logo
Is it time to scrap the Cash ISA? Experts' view on Rachel Reeves' controversial plan to get UK investing

Is it time to scrap the Cash ISA? Experts' view on Rachel Reeves' controversial plan to get UK investing

Independent28-02-2025

SPONSORED BY TRADING 212
The Independent Money channel is brought to you by Trading 212.
One of the biggest talking points this year has been the UK's Cash Isa and what alterations Rachel Reeves may make to it. Early suggestions included removing it entirely, but more recent news has suggested a cap on the amount which can be saved, which is currently set at £20,000 per person per tax year (across all Isa types).
For the uninitiated, saving money within an Isa makes it exempt from tax on interest earned. It is estimated that around £300bn in total sits in Cash Isas, which some have suggested could be put to better use were it invested, for example in a Stocks and Shares Isa. While it's true that over the long term this can generate better returns than cash, this approach doesn't factor in how or when people may need to access their cash. This has led to widespread debate among City executives, politicians and beyond about potential reform.
But what about the people who use them? To get a broad representation of how a range of people use, or could in future use, a cash Isa, The Independent has spoken to a professional trading platform, a wealth management company for high net worth individuals, a money coach, a female money platform and one of our own money writers.
The reasonings and insight each gave for different areas of society were varied, but the overarching message was clear: The cash ISA must remain and is an important part of UK society's wealth-building.
And, even if a reduction in allowance won't hurt everybody, there's absolutely no guarantee it would have the seeming desired effect of pushing individuals towards investing instead - at least, not without far more guidance, education and understanding. And, let's be clear: that's exactly what these newly launched Independent Money pages are intended to bring for people.
When it comes to building an investing culture throughout the population, the UK has a long way to go.
But in savings, while people know how and why to do it, there also remains a wide gap in the ability of some families to do so, with a Yahoo Finance report last year showing 12 per cent of low income families have under £100 in savings.
A crucial stepping stone
Even so, with cash Isas being shielded from tax and an ideal location for anybody to contribute to, there's still a big role for them to play whether for those starting out on savings journeys or for those who have a bigger pile built up - especially, as Wealth Coach Sara Jane Maxwell notes, if they are not yet ready to move into investing.
'A cash Isa is a great tool. It works really well for people who are nervous or unsure about time horizons or don't want to venture into investments yet,' she told The Independent. 'I feel like it will be reduced, possibly not withdrawn altogether, because the government wants us to be investing rather than holding cash.
'When people come to me they usually have a cash Isa already but might not be utilising it to the full potential. I don't work with lots of people with huge balances in them, so the annual limit being reduced wouldnt impact a tremendous amount - but sometimes they might feel that being in an Isa [rather than regular savings account] puts their money at risk - so the more awareness of them, the more we make people have more interest in them, is a positive.'
The Independent 's money writer Marc Shoffman agrees on cash Isa being a stepping stone towards future investing potential - and says branding is an important part of overall awareness on the subject which may be better served changing rather than some of the sweeping and, at times, complicated reforms which have been suggested elsewhere.
'People are naturally and understandably cautious about investing. Having personal finance education in school would help so that children build an understanding of how to generate wealth beyond how Hollywood or TV shows depict it.
'Getting people to save is hard enough so having a cash Isa provides a comfortable starting point and the products play a key role of putting money away for short term goals. Scrapping cash Isas isn't a good idea as there is no guarantee that the money would automatically go into backing British stocks, which appears to be the Treasury's aim.
'Better education and maybe a rebranding stocks and shares Isas to an 'investment Isa' would be a start in making this area more appealing.'
The saving-investing knowledge gap
That latter point on City execs and politicians seeming to think people will automatically divert more money towards investing is an important one, and a recurring theme.
If people aren't already investing, there are reasons behind that - fear, knowledge, misunderstanding, timeframes, personal preference and risk appetite are all just some of the factors at play. It simply won't follow that being allowed to save less in one tax-free environment means the remainder will straight away be sent into shares, British or otherwise.
Saving and investing platform Trading 212 's Head of Treasury, Gabriel May, explained that trying to time-lock using a cash Isa will simply see a change of location, not of mindset.
'People should be free to decide how they save. Forcing them to shift from cash savings to riskier products by undermining the Cash Isa is not only unrealistic but also questionable in intent. If this option is removed, people will simply move their money to less beneficial savings accounts, ultimately reducing their returns,' he said.
Laura Pomfret, of female money platform Financielle, adds further context around that knowledge gap.
Many people might have an idea of what they want to achieve in money terms, but be 'overwhelmed' about how to start, let alone get there.
'They come when they feel overwhelmed in their money journey,' Ms Pomfret says. 'It might be consumer debt, wanting to own a home, a large expense on the horizon. They usually have a financial goal in mind and not know how to get there.'
Jumping straight into investing, then, isn't an ideal approach for many, even if they have started saving already.
Entry point and wealth building
The idea of savings being the only part of a person's, or a family's, wealth is a risky one over the long-term perhaps. But it's absolutely the most important one initially, and only once that is in place can they reasonably be looking further ahead at other products, other ways of looking after their futures.
'We start clients at the beginning: work to a budget which they then manage,' Ms Promfret explains. 'Is there an excess at the end of the month? If not, it's debt, overspending, credit lines. After sorting that, the very first thing we recommend is building an emergency fund, then stronger savings.
'It builds after that.'
Cash Isas clearly have to remain available, but also accessible - even if people cannot fill out £20,000 or close to that a year, restricting what they can put in - without regard for family circumstance or size, or even stage of life, might simply prove restrictive for the long haul.
Trading 212 's Mr May said: "It's a highly appealing financial product. It encourages saving by offering an attractive combination of a high interest rate, tax benefits, and flexible withdrawals. Building a financial safety net is essential for everyone's financial well-being. Our clients' data demonstrates that the product serves as an entry point into the broader Isa family, promoting long-term wealth accumulation.'
Steve Jordan, director and co-founder at Five Wealth, said that while many clients grow more wealth through shares investments, he was 'strongly against' any removal of the cash Isa and pointed out the demographic who would be most at risk, were they somewhat backed into a corner where investments was their only tax-free approach available.
'A large proportion of the population only have cash savings and don't receive any financial planning advice,' he told The Independent. 'Low-risk savers and pensioners would potentially be disproportionately affected; the result for these people could be forcing them into paying more tax on their cash savings or forcing them into capital-at-risk investments that may not be suitable.
'Savers without much investment knowledge could make the move without the benefit of advice and could be unprepared for the volatility that may affect them.'
It also shouldn't be just about moving from cash to stocks and shares Isas either, Mr Jordan notes, with Junior and Lifetime Isas being alternatives too.
'What about the Jisa and Lisa? These investments can have a timescale which is much shorter than that needed for investment. Shares may not be appropriate at all for people saving for a house or money that may be needed at 18. I agree that longer term excess savings are probably better invested in markets than in cash on a return point of view, but that's not always the only consideration,' he said.
And yet, perhaps it won't be as dramatic as it all sounds.
Perhaps political inertia will again reign supreme, as Ms Pomfret suggests - and actually, discussion around limiting something that some people don't already use might just encourage them to find out about it and get started.
'It will at least get press and attention. I don't think Ms Reeves will reduce it so much in the end - it'll be the usual approach of say something and then the end result is not as bad.'
Whatever the eventual outcome for the cash Isa, it's clear that for long-term wealth building, saving remains the start of the journey and a critical step, even if longer-term, more people should certainly be looking to begin investing.
When investing, your capital is at risk and you may get back less than invested. Past performance doesn't guarantee future results.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Civil Service workforce up 2,000 to almost 20-year high, figures suggest
Civil Service workforce up 2,000 to almost 20-year high, figures suggest

Glasgow Times

time16 minutes ago

  • Glasgow Times

Civil Service workforce up 2,000 to almost 20-year high, figures suggest

A total of 550,000 people were employed in the Civil Service as of March 2025, according to new data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS). This is up from 548,000 in December 2024 and a rise of 1% year-on-year from 544,000 in March 2024. Headcount fell to 416,000 in June 2016, the month of the EU referendum. Since that date, the total has risen steadily, driven chiefly by the impact of Brexit and the Covid-19 pandemic. The Government announced in April this year that it planned to cut around 2,100 staff from the Cabinet Office, as part of a plan to shrink the Civil Service and reduce the cost of bureaucracy. Some 1,200 roles will disappear through redundancies, while 900 will be transferred to other departments. The latest Civil Service headcount of 550,000 is nearly a third higher (32%) than it was in 2016, or an increase of 134,000. Of the 550,000, almost 443,000 are full-time roles and the remainder are part-time positions. The last time the quarterly headcount was higher than the current figure was in June 2006, when it stood at 553,000. The total was on a downwards path during the second half of the 2000s and this trend continued into the 2010s until the EU referendum in 2016, after which the headcount began to climb. It grew by 40,000 in the years between 2016 and the start of the pandemic, as thousands of people were recruited to manage the complex and lengthy Brexit process. There was then a further jump once the pandemic was under way, as the Government hired staff to oversee huge projects such as the furlough scheme, testing for Covid-19 and the rollout of the vaccination programme. Headcount increased by 56,000 between March 2020, when the first lockdown began, and March 2022. By June 2024, just ahead of the general election on July 4, the total had reached at 546,000, since when the figure has increased by a further 4,000. Chancellor Rachel Reeves said in March that Civil Service running costs would be reduced by 15% by the end of the decade. As well as abolishing quangos such as NHS England, ministers have committed to increasing the proportion of civil servants working in digital and data roles, creating a workforce 'fit for the future'.

Winter Fuel Payments details of who is eligible confirmed
Winter Fuel Payments details of who is eligible confirmed

Western Telegraph

time18 minutes ago

  • Western Telegraph

Winter Fuel Payments details of who is eligible confirmed

The payment, worth up to £300, will return for millions this winter, the Chancellor has announced. To be eligible for the winter fuel allowance, a person will need to have reached state pension age by the week starting September 15 this year. Devolved authorities in Scotland and Northern Ireland will each receive a funding uplift so they too can meet the new threshold. Payments will be restored to the vast majority of pensioners who previously received it because anyone with an income of under £35,000 a year will now get the payment automatically Those with an income above this threshold will also receive the payment, but it will then be reclaimed from them in tax. Pensioners who do not want to receive the payment will be able to opt out, according to the Treasury. The decision to limit the winter fuel payment to only those who claimed pension credit was one of Labour's first acts in Government, aimed at balancing what was described as a £22 billion 'black hole' in the public finances. This meant the number of pensioners receiving the payment was reduced by around 10 million, from 11.4 million to 1.5 million. But Sir Keir Starmer announced there would be a partial U-turn on the policy in May, after it was thought to have contributed to Labour's drubbing in the local elections. The Treasury claims the new arrangement will cost £1.25 billion in England and Wales, while means-testing winter fuel will save the taxpayer £450 million. Chancellor Rachel Reeves said: 'Targeting winter fuel payments was a tough decision but the right decision because of the inheritance we had been left by the previous government. 'It is also right that we continue to means test this payment so that it is targeted and fair, rather than restoring eligibility to everyone including the wealthiest. 'But we have now acted to expand the eligibility of the winter fuel payment so no pensioner on a lower income will miss out. NEWS. Winter Fuel Payment to be reinstated for all State Pensioners this winter, but then clawed back via tax system for all who earn over £35,000 (roughly average earnings). This is a big improvement. Full instant analysis video coming with all the details in a minute.… — Martin Lewis (@MartinSLewis) June 9, 2025 'This will mean over three-quarters of pensioners receiving the payment in England and Wales later this winter.' Some two million pensioners who earn more than £35,000 will see their winter fuel payments clawed back via the taxman, the Treasury estimates. Kemi Badenoch, Leader of the Opposition, claimed the Prime Minister had 'scrambled to clear up a mess of his own making'. The Conservative leader added: 'I repeatedly challenged him to reverse his callous decision to withdraw winter fuel payments, and every time Starmer arrogantly dismissed my criticisms. hr /> Recommended reading: What is the energy price cap and does it need a smart meter? 'This humiliating U-turn will come as scant comfort to the pensioners forced to choose between heating and eating last winter. The Prime Minister should now apologise for his terrible judgment.' Liberal Democrat Leader Sir Ed Davey said: 'Finally the Chancellor has listened to the Liberal Democrats and the tireless campaigners in realising how disastrous this policy was, but the misery it has caused cannot be overstated. 'Countless pensioners were forced to choose between heating and eating all whilst the Government buried its head in the sand for months on end, ignoring those who were really suffering. 'We will now study the detail of this proposal closely to make sure those who need support actually get that support. The pain they went through this winter cannot be for nothing.'

What will be in the spending review? The winners and losers
What will be in the spending review? The winners and losers

Times

time18 minutes ago

  • Times

What will be in the spending review? The winners and losers

The spending review is make-or-break time for Rachel Reeves. The chancellor's first year in office has been challenging — imposing unpopular tax rises and cutting winter fuel payments for millions of pensions, which she has subsequently been forced to reverse. Reeves sees the spending review as a chance to stamp her authority and present voters with a clearer narrative about the purpose of this government. She will say that the government will invest to renew Britain, focusing on three central pillars: security, health and the economy. Growth will be the order of the day. There will be clear winners — the NHS and the Ministry of Defence will be at the front of the pack — and Reeves will have £113 billion to invest in infrastructure and other capital projects. But there will also be clear losers. The Home Office was the last to settle and Yvette Cooper, the home secretary, is unhappy with her settlement. There are also suggestions of significant cuts to Angela Rayner's Ministry of Housing, Community and Local Government. The NHS will be the biggest overall winner in the spending review, receiving a £30 billion rise in its day-to-day spending budget, making up about 60 per cent of the cash increase in the chancellor's overall day-to-day spending envelope, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies. But health service managers are still warning it will not be enough to meet the government's ambition for reducing waiting time targets. In fact, Wes Streeting, the health secretary, initially asked for a real-terms 4 per cent rise in his budget but had to settle for a 2.8 per cent rise. There are also concerns in the department that although day-to-day spending will rise, infrastructure budgets will remain flat in real terms. NHS managers have long warned that it is hard to improve productivity in the health service when staff have to work in buildings that are not fit for purpose and with outdated IT infrastructure. Reeves has concluded she wants to target infrastructure spending in other areas, such as transport and net zero, where the government is more likely to get an economic return on its investment. The agreement is also complicated by the need for the NHS to pay more for medicines amid pressure from President Trump and to boost Britain's life sciences industry. The Treasury has refused to allocate extra funds, insisting that the department find the additional cash within existing budgets. The other big winner from Wednesday's announcement will be the armed forces, which will see their budgets increase to hit the government target of spending 2.5 per cent of GDP on defence by 2027. The increase will be funded by cuts to international aid and will leave defence spending about £6.4 billion higher than if it had remained at the existing level. • Increase defence spending or learn Russian, Nato chief warns UK A key decision Reeves and Sir Keir Starmer will have to make on Wednesday is whether to go beyond this and increase spending still further towards the end of the decade to meet the prime minister's aspiration of hitting 3 per cent of GDP in the next parliament, 'as economic and fiscal conditions allow'. The announcement comes before a meeting of Nato leaders this month, which is expected to agree to Trump's demand of increasing core defence spending to 3.5 per cent, accompanied by a further 1.5 per cent on defence-related infrastructure. No date has yet been set for when Nato members will have to meet this pledge. Ministers have already announced that schools will receive an extra £4.5 billion a year in core funding by 2029, in part to pay for reforms under which more children with special educational needs will be taught in mainstream schools. The rise includes spending pledges that have already been made, including the cost of expanding free school meals for all pupils whose families claim universal credit and the £615 million allocated to schools to fund the new pay settlement for teachers. But while this extra money may sound generous on paper, in practice schools will receive £1.5 billion each year up until 2028-29, when the cumulative increase reaches £4.5 billion compared with this year. Boiled down, this means the spending rise for education in this review totals a real-term lift of 0.4 per cent. Luke Sibieta, a research fellow at the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said it was also unclear if the money included the teacher pay settlement reached last year. If so this would probably mean a real-terms budget freeze — although a shrinking school-age population means this would still result in a 3 per cent rise in spending per pupil by the end of the parliament. Despite being among the last few ministers to agree their spending settlement with the Treasury, Ed Miliband's department is likely to emerge as one of the biggest winners of the spending review as Reeves doubles down on Labour's clean-power pledge. Miliband will get more than £14 billion to fund the new Sizewell C nuclear power station, as well as a further £2.5 billion to develop a new generation of smaller modular reactors, and additional funding for carbon capture and storage. The energy secretary has also won out in a Whitehall row over the future of the government's warm-homes plan. The Treasury had looked to reduce some of the £13.2 billion earmarked for the scheme, which will subsidise households to install energy efficiency measures such as solar panels and insulation. Miliband is expected to get the vast majority of this funding in an effort to meet Labour's pledge to cut household energy bills by 2030. The Home Office was the last government department to settle its spending plan with the Treasury after it was in effect imposed upon Cooper. Reeves has refused to meet her colleague's demands for extra police funding, despite warnings that it means the government could miss its flagship pledges on law and order and a public intervention by police chiefs who said they faced 'stark choices'. It is understood that police spending will increase in real terms each year of this spending review period, which ends in 2028-29. However, it remains unclear whether this boost will match the more than £1 billion that officers say is needed to cover existing gaps. • Early prison releases risk public safety, police warn Cooper is unhappy with the final settlement amid concerns it is not enough to meet the government's pledge to recruit 13,000 neighbourhood officers by 2029. The real-terms rise in police funding will also mean deeper cuts to other areas of her department. The Border Force has warned that any cuts made to its £1.2 billion budget could result in anything from longer queues at airports to threats to 'national security'. Rayner, the deputy prime minister and housing secretary, has also clashed repeatedly with Reeves over potential cuts to her budget. Negotiations did not close until Sunday and were dominated by two big rows. First, Rayner was attempting to secure billions of pounds in capital funding to build more social housing, arguing that the government's pledge to build 1.5 million homes by the end of this parliament would be missed otherwise. She has previously said that the government needs to double the rate at which it is building council houses to meet this pledge. The second row was about funding for local authorities, which are facing mounting pressure because of the spiralling costs of providing social care. A number of local authorities have declared themselves in effect bankrupt, but as an unprotected area of spending councils could see their real-terms spending power fall further. There are also likely to be changes to the UK Shared Prosperity Fund, which was established to support the long-term economic development of towns and cities in place of EU funding after Brexit. Reeves will cut future allocations for London to zero — and other English regions could lose out as well. Reeves is once again looking to farmers as she seeks to pare back government spending. This time the debate is over Britain's flagship post-Brexit farming subsidies, which appear likely to be slashed for all but a few small farms. Sources at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, led by Steve Reed, said that the subsidies, which financially reward farmers for sustainable practices, will be severely cut in the spending review. Labour will honour its budget promise of £5 billion in farming funding for 2024-26, so cuts would hit many farms from 2026 onwards. The package of subsidies was introduced to replace the European Union's common agricultural policy after Brexit. It is designed to encourage farmers financially to look after nature and the soil instead of rewarding them for growing crops or tending livestock. In future the scheme will be targeted at small farms, meaning larger, wealthier farms will lose access to funding for nature-friendly practices. Coming off the back of the government's decision to reduce inheritance tax relief for farmers, it is likely to go down badly with rural communities. Reeves announced £15 billion worth of funding for local transport infrastructure, predominantly in the north of England and the Midlands. The transport spending will be focused on seats that Labour needs to hold in the face of a growing challenge from Reform. The focus will be on projects that will bring spades in the ground by the time of the next election. Reeves has told colleagues that she wants people to see and feel the outcome of the investment, which includes trams in Manchester and Birmingham, the Tyne and Wear Metro and a mass-transit system around Bristol. There is not expected to be money for big transport projects in London as ministers look to rebalance spending away from the capital. The government has said it will spend £86 billion on the science and technology sector by the end of this parliament as it looks to support the tech industries to boost economic growth. The package will help fund research into drug treatments and longer-lasting batteries, and include up to £500 million for regions across the UK. Local leaders will have a say on how it is spent. • What should the UK bet on with its industrial strategy? While this may sound like a lot of money, the £86 billion figure is the sum of all government spending on 'research and innovation' over four years and the annual spend will be £22.5 billion by 2029-30. This represents a 3 per cent real-terms rise in budget in 2029-30 compared with the present financial year. Three prisons will be built, starting this year, after a £4.7 billion funding commitment in the spending review in an attempt to grapple with the prisons crisis. The justice secretary Shabana Mahmood's speedy settlement was crucial as she was forced to announce plans to curb prison overcrowding when government projections showed that jails would fill up in November. The plans for 'record expansion' of the prison estate came alongside measures that meant offenders would spend only 28 days on recall to prison if they breached their licence conditions.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store