[Colin Harrison]

Morning Stephen,

Yes it’s a pity to close due to subscribers numbers but there we are – time marches on. Perhaps it’s become too easy for occasional readers to self-select which partly accounts for the falling numbers. I know at least one reader in that category, as you’ve commented before here hence taking out the previous published HYP constituents.

Like others have suggested, it would have been great to see the usual end of year round up of performance of the various HYP’s in what I suggest has been a poor year for capital, but good for income, especially forward income. Pity that, as I was genuinely looking forward to a pungent review. I’d like to suggest that falling numbers are in fact a bullish sign for income approaches and the irony is that now is probably a great time to start an income portfolio, though perhaps not as good as the dog days of 2008 of course. So it goes, income yields go up, subscribers dump income strategies, or paying for them at least.

Anyway if another venture pops up in whatever form – really I’d suggest conventional value is better suited to cyclic publication as the changing tips naturally prevent re-use (same crossword as last month? hmm)– then I’d be happy to subscribe. Just make sure to use your own brand name again, and you’ll be found. If not, enjoy, and many thanks for the tuition.

Colin

[Colin Harrison]

Many thanks for that.

kind regards,

Colin

[Colin Harrison]

Many thanks for this prompt reply. The thought was prompted by an article on another website which mentioned 10 times no less, the idea of “script” dividends (vs scrip), a schoolboy howler which shows how far the quality there has fallen. Thanks for keeping the quality here to serious investor level, rather than the increasingly ultracrepidarian script elsewhere.

regards,

Colin

[Colin Harrison]

Thanks for this, a few things to think about there.

[Colin Harrison]

Thanks for this, is there any way for readers to mitigate this new potential tax other than using the ISA allowance? The £3000 reduction in the tax free limit is a substantial one, especially for employed high/+ rate taxpayers and represents a potential cut in the size of a non-ISA held portfolio of about £60,000 (at a typical yield of 5%). Had the annual ISA limit been raised by about £60,000 per year and not £4,760, then that would have been tax neutral, but it wasn’t.

I like the idea of a HYP, but this is making me reconsider part of it, as the idea of being taxed on dividend income (to the tune of 32.5%+ of the yield) on invested savings that have already been income taxed is a bit tiresome really. Perhaps a non yielding growth only fund/trust or dare I say behind the bars of a SIPP, see previous very useful discussions on this. That would apply to a portfolio of, for example full ISA contributions, and maximum £40k non-ISA portfolio HYP -(at 5% yield), but what to do with any planned/potential investments above that?

Presumably this emphasizes that for “full” ISA’s any new purchases of relatively lower yielding shares (such as currently Br.Aerospace, or Unilever for example yielding about 3%+) would be made outside an ISA which helps a little, whereas Carillion, RDSB, VOD et al (currently yielding 6-8% plus) should ideally be purchased inside an ISA in the next ISA year or moved into an ISA if held externally.
best regards,

CSH

PS I’m aware that you are not able to provide individual advice, so this is of course a general type of inquiry.

[Author]

Posts