Talk:Individual savings account

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

United Kingdom Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

What's the point of an ISA?

Obviously to save money; but what does the Government get out of it? I have heard it said that an ISA is a form of tax avoidance; this was countered by someone saying the Government uses the money fron ISAs in a similar way to general taxation. If the latter is correct, how is this achieved?92.28.1.163 (talk) 21:11, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The government doesn't 'get anything out of it' per se they lose out on the tax revenue due on the interest/capital gains made inside the ISA. However the government recognises that it's incredibly expensive to get onto the property ladder here and also that people don't save enough for retirement so they are trying to get people to help themselves rather than rely on the state for benefits housing etc.

references

This artoicle lack references. Who has critcised ISA's as confusing and who caimed they were for the middle classes?--195.26.238.4 06:35, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

other

Ironically, ING also calls their savings account the same thing - does this deserve any mention? Krupo 21:04, Sep 5, 2004 (UTC)

There is no irony. The only thing they have which is called an individual savings account (ISA) is a cash ISA exactally as described in the article and most companies call their ISA an ISA (why call a spade anything but a spade?) Dainamo 17:11, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Pronunciation

Is ISA an acronym sounding like "icer" or an initialism eye-es-ay? I ask because of the footnote in American and British English spelling differences#Acronyms and abbreviations, which says The Guardian spells it Isa, which would be unusual for an initialism. jnestorius^(talk) 21:08, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

-- You read it "icer" rather than I-S-A

Correct. If it would be most unusual to say 'I-S-A' as its use has become so widespread - always "icer"

Broken ext link removed

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/isa/index.htm Guidance Notes for PEP and ISA Managers - removed.Vernon White ^{. . . Talk} 18:24, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fund Supermarkets

"The Fund Supermarkets do not offer the entire range of ISA eligible collective funds nor do they allow investment directly into specific stocks or shares."

That's strange, because I invest in stocks and shares in my ISA through a fund supermarket.

I believe they do. Hargreaves Landsdown do in their vantage ISA, as one example -- but I'm sure there are others. 80.177.214.113 (talk) 20:52, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I also believe they do I have a Hargreaves landsdown ISA and I am able to invest in any fund/share within reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.96.14.189 (talk) 08:47, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple accounts

I believe that people can have ISA with different companies in different years. ie Barclays one year and NatWest the next. This article does not make this clear - if I ffttt6trd am correct PHowell —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.68.39.78 (talk) 14:09, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Changes for "over-50s" in 2009

Having just had a "difference of opinion" with a financial adviser about the meaning of "over 50" in the changes to investment limits in 2009, I've added a clarification to the article. I'm currently not over 50; my 50th birthday is in January 2010. However the changed rules include anyone (such as myself) whose 50th birthday falls before 6th April 2010. Why the various glossy brochures mince about with sentences like "if you'll be 50 or above before 6th April 2010" (a verbatim quote from a Scottish Widows brochure) rather than simply stating "if your date of birth is before 6th April 1960" I don't know; perhaps they're trying not to remind us 49-ers that the big Five Oh is on its way. 81.129.207.108 (talk) 23:40, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The abolition of mini/maxi ISAs

It seems to me that the ISAs we have now are mini ISAs, except that the total annual allowance may now be invested in a S&S ISA, whereas previously you needed a maxi ISA in order to invest the whole lot in S&S.

What happened to existing maxi ISAs when they were abolished? Did each one just become two separate accounts with the same provider, or what? — Smjg (talk) 22:27, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Barclays told it's one customer it no longer does Barclays stocks and share Isa to any of their customers from end of 2014. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.30.134.12 (talk) 23:56, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone else here remember the original plan?

I'm surprised to see no mention of this here. When ISAs first came out, we were told that the cash allowance would be £3000 only for the first tax year and would then be lowered to £1000. Then this change was postponed a year. I don't remember whether this plan was further deferred before being scrapped altogether. Does anyone have information on the history of the plan for the future of the ISA to add here? Moreover, what was the plan in the early days for what would happen to the annual stocks and shares allowance? — Smjg (talk) 22:26, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Move reverted

I've reverted Tony1's move to the lower case title form. See a Google search which shows it always capitalised and Proper_noun#Specific_designators along with its examples like Central Intelligence Agency differentiated from prose use of a central intelligence agency. This is a specific product name, not merely an account held by an individual. Hence the move to lower case form breached the article naming policy. Jamesday (talk) 03:18, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Truncated sentence - can someone fix it?

The last line in the 'Tax treatment' section ends in "as £2.2 billion i". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.64.172.106 (talk) 17:27, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

IF ISAs

Text in future tense, so going to rewrite in present as they are now available, and add in a few more details / dates etc. Colinmcdermott (talk) 15:39, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 14 October 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Page moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jerm (talk) 16:59, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Individual Savings Account → Individual savings account – I see that there has been some prior dispute over the capital letters in the title of this article, but I think this is basically the same situation as for a Individual pension plan or an Individual retirement account. This is not a proper noun. If not moved as proposed, perhaps it should be Individual savings account (United Kingdom), but the capital letters are not appropriate here. As the this article says, an ISA is "a class of retail investment arrangements", and as the proper noun article says, a "a class of entities" is a common noun, not a proper noun. Some writers use capital letters to indicate any special string of words or anything to be abbreviated with initials, but Wikipedia's convention is to use sentence case for topic names instead. Regarding the prior discussion, Central Intelligence Agency is one specific agency. This is not about one particular account – it is about a particular type of account – there are many ISAs, so unlike "CIA", ISA is not a proper noun. —BarrelProof (talk) 12:26, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Not a proper name. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:40, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.