Raisin debuts retail deposit product
0
For the first time, Raisin is offering a savings product directly under its own name to consumers in the region.
The Welcome Account is designed to give new customers a strong and simple entry point into savings. As an overnight deposit product with a promotional rate for the first three months, it offers savers in Spain one of the highest interest rates currently available on the platform. The account is fully flexible, fee-free, and easy to open online, aligning with Raisin's mission to offer transparent, customer-first financial products without barriers.
New customers can deposit between €1 and €60,000 and enjoy a market-competitive rate for three months. Following the promotional period, funds are automatically transferred into a rollover product selected in advance by the user via Raisin's Smart Switch feature, or they can be withdrawn without penalty. Customers receive the interest rate available at the moment of transfer, with this detail clearly disclosed during account setup. As a result, users continue to benefit from competitive ongoing returns with minimal friction.
The launch represents a broader strategic step for Raisin, as it continues to expand its ability to shape and offer products directly through its platform, further strengthening its leadership in digital savings innovation.
The Welcome Account has been designed to counter the complexity and opacity that often accompany traditional teaser products, which frequently include restrictive conditions or unclear rate changes. Raisin's offer focuses on transparency, customer control, and long-term value.
'With the new Welcome Account, we are appealing to everyday savers who are looking for a strong interest rate that is not tied to the obligation to open other products,' says Dr. Tamaz Georgadze, CEO of Raisin. 'It's a product that reflects everything we stand for: fair access to better financial solutions with zero hidden fees. Our goal is to empower people across Europe to take control of their financial future with confidence.'
Raisin continues to scale across key European markets, including Germany, Spain, the Netherlands, France, and Ireland, while supporting more than one million customers and managing over €75 billion in assets.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
a minute ago
- Daily Mail
Barcelona FINALLY make Marcus Rashford decision amid registration issues following forward's loan from Manchester United
Barcelona have announced their squad for the 2025-26 campaign on the day of their LaLiga opener. On Saturday, Hansi Flick's side begin their title defence on with a trip to Jagoba Arrasate's Mallorca. The Catalonian club have endured a series of well-publicised financial difficulties in recent years, and new signing Marcus Rashford had been left sweating over his future amid reports surrounding the club's inability to register new players. However, on Saturday morning Barca announced their squad for the coming season - with both Rashford, and fellow new arrival Joan Garcia both registered. Rashford has been named in the travelling squad for the club's LaLiga opener and could make his league debut for the Blaugrana at the Estadi Mallorca Son Moix. Club captain Marc-Andre Ter Stegen's willingness to sign off on the assessment of the league's medical committee that his latest injury will sideline him for the first five months of the campaign, enabled Barca to guarantee the registration of Garcia for the full term and put forward Rashford's case for approval. Rashford is understood to have sacrificed 15 per cent of his £315,000-a-week salary to get his dream move to Barca. He almost signed for the club in January but La Liga insisted the side sell before they buy and when they failed to offload Ansu Fati, who has since moved to Monaco, the deal had to be put on hold. The Spanish champions have been overspending on their wage bill, which is restricted by LaLiga in accordance to each club's revenue. In an effort to tackle overspending in other sporting departments - and thus ease the salary situation - Barcelona's executives have put their own personal wealth at risk as part of a bank guarantee worth €7million (£6m, $8.2m), according to The Athletic. The Catalans also took the drastic action in December 2023 for the same reason. After securing a season-long loan to the Spanish giants last month, Rashford will be keen to extend his stay beyond the end of the term. And he would have been expecting to showcase his talents in a fully refurbished Nou Camp at the beginning of the campaign. However, the club's £1.3billion project has faced a series of delays, with the latest reports casting doubt over whether they will be able to stage their September clash against Valencia at the venue. Recent reports have cast doubt over whether Barca will be able to stage their September clash against Valencia at their refurbished home Last month, the club were forced to walk back plans to stage the Joan Gamper Trophy, an exhibition match held every August, at the revamped 105,000-seater stadium because of a licensing issue. It was the fourth major delay to the project after the club was unable to meet previous deadlines of November 2024 and February and May of this year. According to Spanish outlet Sport, the Blaugrana face another headache, with the revised return looking 'increasingly unlikely' as they continue to wait to receive an occupancy permit from the city council. The council has previously stated that it cannot grant a licence, which they require to host the match, until the stadium works are fully completed. Their report claims that the club could play the fixture at the Estadi Johan Cruyff, where Barca Atletic typically play their fixtures. Barca have hosted home games at the Lluis Companys Olympic Stadium during the two-year exile from their iconic home but a return to the ground is not possible due to an event in the arena that weekend. The Spanish champions are reportedly still hopeful of making the deadline but they have begun to draw up alternative options in case they are forced to keep their fans waiting even longer for the homecoming. Even once it reopens the Nou Camp will be at a lower capacity, expected to be between 50,000 to 60,000, until renovations are finished, which is likely to be at the start of the 2026-27 campaign.
Telegraph
a minute ago
- Telegraph
Anyone with a brain is jumping off HMS Britain
A piece was recently published about five Oxford graduates. All of them are struggling to find work more than a year after getting good degrees. The article provoked a spate of online mockery about the young people's supposed sense of entitlement. Not for the first time, social media reminded us that we are what GK Chesterton called 'veneered vandals', savages under the thinnest of layers. In fact, the five Oxonians came across as ambitious and determined. They were making ends meet through temping, tutoring and working summer jobs while firing off hundreds of application letters. They were simply finding out, like so many people of their age, that three years of study and tens of thousands of pounds in student debt no longer get you onto the first rung of a career ladder. This discovery shocked them, as well it might. Theirs was the generation that was yanked out of school in March 2020, thinking that they would be back to take their A-levels after three or four weeks of lockdown. In fact, it wasn't just their schools that they never went back to; it was the way of life of pre-pandemic Britain. Before lockdown, the UK budget was on its way to surplus. Now, the Government is borrowing nearly £150 billion a year, two thirds of which must go to pay interest on past borrowing. No one has a plan to undo the supposedly emergency spending of 2020. The only debate is over whether taxes must rise to meet the new commitments, or whether we carry on borrowing. Did we imagine that we could pay people to stay home for the better part of two years without suffering an economic hit? As a matter of fact, I think a lot of us did. The same people who spent lockdown howling down attempts to loosen restrictions as 'putting the economy before lives' are now angry and bewildered because prices, taxes and unemployment have risen. Britain has reached the end of a long run of structurally high employment. For more than 30 years, our jobs market was the envy of Europe. Yes, we could be hit by external events, notably the global financial crisis. But we bounced back quickly, because we understood that the best way to encourage employers to hire people was to make it easy to fire them. A moment's thought reveals why. In a country with light employment regulations, firms take on staff during upswings, knowing that they can always drop them if things go wrong. But in a country with restrictive regulations, every employee is a potential liability, and companies hang back warily. In such countries, unemployment is structurally high, especially among young people. That has been southern Europe's tragedy for decades. British governments used to understand this. Neither Tony Blair nor Gordon Brown tried to undo the labour reforms of the 1980s. Both knew that, if they wanted revenue for public services, they needed a buoyant economy. Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves, by contrast, seem to struggle with the concept of cause and effect. Never mind their tax-and-spend policies. They appear not to grasp that raising the costs of employing people leads to fewer people being employed. Four months ago, they hit businesses with a double tax. Employer National Insurance contributions rose from 13.8 per cent to 15 per cent, and at the same time kicked in on earnings above £5,000 instead of £9,100. What did they think would happen, for heaven's sake? If tobacco taxes reduce smoking and carbon taxes reduce emissions, what did they suppose jobs taxes would do? Sure enough, the number of employees on payroll plunged by 109,000 the following month, and has declined further in every month since. Britain's overall unemployment rate is now at its highest since lockdown. The really striking figure, though, is youth unemployment. Among 16- to 24-year-olds, the jobless rate has reached Mediterranean levels: over 14 per cent in recent months. Why? Again, because of our refusal to acknowledge that actions have consequences. Pushing up the minimum wage (which applies from age 16) and the national living wage (which applies from 21) makes MPs feel righteous. They have voted to raise minimum remuneration for 20-year-olds by 55 per cent since 2020. The trouble is that these repeated hikes end up punishing young people, not helping them, by closing off job opportunities and condemning many to welfare. Around 60,000 students a year go straight from university onto long-term sickness benefits. MPs with a basic knowledge of economics tend to keep quiet, because they are terrified of being asked how they would like to live on £10 an hour. It is an irrelevant question, but it nonetheless terrifies them. I was, I think, the only parliamentarian to speak out against an above-inflation hike in the minimum wage during the pandemic, at a time when wages were falling across the private sector. Everyone else wanted an even bigger rise. Ignorant voters, self-righteous journalists and cowardly politicians make a potent combination. This year, the minimum wage rose by 18 per cent for 16- and 17-year-olds and by 16.3 per cent for 18-, 19- and 20-year olds. Result? Fewer jobs for young people. Openings in the hospitality sector are down by 22,000 since last year, and graduate postings have fallen by an almost unbelievable 33 per cent. To repeat, policies have consequences. I sometimes think that the readiness to acknowledge trade-offs is the real dividing-line in politics. And I don't just mean among politicians. Among voters, too, there are those who look at the costs of policies, and those who go to the polling station humming 'I'm just a soul whose intentions are good'. Hikes in the minimum wage are the least of it. The open-ended extension of equalities laws is an even greater deterrent. When retail workers can be compensated for being paid less than warehouse workers on supposedly sex discrimination grounds, even though the retail workers were refusing to be redeployed to warehouses, employers can hardly be blamed for being reluctant to hire. And that is before we get to Angela Rayner's package of employment laws, the most far-reaching since the mid-1970s. The Employment Rights Bill, currently before the House of Lords, is a regulatory omnibill that covers sick pay, paternity leave, bereavement, privileges for new employees, a right to demand flexible working, new holiday entitlements and extra powers for trade unions. As Tony Blair put it, early in his premiership: 'There is almost always a case that can be made for each specific instrument. The problem is cumulative. All these good intentions can add up to a large expense, with suffocating effects.' Quite so, and it is more than a little scary that we are governed by people who can't see it. Here is a paradox. Labour – the clue is in the name – is meant to be the party of the worker. Yet every single Labour-majority government has left office with unemployment higher than when it began. Every. Single. One. This one, unlike some of its predecessors, has wasted no time. Already we can see where it is going: more and more workers' rights, fewer and fewer workers. We are in a vicious circle. Higher unemployment means fewer people paying taxes into the system and more drawing benefits from it. Since Labour has already proven that it cannot cut spending – not even mildly to slow the rise in benefits claims – that can only mean even higher taxes, prompting more disinvestment, slower growth, higher unemployment and lower revenue. According to a survey by the British Council, 72 per cent of Brits under 30 are thinking of working abroad, and who can blame them? We are pulling off the extraordinary double of simultaneous emigration and immigration crises, exporting our entrepreneurs and replacing them with people who go onto benefits. And, God help us, we have another four years of it to come.
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
How Spain put up wealth taxes - without chasing away the billionaires
With its green curtain of hanging gardens, the Planeta building is one of Barcelona's most recognisable office blocks. Earlier this summer, it was acquired as part of a Monopoly board spending spree by Spain's richest man, the Zara fashion label founder Amancio Ortega. Through his Pontegadea family office, which invests his personal wealth, Ortega has also just snapped up the five-star Hotel Banke in Paris, an apartment building in Florida, and a half-share in the operator of Teesport in the north-east of England, adding to a property portfolio already worth €20bn. Why the rush? Ortega is poised to receive a record dividend of €3.1bn (£2.7bn) this year from his shares in Zara's parent group, Inditex. He is reportedly racing to spend the windfall, which would otherwise be subject to wealth taxes. Sources close to Pontegadea told the Guardian it was not investing to avoid tax, but following its mandate 'to create wealth from the original assets, maintain it, make it grow, and consolidate it over generations'. It invests all dividends from Inditex 'and any other income from its own economic activities every year, no matter the amount', they said. Whatever the reason, the Ortega property portfolio has grown rapidly in recent years, making his family office one of Europe's biggest real estate owners. As chancellors around Europe cast about for ways to repair the damage to public finances caused by successive global shocks, there is a growing clamour for more effective ways to tax the largest private fortunes. Spain is one of only three European countries (along with Switzerland and Norway) to still collect wealth taxes, and policymakers are looking to Madrid for lessons in what works – and what doesn't. In the UK, the former Labour leader Neil Kinnock and the party's former shadow chancellor Anneliese Dodds have joined those calling for Rachel Reeves to introduce a wealth tax when she sets out her budget in the autumn. As the chancellor looks at the options, which could also include changes to inheritance tax, members of her own party are pushing for a debate in parliament about introducing a 2% annual levy on those with assets over £10m, which they say could raise £24bn. In France, a similar proposal aimed squarely at the ultra-rich with assets of more than €100m was approved by the lower house but was rejected by the senate. Wealth taxes are designed to take a percentage of a person's assets each year. Once fairly common, they have gradually fallen out of use, replaced by levies that bite when money changes hands, for example, through dividend payments, inheritance and sales of shares or property. Spain's wealth tax dates to 1978, a year that marked the transition to democracy from dictatorship under Franco. Regional governments receive the revenues collected by the levy, a system that worked well until, after a brief pause during the financial crisis, it was brought back in 2011. On its return, Madrid's conservative administration responded by discounting the rate to zero. The move benefited the high-earning footballers at Real Madrid, attracted new residents from other regions, and incomers from Venezuela and other Latin American countries, boosting property prices. In 2022, the conservative-run region of Andalucía in the south, announced that it, too, would cut the rate to zero. In a play on the Spanish term for tax haven, paraíso fiscal, Madrid's regional leader posted on X: 'Andalucíans: welcome to paradise.' Then Galicia, in the north-west, where Ortega is resident for wealth tax, joined the fray by offering a 50% discount. A source of income that had been providing hundreds of millions of euros a year to support local services, including healthcare, was under threat. The battle to save it became a tussle between the socialist-led central government, headed by Pedro Sánchez, and conservative-run autonomous regional governments. At the end of December 2022, Sánchez took action, with the solidarity tax on large fortunes. Initially for two years, to help with public spending after the pandemic, it has now been rolled over until the regional financing is revised, which is not likely to happen soon. It was designed in such a way that whatever revenue was forfeited by the regions would be collected centrally. The rate starts at 1.7% for those with net wealth of €3m, rising to 3.5% for fortunes over €10m. It is payable on worldwide assets. There are allowances: the first €700,000 is exempted, as is €300,000 for the main residence. A cap to help the asset rich and cash poor means that combined income and wealth taxes cannot exceed 60% of income. Numbers shared with the Guardian by the Ministerio de Hacienda (the Spanish Treasury) show that in the first year, 2023, the regions collected €1.25bn, and the central government €630m; a total of €1.88bn. In 2024, the regions took the logical step of keeping the income for themselves. The total take rose to €2bn. 'The solidarity tax is not a tool to collect revenues for central government, it is a way of forcing regions to collect more,' says Dirk Foremny, associate professor of economics at the University of Barcelona. In that respect, it has worked perfectly. As a revenue raiser, it is limited. The approach from Madrid has been light touch, though the rules could be changed to raise more. The sums collected are on a par with inheritance tax – already heavily discounted by the regions – which raises about €3bn a year. By contrast, income taxes bring in €130bn. But Foremny says the solidarity tax has a social value. 'This tax is a tool to achieve a more equitable distribution of wealth across individuals. There are good arguments why we don't want to have a very large concentration of wealth in the hands of very few. Wealth is correlated with political influence and power.' He points to the US and its billionaire tech barons as a warning of what can happen when the scales tip too far. What is clear is that, two years on, a predicted exodus of the rich, trumpeted in endless alarmist headlines, has not materialised. Forbes counted 26 Spanish billionaires in 2021. This year, it lists 34, with a combined net worth comfortably over $200bn. 'The big fortunes mostly stayed put, filed protective appeals, and hired better structuring teams,' says Marc Debois, the founder of FO-Next, which advises family offices. 'A handful decamped to Lisbon or Dubai or any other location; enough for newspaper headlines, not enough for a flight.' Could the billionaires be made to pay more? Experts point to a big exemption: the one for 'family companies'. Originally designed to encourage small- to medium-sized businesses, these structures are also being used by the very biggest fortunes to manage their assets. There are restrictions. A taxpayer must demonstrate that assets are being used for economic activity, that is, a trade or business. Cash and shares held simply for investment purposes are taxable. Real estate that earns rents is not. If the family exemption is abolished, Debois says the billionaires won't necessarily decamp. They are more likely to lawyer up, reduce profits by leveraging (taking on debt), and create holding companies in low-tax jurisdictions such as Luxembourg. 'Some money already half‑abroad would finish the move,' he says.' The bigger issue is tens of thousands of mid‑sized family firms rely on the same rule; torching it is politically radioactive.' Estimates by Julio López Laborda, a professor of public economics at the University of Zaragoza, suggest that 80% of the assets of the richest 1% are not subject to the wealth tax. He says the family company exemption could represent a loss to the Treasury of about €2bn, while the cap on tax as a proportion of income, mentioned above, could account for another €2.5bn uncollected. Susana Ruiz, tax justice policy lead at Oxfam, which is working with López Laborda on a forthcoming report about wealth taxes, says: 'We could be raising at least two to three times more than we are at the moment.' Cutting public services in order to fund tax breaks, or simply balance the books, can create a doom loop, because it reduces the quality of provision, undermining the consensus on which taxation depends. In Madrid, declines in healthcare provision fuelled resentment among working people and created a sense that private provision was more efficient, says Ruiz. She believes the solidarity tax has helped rebuild confidence. 'There is a lot of citizen support behind it. It helps in the perception that the system is fair.' So far, there is no sign that it has affected growth. Spain was the world's fastest-expanding major advanced economy last year, outpacing even the US, with GDP up 3.2%. By contrast, growth in the UK and France last year barely scraped above 1%. On the balconies of the Planeta building, and in the country at large, the green shoots are alive and well.
