Skip to the content

Insurance bonds left to compete as an add on

04 July 2008

The implications for the future of insurance bonds as a vehicle for long-term investment, and indeed as a product, have been catapulted to the fore by the last budget’s changes in CGT, which have brought the top rate of tax down from 40% to 18%.

By Peter McCready,

Trustnet Correspondent

The taxation implications are significant but not the whole story. As with any investment, there are other considerations such as the investor’s personal circumstances and requirements, performance of the underlying investment and charges.

Jason Butler, a partner at Bloomsbury Financial Planning, says there is still scope for insurance bonds. His firm has done an analysis of sixty scenarios since the CGT changes and can still see a place for onshore and offshore insurance bonds.

Their research indicates that a higher rate taxpayer, who is highly unlikely to become a non-resident, should still invest in an onshore insurance bond, and in an offshore bond if likely to become a non-resident in future.

John Lawson, head of pensions policy at Standard Life, says: “Tax wise, bonds still have a place. The changes in CGT haven’t made much of a difference for basic rate taxpayers. However, for high rate taxpayers it’s now slightly skewed in favour of income for bonds and mutual funds for growth. But it depends on the underlying asset mix of your fund whether one’s better than another.”

Nevertheless, insurance bond sales are falling across the board. They may be of a particular use to some investors but the majority of investors will regard them as another vehicle in addition to their pension plan or wrapper. 

Top performer versus bottom performer

 Zurich Latin America


 Skandia Legg Mason Japan Equity


Danny Cox, head of financial practioners at Hargreaves Lansdown, says investors should look at an insurance bond after taking advantage of a SIPP and ISA.

However, Lawson says: "It may not necessarily be the case that you want to fill up your pension first before you go for insurance bonds."
 
"The problem with pensions is that you’re restricted in what you can do with the money. You can only take 25% back as cash. The rest must been taken as an income. So bonds give you a bit more flexibility because you can still draw an income from them without paying tax immediately."

He also says insurance bonds, tax treatment aside, are like any other collective investment such as a unit trust or OEIC because essentially the underlying investments in bonds or mutual funds are fairly similar.

The investments may be similar but the range of funds and managers is not, and after the changes to CGT this is one of the main drawbacks of an insurance bond.

Cox says: "In terms of performance if you have choice of putting your money into an insurance bond or a unit trust, in most cases you would probably put it into a unit trust because likely you are to get a better performance and find a better manager."

"Whilst insurance bonds have grown up a lot, and recognised the need to have better investment choices, some might have 150 different fund links, but if you invest in a fund supermarket you get 2,000."
 

Editor's Picks

Loading...

Videos from BNY Mellon Investment Management

Loading...

Data provided by FE fundinfo. Care has been taken to ensure that the information is correct, but FE fundinfo neither warrants, represents nor guarantees the contents of information, nor does it accept any responsibility for errors, inaccuracies, omissions or any inconsistencies herein. Past performance does not predict future performance, it should not be the main or sole reason for making an investment decision. The value of investments and any income from them can fall as well as rise.