joko
Crazy Mango
Posts: 437
Likes: 474
|
Post by joko on Aug 3, 2017 16:09:34 GMT 7
I was 42 years old, just getting by making about $3000/mo in Seattle, Washington. I'd recently been dismissed from a company I'd worked for for 17 years (although not consecutively). One day, I got a letter offering me a buyout on the pension I'd earned from the company for the first 10 years I worked there (they discontinued the pension in the early 2000's). They owed me $330/month, every month, after I retired at age 65. The letter offered me $10,500 immediately to discharge that obligation. Hmmm.... $330/mo = $4000/yr... I'd only have to live to be 67 for this to work out in my favor...
But no. My life in America was stagnant, not going anywhere. I had no sex life. No family of my own. No reason to stay.
So, I took the offer and used that $10K to pay for a TEFL course and a plane ticket to SE Asia. Now, I'm saving money like I never could have in America.
|
|
chiangmai
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
Posts: 6,481
Likes: 5,570
|
Post by chiangmai on Aug 3, 2017 17:48:00 GMT 7
We talked earlier about the geographic split of investments, here's how my equities are split currently:
UK 44% US 21% EU 10% Asia 6% Japan 5% India 4% Taiwan 2% China 2% Aus/NZ 1% Emerging 3% Other 2%
|
|
|
Post by rgs2001uk on Aug 3, 2017 22:10:20 GMT 7
What's the best way for a Thailand resident, UK expat to hold an investment portfolio? I want to be able to trade cost effectively and efficiently on a regular basis. I also want some legal protection of the variety offered by the UK Financial Services. I do not want to pay tax on my investments, especially if/when the Chancellor removes my UK Personal Allowance. I want the investments to be liquid in the sense I can redeem them without restrictions, on demand. I want my wife to be able to assume ownership of those investments when I shuffle off. An offshore wrapper at Transact is pricey and limits tax free withdrawals to 5% per year - not a starter. I want, I want I want, sounds just like my ex bloody wife! If you find The Holy Grail and are able to square that circle, please let me know.
|
|
|
Post by rgs2001uk on Aug 3, 2017 22:15:03 GMT 7
I was 42 years old, just getting by making about $3000/mo in Seattle, Washington. I'd recently been dismissed from a company I'd worked for for 17 years (although not consecutively). One day, I got a letter offering me a buyout on the pension I'd earned from the company for the first 10 years I worked there (they discontinued the pension in the early 2000's). They owed me $330/month, every month, after I retired at age 65. The letter offered me $10,500 immediately to discharge that obligation. Hmmm.... $330/mo = $4000/yr... I'd only have to live to be 67 for this to work out in my favor... But no. My life in America was stagnant, not going anywhere. I had no sex life. No family of my own. No reason to stay. So, I took the offer and used that $10K to pay for a TEFL course and a plane ticket to SE Asia. Now, I'm saving money like I never could have in America. Great stuff, took the road less traveled and had the balls to say, eff this there has to be more to life than this. Just like others on this thread, from differing backgrounds, ages and professions we followed the same path. If you dont understand finances, my best advice would be to get into some sort of mutual fund, good old USA has seen the stock market go up 200% in the last 8 years.
|
|
|
Post by rgs2001uk on Aug 3, 2017 22:22:28 GMT 7
We talked earlier about the geographic split of investments, here's how my equities are split currently: UK 44% US 21% EU 10% Asia 6% Japan 5% India 4% Taiwan 2% China 2% Aus/NZ 1% Emerging 3% Other 2% ^^^^ if you were still in the UK, would your portfolio really be much different? I am a great fan of Investment Trusts (as already mentioned), build up a core of UK/Worldwide holdings, as your knowledge and understanding improves, buy some American, European or Asian ITs, then move on to Emerging Markets etc etc. My Alliance Trust dividends are reinvested, the ITs I hold with the stockbroker, the dividends arent reinvested, so every so often I have a bit of research to do to decide where to put the money. Just had an update from the stockbroker, portfolio has increased by about 10% in the last 3 months, dividends now sitting in a cash account waiting to be reinvested.
|
|
|
Post by rgs2001uk on Aug 3, 2017 22:49:28 GMT 7
What's the best way for a Thailand resident, UK expat to hold an investment portfolio? I want to be able to trade cost effectively and efficiently on a regular basis. I also want some legal protection of the variety offered by the UK Financial Services. I do not want to pay tax on my investments, especially if/when the Chancellor removes my UK Personal Allowance. I want the investments to be liquid in the sense I can redeem them without restrictions, on demand. I want my wife to be able to assume ownership of those investments when I shuffle off. An offshore wrapper at Transact is pricey and limits tax free withdrawals to 5% per year - not a starter. I want, I want I want, sounds just like my ex bloody wife! Will be difficult to get a single portfolio which is best at all of those. Different places have different strengths and weakness, so I use different places for different reasons. The main places I hold investments are: UK - Hargreaves Lansdown (HL) Singapore - Standard Chartered (SC Sg) Thailand - Standard Chartered Thailand (SCBT) Thailand - TMB If I rate for each of your criteria: 1) Trading cost efficiently and effectively: - HL cheapest on funds and larger value share/investment trusts transaction as it is fixed cost - SC Sng cheapest on low value transactions (as a Priority Banking client) for shares and ITs. Most expensive for funds - Thailand SCBT and TMB no share dealing. Between UK and SG on funds 2) Legal protection - HL highest - SCB Sg second - Thailand last - but not as bad as self proclaimed "experts" with the attitude never invest in Thailand claim 3) Tax - generalising - Singapore best - Thailand close second - UK would need to distinguish more the vehicle used i.e tax efficient SIPP or ISA vs normal. Normal would be inferior to Singapore and Thailand for most people, although may depend on your income/capital gain levels 4) Liquidity - All pretty similar. Depends more on what you invest though. - HL and TMB UK have the easiest platforms for funds - SCBT is more manual and settlement takes slightly longer - SC Sg is manual for funds because we have in joint names. Shares is similar to UK - Unit trusts and generally easier and more guaranteed in terms of liquidity than shares or investment trusts 5) Wife taking ownership - Without a doubt dealing with stuff in Thailand in her own language and being able to just call in face to face easily to discuss - UK and Singapore would need some help/support navigating the system - Best to have wills in each location too My view is that my wife will have access to Thailand assets in her own name first while she sorts out my stuff. She will then be able to sort out Thailand fairly easily, then Singapore relatively OK, while waiting to navigate thru the UK stuff. Key being she will have enough to be getting by with while she does so 6) Offshore wrappers - Generally I don't like them, and they are just an unecessary extra cost. More often than not to benefit the selling agents rather than you. Offshore Portolfio Bonds (OPBs) being one of the ones I dislike most. Often no need for such wrappers with the 3 places I hold - The main exception I would call would be on larger estates that are seeking to mitigate UK inheritance tax. Sometimes trusts can be useful. But placing stuff in your Thai wife's name and in Thailand is a very good way of dealing with IHT at low cost for many people. The stuff we have in Singapore is also joint names, so automatically halves any UK IHT compared to just my name. Thai IHT won't affect most people/Thais given the high Thailand threshold and fact overseas assets are excluded My thoughts are at this stage in my life it isn't either/ or but a combination works best. If and when I think I'm in say the last 5/10 years of this life I would consider moving most things to Thailand for simplicity if we're still here. Maybe slightly higher transaction costs, and less choice, but there's enough available here to do that. At that stage succession planning and convenience may outrank chasing superior performance/more quality/choice. Edit: Forgot to add I have a Thai brokerage account at KGI. Mainly to trade SET futures and options and very rarely Thai shares. So all Thai focused, and obviously the best way to trade Thai shares and derivatives. It will be very easy for my wife to close after my demise. In the same boat, my attitude is just because my wife is Thai and can speak Thai, doesnt mean she will have a clue as to what is being told to her at Aberdeen, UOB etc etc. Tis a pity there are no trusts in Thailand. I read elsewhere about leaving all the details in an envelope for your mrs, my Thai aint good enough to write it in Thai, so it would need to be in English, doubt if my mrs would even understand it, even if it was written in Thai. There are only two farangs I know in Thailand who my mrs can trust to help her claim my pensions etc etc. Not yet mentioned, Thai will. One of the reasons everything I have here is in joint names, dont believe the rubbish you read elsewhere posted by the bitter and twisted.
|
|
chiangmai
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
Posts: 6,481
Likes: 5,570
|
Post by chiangmai on Aug 4, 2017 2:15:41 GMT 7
We talked earlier about the geographic split of investments, here's how my equities are split currently: UK 44% US 21% EU 10% Asia 6% Japan 5% India 4% Taiwan 2% China 2% Aus/NZ 1% Emerging 3% Other 2% ^^^^ if you were still in the UK, would your portfolio really be much different? I am a great fan of Investment Trusts (as already mentioned), build up a core of UK/Worldwide holdings, as your knowledge and understanding improves, buy some American, European or Asian ITs, then move on to Emerging Markets etc etc. My Alliance Trust dividends are reinvested, the ITs I hold with the stockbroker, the dividends arent reinvested, so every so often I have a bit of research to do to decide where to put the money. Just had an update from the stockbroker, portfolio has increased by about 10% in the last 3 months, dividends now sitting in a cash account waiting to be reinvested. I think the argument that's being made is that as an expat resident in Thailand I should have less reliance on UK equities and should be spread more around the rest of the world. I don't know about anyone else but I find it hard to come up with a model that seems ideal in that respect, perhaps something along the lines of only 25% UK with Asia and Far East being much higher - I have no feel for whether one model is better than another in that respect. From a purely numerical and risk point of view, 56% non-UK does seem like the risk has been spread.
|
|
chiangmai
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
Posts: 6,481
Likes: 5,570
|
Post by chiangmai on Aug 4, 2017 2:32:01 GMT 7
Will be difficult to get a single portfolio which is best at all of those. Different places have different strengths and weakness, so I use different places for different reasons. The main places I hold investments are: UK - Hargreaves Lansdown (HL) Singapore - Standard Chartered (SC Sg) Thailand - Standard Chartered Thailand (SCBT) Thailand - TMB If I rate for each of your criteria: 1) Trading cost efficiently and effectively: - HL cheapest on funds and larger value share/investment trusts transaction as it is fixed cost - SC Sng cheapest on low value transactions (as a Priority Banking client) for shares and ITs. Most expensive for funds - Thailand SCBT and TMB no share dealing. Between UK and SG on funds 2) Legal protection - HL highest - SCB Sg second - Thailand last - but not as bad as self proclaimed "experts" with the attitude never invest in Thailand claim 3) Tax - generalising - Singapore best - Thailand close second - UK would need to distinguish more the vehicle used i.e tax efficient SIPP or ISA vs normal. Normal would be inferior to Singapore and Thailand for most people, although may depend on your income/capital gain levels 4) Liquidity - All pretty similar. Depends more on what you invest though. - HL and TMB UK have the easiest platforms for funds - SCBT is more manual and settlement takes slightly longer - SC Sg is manual for funds because we have in joint names. Shares is similar to UK - Unit trusts and generally easier and more guaranteed in terms of liquidity than shares or investment trusts 5) Wife taking ownership - Without a doubt dealing with stuff in Thailand in her own language and being able to just call in face to face easily to discuss - UK and Singapore would need some help/support navigating the system - Best to have wills in each location too My view is that my wife will have access to Thailand assets in her own name first while she sorts out my stuff. She will then be able to sort out Thailand fairly easily, then Singapore relatively OK, while waiting to navigate thru the UK stuff. Key being she will have enough to be getting by with while she does so 6) Offshore wrappers - Generally I don't like them, and they are just an unecessary extra cost. More often than not to benefit the selling agents rather than you. Offshore Portolfio Bonds (OPBs) being one of the ones I dislike most. Often no need for such wrappers with the 3 places I hold - The main exception I would call would be on larger estates that are seeking to mitigate UK inheritance tax. Sometimes trusts can be useful. But placing stuff in your Thai wife's name and in Thailand is a very good way of dealing with IHT at low cost for many people. The stuff we have in Singapore is also joint names, so automatically halves any UK IHT compared to just my name. Thai IHT won't affect most people/Thais given the high Thailand threshold and fact overseas assets are excluded My thoughts are at this stage in my life it isn't either/ or but a combination works best. If and when I think I'm in say the last 5/10 years of this life I would consider moving most things to Thailand for simplicity if we're still here. Maybe slightly higher transaction costs, and less choice, but there's enough available here to do that. At that stage succession planning and convenience may outrank chasing superior performance/more quality/choice. Edit: Forgot to add I have a Thai brokerage account at KGI. Mainly to trade SET futures and options and very rarely Thai shares. So all Thai focused, and obviously the best way to trade Thai shares and derivatives. It will be very easy for my wife to close after my demise. In the same boat, my attitude is just because my wife is Thai and can speak Thai, doesnt mean she will have a clue as to what is being told to her at Aberdeen, UOB etc etc. Tis a pity there are no trusts in Thailand. I read elsewhere about leaving all the details in an envelope for your mrs, my Thai aint good enough to write it in Thai, so it would need to be in English, doubt if my mrs would even understand it, even if it was written in Thai. There are only two farangs I know in Thailand who my mrs can trust to help her claim my pensions etc etc. Not yet mentioned, Thai will. One of the reasons everything I have here is in joint names, dont believe the rubbish you read elsewhere posted by the bitter and twisted. I think many expats in Thailand struggle with this, here's what I've done. Rather than joint names on everything I've written two wills, one covers my UK assets and the other my Thai assets, my wife is sole beneficiary of both so eventually she will get everything but probably at different times as the respective legal system work at different speeds. The house is in my wife's name albeit I have an usufruct on it, so worst case on day one is that she will have somewhere to live. We then have two daily working accounts, one is in joint names, the other is in her name but I am a signatory to that account, there is enough money in those accounts to last her for about a year after I pass. It's then all down to probate in the UK and Thailand. I have a firm of solicitors in the UK who will act as my executors there and they have been given detailed instructions of who to pass the assets to (ID card number etc) and in what manner (transfer Pounds only). The Thai Will relies on my wife having our Thai solicitor execute probate although all assets in that Will are with UOB and they have a copy of it and I'm told that transfer will be simply and quick but they DO require probate. We're just now setting up a Thai investment account which will be in both names hence the earlier mention of UOB equities products. It seems UOB will allow her to withdraw from that account when I die but not to be able to close it without first obtaining probate - the account is held in both names and is either/or (rather than and). The biggest risks to the above that I can see are red tape/bureaucracy and time although the UK end should be pretty easy.
|
|
chiangmai
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
Posts: 6,481
Likes: 5,570
|
Post by chiangmai on Aug 4, 2017 7:02:41 GMT 7
One last word from me on the subject of wills: I forgot to add that my wife also has a will that names me as sole beneficiary of all her assets. Life deals unusual cards at the oddest times, sometimes, and I wouldn't want to get myself into a position where my assets were transferred to my wife and then following the totally unpredictable early passing of my wife, those assets were suddenly passed on to my wife's family - registering the marriage at the Amphur and making it more than just a village ceremony will also help on this front (we haven't done that).
And another word on geographic split of assets, which is boring but the answer is not there yet:
With respect to geographical split: try as I may I can't see why an overseas resident expat investment portfolio should look that much different from a Western resident investment portfolio, I think the expat aspect is a red herring. I absolutely agree that ideally, all investment portfolios should be spread across a number of different regions in line with the investors risk tolerance levels because doing so will in itself reduce risk. But what that spread should be for an average investor seeking a balanced portfolio with an average risk appetite, expat or not, has to be subjective based on individual comfort levels. Crikey, there are shed loads of expats living in Asia who defy conventional economic wisdom and refuse to bring more than just their daily spending money into the country, all for a number of reasons most of which are not valid. So who is to say that a 10%, 25% or 50% portfolio exposure to non-UK assets is appropriate or not and who is to say that a higher figure is better than a lower one, once a minimum threshold has been reached (for a medium risk investor seeking a balanced portfolio).
If it appears I'm trying to be argumentative on this point I am not, far from it. I'm simply trying to understand the logic to see if and how it applies to me. I've accepted blindly from the outset that geographic diversification is a good thing but now, having thought about it extensively, I'm trying to better understand the detail of the mechanics.
|
|
AyG
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
Posts: 5,871
Likes: 4,555
|
Post by AyG on Aug 4, 2017 7:56:23 GMT 7
I can't see why an overseas resident expat investment portfolio should look that much different from a Western resident investment portfolio Let me try to explain. If you live in the UK your expenditure is in GBP, so you want your income to be in GBP. That's why (if you're rational) you'll put your savings in a GBP bank account, rather than one in, say AUD, (even though an AUD savings account may have a higher interest rate). That's because the GBP/AUD interest rate may change and wipe out the notional gains of investing in AUD. With the UK-resident, the rationale is the same for investments. It makes more sense for the bulk of your investments in Sterling-denominated bonds, and in companies with UK-derived earnings*. In the case of investment in UK companies, one is tying one's investments to the UK economy. If inflation rises, the companies can (generally speaking) increase their prices, so increasing their profits (in purely cash terms), allowing them to increase their dividend. This gives you protection against the ravages of inflation. A rational investor who has a well established core UK portfolio may then want to add some "spice" with foreign equities which may, over the longer term, provide superior returns. The rational investor living in the United States would follow similar logic, and end up with savings with US banks in USD, and investments predominantly in companies deriving their income from the United States. So clearly, one's portfolio should look radically different, according to one's home economy. *** Now, how about an expat living in Thailand? In an ideal world, the bulk of one's savings and investments would be within Thailand. However, there are reasons, which I don't think I need to go into here, for not doing so. That said, I think there should be a substantial investment here. Perhaps 15-20%. This THB-denominated investment substantially eliminates FX risk and reduces local inflation risk. As for the rest of one's investments, it's foolish to expose oneself to a single foreign economy - "putting all one's eggs in one basket" springs to mind. By spreading one's investments around one gets an average effect of FX risk, inflation risk, and economic growth. If one considers the US, UK, Eurozone and Japan to be the major, investable economies, then one would rationally put 20% into each of them, and 20% into Thailand; there is no rational reason to prefer one over the others. *** At this point I think I've answered your point "why an overseas resident expat investment portfolio should look that much different from a Western resident investment portfolio". Taking things a little bit further though, one can consider how nearby economies tend to move in step. For example, when France is doing well, Germany tends to be doing well too, and vice versa. So, if you're living in Thai, you might want to invest a bit more in SE Asian markets, and a bit less in US/UK/EU/Japan - say 15%. Let's also assume you want to at a little spice to your portfolio by investing 6% in Emerging Markets. This gives us: 15% Thailand 15% SE Asia 16% US 16% UK 16% Europe 16% Japan 6% Emerging Markets * I specifically wrote "companies with UK-derived earnings", not "UK companies". Many of the largest companies derive the bulk of their earnings overseas, in foreign currencies. Thus they are not 100% representative of the UK economy and may carry FX risk. This can be a good or a bad thing, according to one's circumstances and point of view.
|
|
chiangmai
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
Posts: 6,481
Likes: 5,570
|
Post by chiangmai on Aug 4, 2017 8:36:48 GMT 7
I can't see why an overseas resident expat investment portfolio should look that much different from a Western resident investment portfolio Let me try to explain. If you live in the UK your expenditure is in GBP, so you want your income to be in GBP. That's why (if you're rational) you'll put your savings in a GBP bank account, rather than one in, say AUD, (even though an AUD savings account may have a higher interest rate). That's because the GBP/AUD interest rate may change and wipe out the notional gains of investing in AUD. With the UK-resident, the rationale is the same for investments. It makes more sense for the bulk of your investments in Sterling-denominated bonds, and in companies with UK-derived earnings*. In the case of investment in UK companies, one is tying one's investments to the UK economy. If inflation rises, the companies can (generally speaking) increase their prices, so increasing their profits (in purely cash terms), allowing them to increase their dividend. This gives you protection against the ravages of inflation. A rational investor who has a well established core UK portfolio may then want to add some "spice" with foreign equities which may, over the longer term, provide superior returns. The rational investor living in the United States would follow similar logic, and end up with savings with US banks in USD, and investments predominantly in companies deriving their income from the United States. So clearly, one's portfolio should look radically different, according to one's home economy. *** Now, how about an expat living in Thailand? In an ideal world, the bulk of one's savings and investments would be within Thailand. However, there are reasons, which I don't think I need to go into here, for not doing so. That said, I think there should be a substantial investment here. Perhaps 15-20%. This THB-denominated investment substantially eliminates FX risk and reduces local inflation risk. As for the rest of one's investments, it's foolish to expose oneself to a single foreign economy - "putting all one's eggs in one basket" springs to mind. By spreading one's investments around one gets an average effect of FX risk, inflation risk, and economic growth. If one considers the US, UK, Eurozone and Japan to be the major, investable economies, then one would rationally put 20% into each of them, and 20% into Thailand; there is no rational reason to prefer one over the others. *** At this point I think I've answered your point "why an overseas resident expat investment portfolio should look that much different from a Western resident investment portfolio". Taking things a little bit further though, one can consider how nearby economies tend to move in step. For example, when France is doing well, Germany tends to be doing well too, and vice versa. So, if you're living in Thai, you might want to invest a bit more in SE Asian markets, and a bit less in US/UK/EU/Japan - say 15%. Let's also assume you want to at a little spice to your portfolio by investing 6% in Emerging Markets. This gives us: 15% Thailand 15% SE Asia 16% US 16% UK 16% Europe 16% Japan 6% Emerging Markets * I specifically wrote "companies with UK-derived earnings", not "UK companies". Many of the largest companies derive the bulk of their earnings overseas, in foreign currencies. Thus they are not 100% representative of the UK economy and may carry FX risk. This can be a good or a bad thing, according to one's circumstances and point of view. Thank you AyG. that does indeed make sense. Let me add a personal perspective to the above which I accept does not represent the typical investor: My cash assets are split between the UK and Thailand, I was braver than most some years ago and brought into Thailand enough to cover my living expenses for the next seven years (and two months). I therefore don't have to worry about exchange rate risk for the time being, nor do I have to be concerned that I can't continue to live here, those were my two most important financial priorities. But I have left an equal amount of UK assets in the safe haven UK and it's these assets that represent my Plan B in life and are the subject of this pension and investment portfolio discussion. Up until now I have treated the two investment areas, Thailand and the UK, separately and independent of each other in the knowledge that at some point my UK assets will be converted into THB when my UK will is executed and that the exchange rate is nearing a long term average. So when it comes to me making investments I first have to consider which currency will I invest in and if it's going to be THB in Thailand, that investment tends to be restricted to the Thai investment market, in this respect I am mostly very cautious. I can see no reason why I would invest in Thailand using UK based GBP and I suppose some of that argument carries over to investments generally in SE Asia, other than as a means of risk mitigation of the FTSE or as part of a broader fund. When I consider investing in UK onshore Pounds I can afford to be a little more adventurous. But since those investments are not needed to support my life in Thailand I don't need to consider short term exchange rate risks hence the geographic spread of those investments is aimed mostly at mitigating risk in the UK index. I totally agree it's foolish to expose oneself to only a single economy, ditto any one egg basket for anything. I guess part of the problem I have is that trying to determine which is my home economy, based on location of my assets, is not that easy. I hope that goes some way towards explaining my current sentiment towards the geographic spread of my investments, not that it is necessarily 100% right, if that makes sense.
|
|
chiangmai
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
Posts: 6,481
Likes: 5,570
|
Post by chiangmai on Aug 5, 2017 7:10:45 GMT 7
Time for some questions on UK tax, CG and Inc vs. Acc:
- as a retiree expat who is non-UK resident for tax purposes, am I potentially exposed to capital gains by holding ACC units inside my active drawdown pension?
- second question, same as above but what if investment portfolio and not pension?
|
|
AyG
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
Posts: 5,871
Likes: 4,555
|
Post by AyG on Aug 5, 2017 7:36:54 GMT 7
As non-UK resident you are not subject to CGT.
However, if you become resident again, Hector will claim CGT on any capital gains in the 5 years prior to rebecoming resident.
SIPPS (which I what I presume you have) are not subject to CGT at all, resident or non-resident.
|
|
chiangmai
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
Posts: 6,481
Likes: 5,570
|
Post by chiangmai on Aug 5, 2017 7:53:17 GMT 7
As non-UK resident you are not subject to CGT. However, if you become resident again, Hector will claim CGT on any capital gains in the 5 years prior to rebecoming resident. SIPPS (which I what I presume you have) are not subject to CGT at all, resident or non-resident. Thanks AyG. No it's not a SIPP it's a drawdown pension that is self administered and is contained within a wrapper. It looks as though my pension is safe but I shall need to give thought to how to set up the investment portfolio, one option I suppose might be as a SIPP but then I'm exposed to tax if I want to liquidate it in the future - the other option of course is an offshore bond which is not especially cheap and limits annual take out to 5%. I shall have to think about this one carefully. Another answer might be to take income/dividends, up to the limit of the personal allowance. But the good news is that I've established a target structure for the new portfolio and whilst it isn't as diversified as you might wish, it is much improved and I'm comfortable with it: UK - 30% US - 24% EU - 16% Asia - 5% Japan - 7% India -6% China - 5% Emerging 5% Cash 2%
|
|
AyG
Crazy Mango Extraordinaire
Posts: 5,871
Likes: 4,555
|
Post by AyG on Aug 5, 2017 9:14:54 GMT 7
It looks as though my pension is safe but I shall need to give thought to how to set up the investment portfolio, one option I suppose might be as a SIPP but then I'm exposed to tax if I want to liquidate it in the future - the other option of course is an offshore bond which is not especially cheap and limits annual take out to 5%. I shall have to think about this one carefully. Another answer might be to take income/dividends, up to the limit of the personal allowance. Definitely not an offshore bond. Absolute rip-off. Personally, I would (and do) invest offshore. This has the advantage for me, given that I hope to be declared non-domiciled in the UK upon my death, that it takes that part of my wealth out of UK inheritance tax. (And for that reason I keep my investments held in the UK under the IHT threshold.) All my offshore investments are either investment trusts or ETFs, with all but one being traded on the London Stock Exchange. This means that I'm much more comfortable with the investments concerned, and I don't have to do a lot of additional research to familiarise myself with foreign investment managers. Of course, the additional complexity of investment trusts might mean this isn't a route you want to go down (even though, historically, investment trusts have outperformed comparable unit trusts/OEICS). An alternative approach which you may prefer is to invest primarily (or exclusively) in accumulation units of funds in the UK, and then sell a small percentage each year. (Remember that your UK investments are free of CGT as a non-resident.) But the good news is that I've established a target structure for the new portfolio and whilst it isn't as diversified as you might wish, it is much improved and I'm comfortable with it: UK - 30% US - 24% EU - 16% Asia - 5% Japan - 7% India -6% China - 5% Emerging 5% Cash 2% That is looking a lot better in my opinion. A good, international spread. Glad you've made the change.
|
|