1% Levy on Unit-Linked Savings and Investments

I'm a bit piqued by the 'not for turning' attitude on the Government on this Levy; as introduced in the Finance Bill.

Let's call a spade a spade; this Levy will have a negative affect my business but it also affects me as a consumer as I have a preference for saving/investing through these products. I don't fancy handing over 1% of every payment I make, to save for my family's future, to subsidise a Government that can't think beyond tomorrow.

In 1985 the Government introduced a 'temporary' insurance levy of 2% on General Insurance (house, motor etc.) premiums to assist with the bailing out of the Insurance Corporation of Ireland. 25 years later, it's still there and it was increased by 50% in 2009.

Now, the Governments attention is focused on Life Insurance Protection type policies (mortgage protection, term insurance etc.) as well as Unit-Linked Savings and Investments. They had initially planned to apply the 1% Levy to private Pension policies but did a u-turn on the wisdom of that between the publication of the Budget and Finance Bill. The 'great minds' that had the temerity to even think about slapping a levy on these pension policies should be the ones that are emigrating.

Anyway, back to the title of this post. I understand that Government need to raise revenue to bail out the reckless spending and lending that has landed us in the mess we are in, but I don't understand the train of thought that goes along with some of the areas they are hitting.

Here is a summary of why I think that the 1% Levy on Unit-Linked Savings and Investments is a bad fecking idea :

# It's Anti-Competitive - It does not apply to all similar type products in this sector.
# It's a deterrent to save/invest - Folk should be encouraged to save so that they have something to fall back on when their Country goes bust, just to keep the show on the road.
# I would have serious doubts about the anticipated revenue it will raise - Do they (DoF) even know?
# The Government take tax at 41% of the growth on these funds already.
# Consumer groups have been campaigning for a long time to reduce the costs of these products - not increase them.
# There seems to have been no thought given to the costs of administering the collection of the levy.
# It punishes those that are being prudent with their money by saving for the long-term - Unlike you-know-who.
# It will drive savers/investors to the doors of the Banks and Post Office - Think about that one!
# There is no 'plan' as to how long this levy will apply - "Shur they'll get used to it like the Insurance Levy".
# It comes at a time when the Government are introducing their own medium to long-term savings scheme via the National Solidarity Bond - No levy on that then. Ahem!!!


Folks, would there be any appetite out there to get the Government to reverse this levy on Unit-Linked Savings and Investments? They haven't listened to the Industry heads. Do you think that they might listen to the consumers?

UPDATED 30/12/2011

The 1% Levy on the Savings & Investment product available at www.InvestAndSave.ie will not apply for the term of the contract.

The F.U. File

I keep a file in my office, simply titled F.U. It's littered with F**k Ups by Life and Pension Companies over the past 3 years. F.U's that cost my business money. There are also letters from these companies offering 'sincere' apologies for their incompetence and assuring me that the 'problems' have been rectified. To be honest; these letters are as empty as the heads that wrote them.

It was my hope that 2010 would bring some change to the way Life & Pension companies do business. Alas, it has begun the way that 2009 ended; same story, different year. I don't think that I would have higher expectations of customer service than other Financial Advisors. From talking with a few others before Christmas, it would appear that they are also experiencing servicing difficulties with some of the players in the market.

It really is baffling that the very companies that are losing business and market share cannot up their game to win new business by providing a superior service to customers. It seems that 'buying' business is where it's at in management circles but this method of business growth is not good news for the end consumer.

What I would like to ask the readers of this Blog is this : 'Do you think that I should post i) details of servicing issues that I am having with companies here ii) the names of the companies involved and iii) the name/s of the individual/s responsible for the F**k Ups?'

In your opinion would it hinder or help with customer service?

Have Bank Mangagers merely become 'fluffers' for their Financial Planning Consultants?

A client of mine lodged a six figure sum in her AIB current account just before Christmas. Within 48 hours the bank manager was on to her acknowledging the lodgement and asking if she had any 'plans' for the money. The client is savvy enough to recognise what she would consider to be a genuine interest in her finances and what was a sales pitch. The client told the manager that she had 'plans' for the money and the telephone conversation ended. The client subsequently received a letter from the bank manager listing '..some Deposit Options for consideration.'

As I understand it, AIB are under pressure to take in as much deposit money as possible as it is their principal source of funding at the moment. The bank says that they are continuing to "target a progressive reduction in their loan to deposit ratios" and that they are selling some assets as part of an ongoing strategy to successfully unlock "shareholder equity for its core business activities". Last time I checked, 'core activities' meant 'Deposit Taking' and 'Lending' not 'Holistic' Financial Planning.

I'm finding it difficult to reconcile what they are saying and what they are doing. If they are so anxious to take money in via Deposits, why are they continuing to use their deposit base as a gravy train for the investment products that they offer through AVIVA?

The letter that I mentioned above, titled "Deposit Options", also contained the following paragraph : "Ideally we recommend you to meet with Financial Planning Consultant who will cover off all the options available including some long term funds with potential to outperform Deposits."

Seriously; have the Bank Managers merely become 'fluffers' for their Financial Planning Consultants?

The use of the words "all the options available" suggests that the Financial Planning Consultant might recommend a Deposit Account, perhaps with another institution, that is offering a higher rate of interest. It also implies that the Consultant may recommend an investment product from all the options available on the market. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Consultant would either recommend an AIB Deposit Account, an AVIVA Investment Product or a combination of both. They don't recommend the more competitive products available elsewhere on the market.

I think that it's about time that someone took them to task on the way that they present themselves to their customers. It is about time that they were banned from the 'sharing' of Deposit Account holder information with their Investment Salesmen/women. It is also a pity that the Department of Finance did not make some reference to the movement of Deposits with Banks to Investments with linked companies, when they decided to Recapitalise the Banks last February.