it’s uncompetitive with most p2p platforms. I suppose it gives the now lamentable rates on Zopa a run for its money. A 1.5% fee, as you say nearer 2% with tax, is outrageous! I love the product, I may even try it in an isa, but bloomin' heck they don’t make it easy.
|
|
garfield
Member of DD Central
Posts: 490 
Likes: 268
|
Post by garfield on Apr 5, 2018 9:01:59 GMT
Here you are! Copy and paste and I'll zap my post I refuse to pay a 1.5% fee to BM for their middleman activity. That works out at nearly 2% when I add the tax to the fee (and I'm still only on 20% tax)! Quite so, old grumps. Why. BM can’t devise a product suitable for 20% and 40% taxpayers is beyond me. I guess the ISA goes some way toward that admirable goal. But that non tax deductible fee is a killer. I can only imagine that most of their investors are companies, non taxpayers or tax dodgers, because otherwise it’s uncompetitive with most p2p platforms. I suppose it gives the now lamentable rates on Zopa a run for its money. A 1.5% fee, as you say nearer 2% with tax, is outrageous! I love the product, I may even try it in an isa, but bloomin' heck they don’t make it easy. It's great for SIPPs!! I don't call that tax dodging. In fact, BM gives us great peace of mind.
|
|
|
|
Post by portlandbill on Apr 5, 2018 12:40:17 GMT
if i wasn't a member of this forum, I would simply fill in my self assessment tax return each year simply listing the net income from my Bondmason investment as untaxed interest.
Would I be wrong to do that? How would I know not to do that? And is anyone at HMRC likely to notice?
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,376
Likes: 2,780
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Apr 5, 2018 13:30:07 GMT
if i wasn't a member of this forum, I would simply fill in my self assessment tax return each year simply listing the net income from my Bondmason investment as untaxed interest. Would I be wrong to do that? How would I know not to do that? And is anyone at HMRC likely to notice? I think they quoted the HMRC advice on declaring tax on BM investments on our tax statements last year. Strangely I can't now find the tax statement on my account to see exactly what it said. Does anyone know where it's hidden? Edit: Tax statements now available, the phrase is 'Advice from HMRC suggests that you are able to offset losses (write-offs), but not administration fees in your tax return.'
|
|
TheDriver
Member of DD Central
Slightly bonkers
Posts: 493
Likes: 190
|
Post by TheDriver on Apr 9, 2018 7:33:44 GMT
if i wasn't a member of this forum, I would simply fill in my self assessment tax return each year simply listing the net income from my Bondmason investment as untaxed interest. Would I be wrong to do that? How would I know not to do that? And is anyone at HMRC likely to notice? So the answers are: 1. Yes, you should list the GROSS interest (before FEES) although offset by any declared LOSSES 2. As above, from @greenwood2 3. Probably not, but as with any Tax Evasion technique is it worth the risk? I guess ignorance could reflect across a whole return history, and no-one wants an Investigation!
|
|
zlb
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,422
Likes: 333
|
Post by zlb on Apr 16, 2018 20:27:59 GMT
(3) subscribe to our upcoming IF ISA product... Roughly how soon do you expect to be offering this? And stevefindlay, will you offer transfers from the start, or should I save my new ISA allowance for your product? Bearing in mind that if you intend offering it in March 2019, that's not wise use, obviously. I'd also request, like very many others have, that in non-ISA, BM 'hide' their fees behind the scenes so that lenders pay tax only on what they earn.I think that you underestimate the quantity of lenders/investors who are not interested in, or up to, or in the league for setting up a company simply for this.
|
|
ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,814
Likes: 1,092
|
Post by ashtondav on Apr 20, 2018 18:08:53 GMT
Outside of an isa BM is useless for a taxpayer. Stupid suggestions of setting up a company is ludicrous.
post tax returns from BM for a 40% taxpayer are almost on a par with risk free 5 year BS accounts. Incredibly ineffective business model.
|
|
stub8535
Member of DD Central
personal opinions only. Not qualified to advise on investment products.
Posts: 1,447
Likes: 945
|
Post by stub8535 on Apr 20, 2018 18:39:59 GMT
Outside of an isa BM is useless for a taxpayer. Stupid suggestions of setting up a company is ludicrous. post tax returns from BM for a 40% taxpayer are almost on a par with risk free 5 year BS accounts. Incredibly ineffective business model. "risk free 5 year on RS" hmm. A bank or savings account it is not🤔
|
|
ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,814
Likes: 1,092
|
Post by ashtondav on Apr 20, 2018 19:18:05 GMT
Outside of an isa BM is useless for a taxpayer. Stupid suggestions of setting up a company is ludicrous. post tax returns from BM for a 40% taxpayer are almost on a par with risk free 5 year BS accounts. Incredibly ineffective business model. "risk free 5 year on RS" hmm. A bank or savings account it is not🤔 BS, not RS. BM delivers, if on target, for a 40% tax payer, 3.3% post tax. I’ll stick a few grand in when there’s an isa but BM is a seriously flawed model for a taxpayer. To be honest, it’s a non starter. On current trends by year end BS 5 year rates will be c. 3%. BM busted flush apart from tax dodgers...
|
|
|
|
Post by df on Apr 20, 2018 19:49:09 GMT
Quite so, old grumps. Why. BM can’t devise a product suitable for 20% and 40% taxpayers is beyond me. I guess the ISA goes some way toward that admirable goal. But that non tax deductible fee is a killer. I can only imagine that most of their investors are companies, non taxpayers or tax dodgers, because otherwise it’s uncompetitive with most p2p platforms. I suppose it gives the now lamentable rates on Zopa a run for its money. A 1.5% fee, as you say nearer 2% with tax, is outrageous! I love the product, I may even try it in an isa, but bloomin' heck they don’t make it easy. Gentlemen, BM sets no precedent in levying a fee of this nature to enable it to meet it's DD, Monitoring and other Administrative costs, many if not all mainstream financial services (FS) companies charge their clients in this way. BM's fee structure could be considered fair given a broader FS practice. Not happy?! Incredulous even?! Then why not liquidate your 'outrageously over taxed charged' portfolios and relocate your funds to elsewhere.  Note: Because my personal wealth was too low to meet the £5,000 minimum BM fund I am no longer an investor here, I wish it had been otherwise Because I would have still been invested here and content to pay the appropriate fees. BM offers a 'sea of professionally managed calm' amid an Oceans worth of Adrenaline charged worry, stress and minefields. I left BM for the same reason, but later reconsidered how I'm distributing my p2p funds and invested again. Had no loss with BM first time round and it's going fine now. I don't understand why people so resistant to fees. Is it because the word sounds bad? Every platform pays us less than they get from borrowers, they have to sustain and make some profit. I'm not interested how the fee is packaged, but what return I get from my investment.
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,376
Likes: 2,780
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Apr 20, 2018 20:03:23 GMT
Gentlemen, BM sets no precedent in levying a fee of this nature to enable it to meet it's DD, Monitoring and other Administrative costs, many if not all mainstream financial services (FS) companies charge their clients in this way. BM's fee structure could be considered fair given a broader FS practice. Not happy?! Incredulous even?! Then why not liquidate your 'outrageously over taxed charged' portfolios and relocate your funds to elsewhere. Note: Because my personal wealth was too low to meet the £5,000 minimum BM fund I am no longer an investor here, I wish it had been otherwise Because I would have still been invested here and content to pay the appropriate fees. BM offers a 'sea of professionally managed calm' amid an Oceans worth of Adrenaline charged worry, stress and minefields. I left BM for the same reason, but later reconsidered how I'm distributing my p2p funds and invested again. Had no loss with BM first time round and it's going fine now. I don't understand why people so resistant to fees. Is it because the word sounds bad? Every platform pays us less than they get from borrowers, they have to sustain and make some profit. I'm not interested how the fee is packaged, but what return I get from my investment. With BM it's just the irritation of getting taxed on money you theoretically had but never actually had (fees), when other platforms have found a way of getting around this, particularly if you pay 40% tax on it. I don't object to fees in general, my bigger beef with BM is the inability to diversify as much as I would like.
|
|
