Nationwide, NatWest, Lloyds, Halifax, and Santander issued HMRC warning
Customers with certain accounts at banks like Nationwide, NatWest, Lloyds, Halifax, and Santander have been issued a warning.
Experts have explained that Brits with long-term fixed-rate savings accounts might get an unwelcome knock on the door from HMRC.
A lot of banks nowadays offer two or three-year fixed savings accounts as a way to grow your funds.
But while you're counting the cash at the end of the term, you could be hit with a tax demand because HMRC views the interest from these accounts as income within a single year.
Got a #sidehustle? 💸 We're here to help you get your tax right. ✅ Click below to check if you need to tell us about your side hustle income today. ⬇️https://t.co/D56rzpHInt pic.twitter.com/bDOVZauouv
— HM Revenue & Customs (@HMRCgovuk) June 4, 2025
For some savers, the final payout could nudge them over the tax-free threshold, triggering a tax event. However, it's key to remember that this doesn't apply to cash ISA accounts, which remain tax-free up to £20,000.
The current tax-free interest earnings cap for basic-rate taxpayers sits at £1,000 annually. Those on the higher-rate can pocket up to £500 without owing tax, but additional-rate taxpayers aren't afforded any tax-free interest allowance.
Laura Suter, personal finance director at AJ Bell, told the Star: "Many people won't realise that [fixed rate accounts] could leave them with a tax headache in the future."
She added: "You are taxed on the interest on your savings when it is accessible by you.
"So if you pick a fixed-rate savings account that pays out all the interest at maturity, for tax purposes all of that interest will be counted in one tax year.
Recommended reading:
103-year-old British gran reveals the secret to long living - it's an alcohol
Holidaymaker's 'nightmare' Corfu holiday: 'No English food and water cost €1.50'
Nationwide customers who won't get extra June £100 payment – are you one?
"This means that the interest from just one account could take you over your Personal Savings Allowance on its own."
Ms Suter suggested getting an account where interest is paid out monthly or annually instead.
She continued: "This means it is spread across different tax years.
"Or you can opt for a fixed-term ISA savings account, where you won't pay any tax on the interest."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
£10,000 invested in Lloyds shares 12 months ago is now worth…
Despite the ongoing investigation into motor loans, shares in Lloys Banking Group (LSE:LLOY) are up almost 38% in the last year. That's clearly a very good result, but it's worth putting into context. While 38% is enough to turn £10,000 into £13,800, investors who bought shares in Barclays or NatWest have fared even better. And this is something investors should pay attention to. There are a couple of reasons Lloyds shares have trailed some of the other UK banks over the last 12 months. But the biggest is the ongoing investigation into motor loans. The bank has more exposure to the potential liabilities arising from the case than either NatWest or Barclays. And the bank has put aside £1.2bn to cover potential liabilities. That's around 10% of the firm's net interest income from 2024 and two-thirds of the cash it used for dividends. This has been weighing on its financial results and explains the stock performance. The Supreme Court's verdict is due in July. And while there's obviously a big risk here, things could go very well for Lloyds if the verdict is favourable. In terms of motor loans, Lloyds is at a clear disadvantage to Barclays or NatWest. But it might be in a better position to cope with a different potential risk. Interest rates in the UK have been falling and this typically means lower lending margins. Banks, however, typically make fixed-income investments to try and limit the risk of changes in rates. This is known as structural hedging. When interest rates are high, it can act as a drag on earnings, but when rates start to fall – as they are now – it can provide a boost to net income. Lloyds goes about it in a more dynamic and less mechanical way than the other UK banks. And this might well prove to be an advantage with rates coming down in the near future. Lloyds shares currently trade at a price-to-book (P/B) ratio of around one. That's lower than NatWest, but it's towards the higher end of where the stock has been trading over the last 10 years. On this basis, the share price doesn't look unusually cheap. More accurately, it doesn't look as though investors are particularly pessimistic about the company at the moment. Given the ongoing motor loan investigation, I find this surprising. I think the outcome is difficult to foresee and this is something that I'm not sure is reflected in the share price. Investors who bought Lloyds shares 12 months ago have done very well. But despite the stock underperforming some of its rivals, I don't see an obvious buying opportunity for my own portfolio at the moment. I think banks can be terrific investments. But their businesses tend to be more cyclical than average and their share prices fluctuate accordingly. With Lloyds specifically, buying the stock ahead of the upcoming Supreme Court verdict looks hugely risky. And I prefer to avoid uncertainty as much as possible with my investing. A positive outcome for the company could give the stock a big boost. But investors considering buying shares at the moment should at least be aware of the potential for things to go wrong. The post £10,000 invested in Lloyds shares 12 months ago is now worth… appeared first on The Motley Fool UK. More reading 5 Stocks For Trying To Build Wealth After 50 One Top Growth Stock from the Motley Fool Stephen Wright has no position in any of the shares mentioned. The Motley Fool UK has recommended Barclays Plc and Lloyds Banking Group Plc. Views expressed on the companies mentioned in this article are those of the writer and therefore may differ from the official recommendations we make in our subscription services such as Share Advisor, Hidden Winners and Pro. Here at The Motley Fool we believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. Motley Fool UK 2025 Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Newsweek
6 hours ago
- Newsweek
Satellite Images Show Giant Port Emerge at World's Biggest Construction Site
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Satellite imagery showed advances in construction of Oxagon, a floating industrial complex that is a key component of Saudi Arabia's Neom, currently the world's largest construction site. Newsweek has contacted Neom for comment. Why It Matters The new port city has a strategic location in one of the world's busiest maritime trade routes connecting Asia, Africa, and Europe. Neom is the flagship element of Saudi Arabia's Vision 2030 aimed at diversifying its economy away from oil dependence. Oxagon, The Line and the Trojena Ski resort are among its most ambitious pieces. Neom has recently announced several progress reports, with a new CEO now in charge of resolving the project's budget overruns and delays amid multiple simultaneous, ambitious, and costly projects. What To Know Images captured by the Copernicus Sentinel-2 satellites showed rapid progress made on Oxagon city and port, set to become one of the world's most advanced port terminals, the facility lies on the Red Sea in northwestern Saudi Arabia. Drag slider compare photos The Port of NEOM has received Saudi Arabia's first fully automated, remote-controlled cranes, marking a key step in boosting Red Sea trade, automation, and tech-driven job creation, the company announced this week on LinkedIn. The Red Sea corridor is a major shipping route linking Asia via the Indian Ocean, to Europe and Africa via the Suez Canal. Oxagon's proximity to the canal, which facilitates almost 12% of global trade, provides it with a strategic edge, according to Blackridge Research & Consulting, an Indian-based specialized market research firm. The port is part of an envisioned cutting-edge industrial city which will fully rely on renewable energy and aims to host some 90,000 inhabitants by 2030, according to the government's vision. Update🚨: Recent images posted by Giles Pendleton (Chief Operating Officer THE LINE at NEOM | Chief Development Officer) of Oxagon, showing immense progress in infrastructure works + Oxagon village is about to have more construction work coming as the site being prepared. — Saud (@Saudfromabove) April 13, 2025 Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman had announced the establishment of Oxagon in 2021. "It will contribute to Saudi Arabia's regional trade and commerce, and support creating a new focal point for global trade flows," Al-Arabiya's English website quoted him as saying. Neom's Green Hydrogen Company (NGHC) is developing the world's largest green hydrogen facility—a $8.4 billion project— at Oxagon. What People Are Saying Melissa Blake, Port Director at Neom wrote on Linkedin: "Port of Neom is excited to receive the first batch of cranes and other cargo handling equipment as we come another step closer to delivering our vision." Saudi Arabia's Government Vision 2030's website: "Sitting at the crossroads of 3 continents, Oxagon is a place where people, nature and technology come together in harmony." Vishal Wanchoo, CEO of Oxagon said in May: "Industrial development cannot continue at the expense of people or the environment. We're offering a compact, mixed-use city where industry, nature, and community coexist." What Happens Next The port is planned to act as the main trade gateway to northwestern Saudi Arabia, with a smart logistics hub, connects Asia, Europe, and Africa.
Hamilton Spectator
6 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Global streamers fight CRTC's rule requiring them to fund Canadian content
OTTAWA - Some of the world's biggest streaming companies will argue in court on Monday that they shouldn't have to make CRTC-ordered financial contributions to Canadian content and news. The companies are fighting an order from the federal broadcast regulator that says they must pay five per cent of their annual Canadian revenues to funds devoted to producing Canadian content, including local TV news. The case, which consolidates several appeals by streamers, will be heard by the Federal Court of Appeal in Toronto. Apple, Amazon and Spotify are fighting the CRTC's 2024 order. Motion Picture Association-Canada, which represents such companies as Netflix and Paramount, is challenging a section of the CRTC's order requiring them to contribute to local news. In December, the court put a pause on the payments — estimated to be at least $1.25 million annually per company. Amazon, Apple and Spotify had argued that if they made the payments and then won the appeal and overturned the CRTC order, they wouldn't be able to recover the money. In court documents, the streamers put forward a long list of arguments on why they shouldn't have to pay, including technical points regarding the CRTC's powers under the Broadcasting Act. Spotify argued that the contribution requirement amounts to a tax, which the CRTC doesn't have the authority to impose. The music streamer also took issue with the CRTC requiring the payments without first deciding how it will define Canadian content. Amazon argued the federal cabinet specified the CRTC's requirements have to be 'equitable.' It said the contribution requirement is 'inequitable because it applies only to foreign online undertakings and only to such undertakings with more than $25 million in annual Canadian broadcasting revenues.' Apple also said the regulator 'acted prematurely' and argued the CRTC didn't consider whether the order was 'equitable.' It pointed out Apple is required to contribute five per cent, while radio stations must only pay 0.5 per cent — and streamers don't have the same access to the funds into which they pay. The CRTC imposes different rules on Canadian content contributions from traditional media players. It requires large English-language broadcasters to contribute 30 per cent of revenues to Canadian programming. Motion Picture Association—Canada is only challenging one aspect of the CRTC's order — the part requiring companies to contribute 1.5 per cent of revenues to a fund for local news on independent TV stations. It said in court documents that none of the streamers 'has any connection to news production' and argued the CRTC doesn't have the authority to require them to fund news. 'What the CRTC did, erroneously, is purport to justify the … contribution simply on the basis that local news is important and local news operations provided by independent television stations are short of money,' it said. 'That is a reason why news should be funded by someone, but is devoid of any analysis, legal or factual, as to why it is equitable for foreign online undertakings to fund Canadian news production.' In its response, the Canadian Association of Broadcasters said the CRTC has wide authority under the Broadcasting Act. It argued streamers have contributed to the funding crisis facing local news. 'While the industry was once dominated by traditional television and radio services, those services are now in decline, as Canadians increasingly turn to online streaming services,' the broadcasters said. 'For decades, traditional broadcasting undertakings have supported the production of Canadian content through a complex array of CRTC-directed measures … By contrast, online undertakings have not been required to provide any financial support to the Canadian broadcasting system, despite operating here for well over a decade.' A submission from the federal government in defence of the CRTC argued the regulator was within its rights to order the payments. 'The orders challenged in these proceedings … are a valid exercise of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission's regulatory powers. These orders seek to remedy the inequity that has resulted from the ascendance of online streaming giants like the Appellants,' the office of the attorney general said. 'Online undertakings have greatly profited from their access to Canadian audiences, without any corresponding obligation to make meaningful contributions supporting Canadian programming and creators — an obligation that has long been imposed on traditional domestic broadcasters.' The government said that if the streamers get their way, that would preserve 'an inequitable circumstance in which domestic broadcasters — operating in an industry under economic strain — shoulder a disproportionate regulatory burden.' 'This result would be plainly out of step with the policy aims of Parliament' and cabinet, it added. The court hearing comes as trade tensions between the U.S. and Canada have cast a shadow over the CRTC's attempts to regulate online streamers. The regulator launched a suite of proceedings and hearings as part of its implementation of the Online Streaming Act, legislation that in 2023 updated the Broadcasting Act to set up the CRTC to regulate streaming companies. In January, as U.S. President Donald Trump was inaugurated for his second term, groups representing U.S. businesses and big tech companies warned the CRTC that its efforts to modernize Canadian content rules could worsen trade relations and lead to retaliation. Then, as the CRTC launched its hearing on modernizing the definition of Canadian content in May, Netflix, Paramount and Apple cancelled their individual appearances. While the companies didn't provide a reason, the move came shortly after Trump threatened to impose a tariff of up to 100 per cent on movies made outside the United States. Foreign streamers have long pointed to their existing spending in Canada in response to calls to bring them into the regulated system. This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 8, 2025.
