Mortgages question

[Sugar]

Hiya guys, now i already have a mortgage with my ex partner but i am maybe going to be looking into selling our house next year and buying somewhere on my own. My question is really about what multiples lenders give these days? When we got ours i think it was 3.7x joint income was the maximum. That was over 2 years ago now and i'm not sure if it's different for a single applicant.

I've done an internet search but mostly its just a rough guide of 3.5x, i've heard of my friends getting 4 and a bit times their salary though. I will have a deposit which we didn't when i bought with my ex so i think that makes a difference too.

Any help would be great thanks! :)

[LuckyStrike]

theres all sorts out there, ive heard of as much a 6x salary mortgages and 100%+ mortgages, but seen as you have a deposit thats not a problem.

best to check around i would think.

theres a lot of good mortgage advice over at moneysavingexpert altho im sure you'll find some on here as well!

[Pearly]

Hi,

It depends so much these days, but generally you will be allowed to borrow more in relation to how much x your salary if you go for a mortgage on your own, than if you are getting a joint mortgage. This news article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4418882.stm)has some interesting info you may want to read.

You can also try this website (http://www.mortgagesorter.co.uk/mortgages_amount_you_can_borrow.html)to see what lender's would possibly lend you on your current salary.

[Ricardo R]

Northern Rock (!!) offered me 5.5x, I took Alliance & Leicester which gave me 5.1x - this is of 100% my basic salary and 60% my bonus (much higher than salary). Multiples might be higher in London than elsewhere, most people I know get 5+.

[CheeseOnToast]

Good luck getting 5x salary in the current credit conditions.

4x may be an option, especially as you have a deposit.. :)

[Kazbo]

When I was buying 2 months ago 5x was about the most. I got 4x and to be honest I wouldn't want any more than that on my current salary as I don't believe I've got the remaining income to live on comfortably and be able to do what I want with the property.

[Kermit]

You shouldn't be looking at how much the bank will lend you, you should be looking at how much you can afford to pay each month.

I would be very worried if you took out a mortgage that was more than two-thirds of your salary each month. You would be setting yourself up for financial ruin.

The banks won't tell you what you can afford, and just because a bank will give you the money doesn't mean you should take it.

[Mist]

It varies anyway. Some banks and building socieities will lend higher than others. Also it will largely depend on whether you represent a good risk for them, I expect, in today's climate.

For info though, Halifax, Nationwide and Abbey are amongst ones that will lend on a 5* multiple.

[Whowhere]

TBH I wouldn't try and get a mortgage that is more than 3.5 times your income, put simply you won't be able to afford the repayments. Best bet is to save up for a bigger deposit, or get a smaller house.

[Olive]

You shouldn't be looking at how much the bank will lend you, you should be looking at how much you can afford to pay each month.

I would be very worried if you took out a mortgage that was more than two-thirds of your salary each month. You would be setting yourself up for financial ruin.

:yes:

Especially important if you're buying alone, as it's more expensive to live by yourself.

My bank would have lent me 5x my salary, but realistically, living alone I would only have been able to afford 2.5x max.

[CheeseOnToast]

TBH I wouldn't try and get a mortgage that is more than 3.5 times your income, put simply you won't be able to afford the repayments. Best bet is to save up for a bigger deposit, or get a smaller house.

I'd love to know how you and others making these type of comments would know?

With no idea of the wage, the persons debts etc?

[BumbleBee]

If I'd bought my house on my lonesome it would have been over 7 times my annual salary. Luckily with my boyfriend it's 2.6 times our annual salary. We're just about managing to afford it. We could probably do better if I stopped spending as if I didn't have a mortgage to pay!

My advice would be to see an independent mortgage adviser. We had a mortgage offer from Northern Rock and were willing to go with them. The estate agency we bought from asked us to see someone they recommended and it was free. He was really nice and we got a much better fixed interest rate deal and the 'real' cost over the fixed period was lower than with Northern Rock. We're with Bristol & West. It is worth speaking to someone (a lot are free, ours was) because they have more 'tools' to investigate more lenders than you can possibly can on your own. Good luck. :thumb:

[Sugar]

Thanks for the advice everyone.

I already know how much i can afford and as it's a bit more than 3.5x my income i just wondered really if lenders would lend more.

I have no other outstanding finance or debt so i know that i can afford a bit more than the 3.5x norm. I know alot of people who have a mortgage higher than that and manage fine.

(Before people start arguing about unexpected costs etc i have had a mortgage before, and still do, so i know to think of these things ;))

Thanks again.

[Ricardo R]

TBH I wouldn't try and get a mortgage that is more than 3.5 times your income, put simply you won't be able to afford the repayments. Best bet is to save up for a bigger deposit, or get a smaller house.
How?? 5x is perfectly affordable. On a 5.5% interest rate,

Earning £20k = £1.3k/mth after tax, a 5x multiple = just £450/mth interest repayments, £850 left
Earning £40k = £2.3k/mth after tax, a 5x multiple = £900/mth interest repayments, £1,400 left

So even with a monthly mortgage repayment on top of the interest repayment, should be affordable even with a 5x multiple.

[Kazbo]

Show me a 5.5% interest rate these days.

[Ricardo R]

Show me a 5.5% interest rate these days.
I got my mortgage in March this year. 0.31% below the base rate, so currently 5.49%. Looking at my bank you can currently take out a new mortgage for 5.73%, which only adds £20-50/mth to my below figures, still entirely affordable. And anyway new mortgage rates are going to go down shortly, BoE hinted at a rates cut this afternoon.

[Kazbo]

They hinted at a reduction next year, but not necessarily when next year.

Most buyers on a moderate income at the moment need to be taking out fixed rate mortgages, not tracker mortgages, just in case anything happens. A lot of people also feel more secure knowing exactly how much they'll be paying month to month...fixed rate mortgages are well over the 6% mark these days.

I also wouldn't advise anyone to just pay the interest payments on a mortgage.

I certainly worked out I couldn't afford 5x my salary on mortgage when I looked sensibly at all the other costs I have a month, but we already know you underestimate them.

[Ricardo R]

I also wouldn't advise anyone to just pay the interest payments on a mortgage.It's not a bad idea if your salary's going to progress as you move up the ladder..so to start off with just do interest payments and the year after start repayments.I certainly worked out I couldn't afford 5x my salary on mortgage when I looked sensibly at all the other costs I have a month, but we already know you underestimate them.What do people waste money on? I earn less than £5k/mth (and annual bonus) and always put ~75%, £3-4k/mth of it towards the mortgage. ~£1-1.5k on bills, food, going out (quite a bit) and 1-2 European weekend breaks.. and I'm paying double usually.

[Scary Monster]

less than £5k per month take home, or salary? They are very different. £5k take home is a pretty high wage.

As I'm sure you've mentioned elsewhere, your annual bonus is fairly large whereas most mere mortals won't have that boost to their funds.

[Kazbo]

It's not a bad idea if your salary's going to progress as you move up the ladder..so to start off with just do interest payments and the year after start repayments.

Not everyone can be that lucky as to have a guarentee like that. More and more companies are going for a graded structure of getting a score above the excpected level or no pay rise.


What do people waste money on? I earn less than £5k/mth (and annual bonus) and always put ~75%, £3-4k/mth of it towards the mortgage. ~£1-1.5k on bills, food, going out (quite a bit) and 1-2 European weekend breaks.. and I'm paying double usually.

Yes and as the other thread showed, most people earn around the 1 - 1.5k a month. i.e covering bills and food. You throw in suddenly needing to do repair work to a house, or even just wanting to simply decorate a room and you're suddenly struggling to afford everything.

[Ricardo R]

less than £5k per month take home, or salary? They are very different. £5k take home is a pretty high wage.

As I'm sure you've mentioned elsewhere, your annual bonus is fairly large whereas most mere mortals won't have that boost to their funds.£5k after tax..though I don't pay that much tax with some crazy offshore SIV restructuring thing in place. Annual bonus of no use for day-to-day expenses, just use to repay mortgage.

[katchika]

That's a bit unfair if you don't have to pay your fair share of tax.

[Ricardo R]

That's a bit unfair if you don't have to pay your fair share of tax.If you have the option of either paying £1800/mth or £800/mth in tax, when you get next to nothing in return for that tax payment, I think the vast majority of people would opt for the latter. It's entirely legal and a lot of people do it. Maybe if the government didn't waste tax money on wars and bureaucracy we'd be less incentivised to opt for tax restructuring solutions.

[katchika]

If you have the option of either paying £1800/mth or £800/mth in tax, when you get next to nothing in return for that tax payment, I think the vast majority of people would opt for the latter. It's entirely legal and a lot of people do it. Maybe if the government didn't waste tax money on wars and bureaucracy we'd be less incentivised to opt for tax restructuring solutions.


I pay my fair share of tax and don't fiddle the system and at the moment, only get about £1,000 a month to live off. Can you explain to me how I can pay less tax please?

[snapping_crocodile]

How?? 5x is perfectly affordable. On a 5.5% interest rate,

Earning £20k = £1.3k/mth after tax, a 5x multiple = just £450/mth interest repayments, £850 left
Earning £40k = £2.3k/mth after tax, a 5x multiple = £900/mth interest repayments, £1,400 left

So even with a monthly mortgage repayment on top of the interest repayment, should be affordable even with a 5x multiple.

How many people can afford to take out an interest only mortgage? Me and my partner have a mortgage of just over 3 times our joint income, and we have had to make a few cutbacks on order to afford it. There would be no way, long term that we could afford an interest only mortgage :no:

[Ricardo R]

Can you explain to me how I can pay less tax please?http://www.welbeckwealth.com - enjoy. Great people.

[BumbleBee]

I think most of us can agree that Ricardo doesn't live in the same world we all do.

[snapping_crocodile]

I think most of us can agree that Ricardo doesn't live in the same world we all do.

Agree completely :yes:

[g_angel]

http://www.welbeckwealth.com - enjoy. Great people.

Ricardo - are you classed as being self employed then, or effectively working as freelance? I'm a little confused how a permanent employee of a company is able to use an external (especially offshore) system to to their accounts...? Is it just the way your company operate?

To the others - I work in a similar way myself (although not offshore) as I am a consultant and I pay very little tax, and none of it is fiddling the figures. We're given certain dispensations for expenses etc etc which lower the tax bill a fair old whack.

My take home is around the £4.5k-£5k a month mark at the moment as the contract I am working on right now isn't quite paying what I am used to, but it's nice and close to home so I'm not too bothered. To back Ricardo up here - if there was a legal way for all you guys to pay a lot less tax, you'd sure as hell take it!!

[katchika]

Yeah I would take it, but it DOES seem very unfair that all the people who seem to dodge their way out of paying tax are the ones earning loads in the first place.

[Knee High Stripy Socks]

Seems like the ones who can most afford it don't pay very much of it.
And of course I would pay less tax if I could!

[g_angel]

It's just the way it works. It you're working as a permanent employee for a company, then they are responsible for your PAYE accounts etc. When you have somebody else looking after your money for you, then it can be a different kettle of fish.

I, for example, get no paid holidays, sick pay etc as I am a consultant. I specifically get paid for the work I do on either a daily or an hourly rate. I've just had 3 months off work (between contracts) as the market is fierce at the moment so for some of us, it's not all fluffy bunny land... But when working, yes, it's good.

Often, it's the people taking the biggest risks that get the better benefits, but sometimes lose out - just the way of the world.

I wasn't happy in a 'normal' permanent job, doing the same things day in day out, so I pushed myself and got into what I do now. I don't have any A-Levels or a Degree, but that didn't hold me back. It's partially down to the person and how far you are prepared to go.

[Ricardo R]

Yeah I would take it, but it DOES seem very unfair that all the people who seem to dodge their way out of paying tax are the ones earning loads in the first place.But the rich don't use stuff that tax pays for as much as the poor so is it fair they should pay more for it?! A huge bulk of tax goes towards NHS, state schools, public transport, etc. The rich don't use that much - I'm with BUPA, kids will go to private schools, never use any public transport. Whereas a poorer family will use NHS, go to state schools, use buses etc. Anyway, note that even though I'm paying less % tax, I'm still paying more £ than most, and getting less in return.

[g_angel]

But the rich don't use stuff that tax pays for as much as the poor so is it fair they should pay more for it?! A huge bulk of tax goes towards NHS, state schools, public transport, etc. The rich don't use that much - I'm with BUPA, kids will go to private schools, never use any public transport. Whereas a poorer family will use NHS, go to state schools, use buses etc. Anyway, note that even though I'm paying less % tax, I'm still paying more £ than most, and getting less in return.

I'm with you on this one, chap. :yes:

I feel a flaming coming on though :lol:



Oh - just to add, I have to pay 2 NI contributions; employers and employees. Employees (as everybody pays) is capped. Employers is not.

[Ricardo R]

I think most of us can agree that Ricardo doesn't live in the same world we all do.My take home is around the £4.5k-£5k a month mark at the moment as the contract I am working on right now isn't quite paying what I am used toClearly not then. UK is a very diverse country, as is reflected well on this site. Some people on here earn £100k+, others earn under £10k. Some have slept with 100+, others are virgins. Some might be dealers, others have never smoked weed. Just because what I say isn't what you're used to hearing doesn't mean my life is abnormal, plenty of others I'm surrounded with live similar lives.

[g_angel]

Clearly not then. UK is a very diverse country, as is reflected well on this site. Some people on here earn £100k+, others earn under £10k. Some have slept with 100+, others are virgins. Some might be dealers, others have never smoked weed. Just because what I say isn't what you're used to hearing doesn't mean my life is abnormal, plenty of others I'm surrounded with live similar lives.

Just noticed that it is still using my '007' username in that quote... Odd.

[Ricardo R]

Ricardo - are you classed as being self employed then, or effectively working as freelance? I'm a little confused how a permanent employee of a company is able to use an external (especially offshore) system to to their accounts...? Is it just the way your company operate?Almost similar to you - am classed as a "consultant", so via my offshore-based company I can count accommodation, travel, food, virtually everything as "expenses" and not be income-taxed on them.

[g_angel]

Almost similar to you - am classed as a "consultant", so via my offshore-based company I can count accommodation, travel, food, virtually everything as "expenses" and not be income-taxed on them.

A-ha!

I'm with you now ;) I just didn't go the offshore route... Same thing thing, effectively.

[snapping_crocodile]

But the rich don't use stuff that tax pays for as much as the poor so is it fair they should pay more for it?! A huge bulk of tax goes towards NHS, state schools, public transport, etc. The rich don't use that much - I'm with BUPA, kids will go to private schools, never use any public transport. Whereas a poorer family will use NHS, go to state schools, use buses etc. Anyway, note that even though I'm paying less % tax, I'm still paying more £ than most, and getting less in return.

It doesn't matter whether you chose to use it or not. The fact is it is there to use. It is your choice to pay privately for public services. It does not mean that you shouldn't pay for them. If you were ever in an accident etc, the ambulance would take you to an NHS A&E department. I don't have any children, but i dont think i should pay less tax cos i'm not utilising school services. Wealth can buy you a lot of things, but it does not mean you shouldn't have to contribute to public services

[Ricardo R]

It doesn't matter whether you chose to use it or not. The fact is it is there to use. It is your choice to pay privately for public services. It does not mean that you shouldn't pay for them. If you were ever in an accident etc, the ambulance would take you to an NHS A&E department. I don't have any children, but i dont think i should pay less tax cos i'm not utilising school services. Wealth can buy you a lot of things, but it does not mean you shouldn't have to contribute to public servicesLet's say you earn £5k a month. If you have the option of legitimately paying either £1,800 or £800 in tax a month, which would you pick? If you say the former, you're definitely in the minority. I'm not saying what I'm doing is 'right', obviously need tax to keep the country running, but I don't exactly feel guilty about not paying it, and nor would most people (rich or poor).

[g_angel]

It doesn't matter whether you chose to use it or not. The fact is it is there to use. It is your choice to pay privately for public services. It does not mean that you shouldn't pay for them. If you were ever in an accident etc, the ambulance would take you to an NHS A&E department. I don't have any children, but i dont think i should pay less tax cos i'm not utilising school services. Wealth can buy you a lot of things, but it does not mean you shouldn't have to contribute to public services


But you miss the point - we ARE still paying towards them. I just don't see why, if we are already shelling out for private services, we should then pay £2k a month towards things we are rarely going to use if we can pay a figure half that and STILL pay more income tax than most people.

I have no problem in paying SOME tax, but I object to paying so much tax when I am paying extra as it is - bearing in mind we are only talking income tax here. We pay the rest of the taxes (and stealth taxes) the same as anybody else.

This is going to turn into a circular discussion... :yeees:

[snapping_crocodile]

But you miss the point - we ARE still paying towards them. I just don't see why, if we are already shelling out for private services, we should then pay £2k a month towards things we are rarely going to use if we can pay a figure half that and STILL pay more income tax than most people.

I have no problem in paying SOME tax, but I object to paying so much tax when I am paying extra as it is - bearing in mind we are only talking income tax here. We pay the rest of the taxes (and stealth taxes) the same as anybody else.

This is going to turn into a circular discussion... :yeees:

Yes but the point you are missing is that it is YOUR decision to pay extra on top of your tax for private services. Why should you have the option of opting out of paying for public services which one day you may need?

[g_angel]

Yes but the point you are missing is that it is YOUR decision to pay extra on top of your tax for private services. Why should you have the option of opting out of paying for public services which one day you may need?


Because the Government says I should! ;)

Really though - I didn't miss that point, but again you missed mine:

We are STILL paying for the public services (2 x NI AND Income Tax), albeit at a reduced rate when compared proportionally to what we earn, and yet we STILL contribute a pile more than most people. We have not 'opted out of paying for public services', but we are given the option of using our expense dispensations to lower our tax bill.

Simply put, it wouldn't be worth doing the jobs we do, with the inherent risks involved if there were not the 'incentives' offered, and that, I'm afraid, is what is helping prop up the economy, to a large extent. People would just go abroad to the same work if they were unable to gain some benefits when working over here, and so the UK would fall flat on it's face in the more specialized markets.

The Government recognises this and hence grants us extra 'leeway' in our finances.

[snapping_crocodile]

But you contribute more because you earn more, it's just the way it is *shrugs*

I appreciate your point about propping up the economy and incentives etc, it is a fair point. But back to one of your earlier statements about "I just don't see why, if we are already shelling out for private services, we should then pay £2k a month towards things we are rarely going to use" You have to think about where the money comes from to train the teachers and nurses, that actually work in the private sector, cos it sure as hell doesn't come from the fees you pay to use them. Unfortunately public services are not pay per use, and it is only fair that those in employment pay a roughly standard percentage of their earnings to fund these services that are open to all.

[katchika]

I've never used an ambulance, or a hospital (apart from when I was born), or a nursery, or social services. Can I get a discount please?

Sadly (but rightly!), the world doesn't work like that!

[snapping_crocodile]

I've never used an ambulance, or a hospital (apart from when I was born), or a nursery, or social services. Can I get a discount please?

Sadly (but rightly!), the world doesn't work like that!

Exactly :yes:

[g_angel]

But you contribute more because you earn more, it's just the way it is *shrugs*

But it isn't, obviously. It only is if you choose to be a permanent employee - which is something I hate the thought of.


I appreciate your point about propping up the economy and incentives etc, it is a fair point. But back to one of your earlier statements about "I just don't see why, if we are already shelling out for private services, we should then pay £2k a month towards things we are rarely going to use" You have to think about where the money comes from to train the teachers and nurses, that actually work in the private sector, cos it sure as hell doesn't come from the fees you pay to use them. Unfortunately public services are not pay per use, and it is only fair that those in employment pay a roughly standard percentage of their earnings to fund these services that are open to all.

Aye, perhaps my comment there was ill thought out.

I also see your points here, but for some reason, I am not really feeling anything about it as I still, and I am repeating myself now (something I don't like doing), pay my dues, so to speak.

I'm sure I said something about this turning into a circular discussion, earlier...

[Scary Monster]

and it is only fair that those in employment pay a roughly standard percentage of their earnings to fund these services that are open to all.

That would be fair.

Except that isn't the way the tax system works. If you pay tax as a high earning permanent employee then you'll pay 40% tax (+NI etc).

If you pay tax as a permanent employee on a lower salary you'll pay 20% tax (+NI etc).

By going the self employed consultant route most high earners get themselves closer to the 20% of total that those lower earners pay.

As you said, that seems fair.

Far fairer than having to pay a higher % on a higher income thus contributing a bigger portion of what they earn.

[g_angel]

That would be fair.

Except that isn't the way the tax system works. If you pay tax as a high earning permanent employee then you'll pay 40% tax (+NI etc).

If you pay tax as a permanent employee on a lower salary you'll pay 20% tax (+NI etc).

By going the self employed consultant route most high earners get themselves closer to the 20% of total that those lower earners pay.

As you said, that seems fair.

Far fairer than having to pay a higher % on a higher income thus contributing a bigger portion of what they earn.

Thank you!

I should've explained it that way. Much clearer.

As you may guess, I would not be happy about forking out 40% of my earnings (above the threshold) in the slightest :lol:

[CheeseOnToast]

Realisitically, I think it's a selfish attitude to have.

But if it was me, I'd pay as little as possible, the tax money would only get pissed up the wall anyway.

Instead though, I can honestly say I would make some very choice and very sizeable charity donations every year instead.. as I'd like to think I'm not totally selfish.

Just for the record though, the 'public services' argument around schools, NHS etc is very poor and not needed, bottom line is you pay less because you can which is all that needs to be said.. you should be proud and happy to help other people who do use those services, not begrude it.

[g_angel]

Just for the record though, the 'public services' argument around schools, NHS etc is very poor and not needed, bottom line is you pay less because you can which is all that needs to be said.. you should be proud and happy to help other people who do use those services, not begrude it.

A fair point.

[CheeseOnToast]

Thanks, any chance of a job now? haha

[g_angel]

Thanks, any chance of a job now? haha

LOL - if you know anything about testing mobile phones (piece of piss), then quite possibly! ;):D

[CheeseOnToast]

lol, can I do it part time?

I'm an IT network engineer during the rest of my time! lol, I do 4on/4off though lol

[Ricardo R]

you should be proud and happy to help other people who do use those services, not begrude it.You're imposing your values on others here when dif people have different attitudes.. I don't in the slightest feel "proud" or "happy" that I'm helping other people use public services. I don't know them so am detached from the situation, and it's not like they'd be grateful or anything...

[g_angel]

You're imposing your values on others here when dif people have different attitudes.. I don't in the slightest feel "proud" or "happy" that I'm helping other people use public services. I don't know them so am detached from the situation, and it's not like they'd be grateful or anything...


LOL - another fair point (to me).

Anyways, I've said my piece on this one and so I will now bow out and do some bloody work. ;)

[g_angel]

lol, can I do it part time?

I'm an IT network engineer during the rest of my time! lol, I do 4on/4off though lol

:lol: Well, at the moment I have been doing pretty much seven days a week since the product launch, making sure that all new handsets are ready to rock and are up to scratch, so part time isn't really an option ;)

[Kermit]

I'd love to know how you and others making these type of comments would know?

I'd know because I'm a professional debt and welfare benefits advisor, and it's my job to sort out people's finances for them...

I think this thread goes to show just how fucking selfish the wealthy really are. It's a serious case of having cake and eating cake, but then what else are we to expect?

My opinion is that anyone who "offshores" their money should have their UK passport permanently confiscated, and they should be deported to whichever Godforsaken Pacific island their money lives on.

Given that my salary is paid for by Government, I have to say that the whole taxation thing really doesn't piss me off too much.

[Ballerina]

You're imposing your values on others here when dif people have different attitudes.. I don't in the slightest feel "proud" or "happy" that I'm helping other people use public services. I don't know them so am detached from the situation, and it's not like they'd be grateful or anything...

Why not? What's wrong with people using public services? How do you know they're not grateful?

[CheeseOnToast]

You're imposing your values on others here when dif people have different attitudes.. I don't in the slightest feel "proud" or "happy" that I'm helping other people use public services. I don't know them so am detached from the situation, and it's not like they'd be grateful or anything...

I'm not imposing anything on anyone, I'm saying what I think should be the situation mate so do me a favour.

Kermit - Well you should see my point, if someone is in 20K of debt with a 3.5x mortgage or someone with no debt and a 4x mortgage, who is going to be worse off ? It's not black and white is it mate?

[g_angel]

My opinion is that anyone who "offshores" their money should have their UK passport permanently confiscated, and they should be deported to whichever Godforsaken Pacific island their money lives on.


I'm not sure you understand the concept of offshore banking - all the big banks offer this option. It's not just some dodgy tax-evasion thing :yeees: and it's certainly no longer the preserve of the rich and famous. ANYBODY can apply for an offshore account for a multitude of reasons.

Just for example:

HSBC (https://www.offshore.hsbc.com/1/2/international/current-accounts/offshore-bank-account)

https://www.offshore.hsbc.com/1/2/international/current-accounts/offshore-bank-account/currentaccounts-casestudy

To be straight, if I started working in Europe again but for a foreign company, I would be using the offshore option as opposed to my business account with the RBS as it makes the money easier to access and for your employers to deposit the money into. It just makes sense - not forgetting all the offshore savings accounts that are on offer.

[Kermit]

I'm not sure you understand the concept of offshore banking - all the big banks offer this option. It's not just some dodgy tax-evasion thing :yeees:

No, I am fully aware of what offshore banking is all about. Using a foreign bank because you are working in a foreign country and paid in a foreign country is one thing.

If there weren't the advantages of tax evasion, why on earth would anyone do it? The savings rates themselves don't tend to be that much better.

Just because I think tax avoidance is immoral doesn't mean that I am stupid.

[g_angel]

No, I am fully aware of what offshore banking is all about. Using a foreign bank because you are working in a foreign country and paid in a foreign country is one thing.

If there weren't the advantages of tax evasion, why on earth would anyone do it? The savings rates themselves don't tend to be that much better.

Just because I think tax avoidance is immoral doesn't mean that I am stupid.

... and just who was calling you stupid? :yeees:

I know my conscience is clear as my accounts are perfectly legal. Ricardo's finances I am sure are within any guidelines set out.

Tax evasion is a pretty strong term to use if the person you are accusing is essentially doing nothing wrong in the eyes of the law. Until we are actually aware of the terms and conditions of Ricardo's expense dispensations, i'd lay off that avenue mate. ETA - not that he has to show us anyway as it's none of our fucking business!

It doesn't sound like it is much different to what I am doing, and yet because I am not using an offshore service.................?

[CheeseOnToast]

I have to agree actually, "Tax evasion" is actually illegal activities and not paying tax via underhand means..

These people are just using the tools and limits set by our goverment, so maybe you should point the blame somewhere else..

[Kermit]

Tax evasion is a pretty strong term to use if the person you are accusing is essentially doing nothing wrong in the eyes of the law.

I don't think tax evasion is too strong a word to use for people who use offshore banking services to avoid paying their tax. Especially when the prevailing attitude of the evader is "screw the poor", as it so evidently the case of Ricardo, who really does put the banker into merchant banker.

If they want to keep their money in another country to avoid paying UK tax, then they should stay in that country. They're not wanted here.

Just because the law allows it doesn't mean the action is ethical. The actions of most bank staff most of the time is downright disgusting IMHO, and if I had my way they'd be put in prison.

The same would go for people creating expenses out of thin air and deducting them from their "profits" to lower their tax bill.

Other than semantics, I don't believe there to be a difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion. The Government are the rich and the rich are the Government, after all.

[g_angel]

I don't think tax evasion is too strong a word to use for people who use offshore banking services to avoid paying their tax. Especially when the prevailing attitude of the evader is "screw the poor", as it so evidently the case of Ricardo, who really does put the banker into merchant banker.

If they want to keep their money in another country to avoid paying UK tax, then they should stay in that country. They're not wanted here.

As already stated, he's still paying a fair whack of tax, hence hardly evasion.

The actions of most bank staff most of the time is downright disgusting IMHO, and if I had my way they'd be put in prison.

Yet another balanced and fair opinion there... :yeees: :rolleyes: I've got plenty of friends working in banks (from on the counters up to retired senior management of HSBC), and if you're deciding to tar them all, or even most, with the same brush as a few bad eggs, then you're a fool.

The same would go for people creating expenses out of thin air and deducting them from their "profits" to lower their tax bill.

It's a bit difficult to magic up proper receipts for most things.

Other than semantics, I don't believe there to be a difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion. The Government are the rich and the rich are the Government, after all.

C'est la vie. We're starting to go round in circles again.

[LuckyStrike]

i know if i was taking home £5k a month and paying next to no tax i'd have better things to do than sit on a message board aimed at young people looking for advice arguing about it.

the truth of the matter is, sugar came on here asking advice on mortgages and its been turned into something else.

offshore banking and tax evasion (i dont think this is too strong either) is not needed to be discussed here really, start a new thread on it.

or go and spunk some money on strippers down in soho, followed by a pint of shandy :wave:

[Kermit]

As already stated, he's still paying a fair whack of tax, hence hardly evasion.

Like hell he is.

If you believe his posts he earns 4 times what I do, yet pays an extra £200 in tax each month.

Regardless of whether it's legal or not, that is very much avoiding paying your due.

Yet another balanced and fair opinion there... :yeees: :rolleyes: I've got plenty of friends working in banks (from on the counters up to retired senior management of HSBC), and if you're deciding to tar them all, or even most, with the same brush as a few bad eggs, then you're a fool.

If it's a few bad eggs then I must be really really bloody unlucky every day at work, put it that way.

The management are scum for creating a financial system that exploits and victimises the poorest and most vulnerable people. If you think charging someone on JSA of £59 per week £50 in bank charges for going a few pence overdrawn is ethical and fair then you need your head seeing to.

The middle managers are scum for not overriding the senior policy, and the helpline staff, cashiers and "money advisers" are scum for relying on the computer saying no rather than lifting a finger to help those who need help the most.

Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but I think people should look after each other a lot more. If you have brains, use them to aid not exploit others; if you have money, use it to help and assist those without it, rather than sending it all to Bermuda and saying that the poor can go swivel.

People who play with their money to avoid paying their fair share are filth. There really is no other word to describe them.

[g_angel]

Like hell he is.

If you believe his posts he earns 4 times what I do, yet pays an extra £200 in tax each month.

Regardless of whether it's legal or not, that is very much avoiding paying your due.

Well, you're gonna have a minor heart attack when you hear I pay less tax than he does, and it's all perfectly, 100% above board. ... and in the UK. I don't feel I am avoiding paying my due in the slightest, and I am certainly not evading my tax.


If it's a few bad eggs then I must be really really bloody unlucky every day at work, put it that way.

The management are scum for creating a financial system that exploits and victimises the poorest and most vulnerable people. If you think charging someone on JSA of £59 per week £50 in bank charges for going a few pence overdrawn is ethical and fair then you need your head seeing to.

The middle managers are scum for not overriding the senior policy, and the helpline staff, cashiers and "money advisers" are scum for relying on the computer saying no rather than lifting a finger to help those who need help the most.

Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but I think people should look after each other a lot more. If you have brains, use them to aid not exploit others; if you have money, use it to help and assist those without it, rather than sending it all to Bermuda and saying that the poor can go swivel.

People who play with their money to avoid paying their fair share are filth. There really is no other word to describe them.

When it comes to it, the rules are laid down by a tiny, tiny minority at the top, and there is very little leeway for the people at the bottom to actually do anything. I worked for Abbey National many years ago, and it literally was 'follow the script'. People in an organisation like a bank simply cannot be autonomous, even at management level! There is the problem, and hence you label everybody 'scum'. Fair. :rolleyes:

[g_angel]

i know if i was taking home £5k a month and paying next to no tax i'd have better things to do than sit on a message board aimed at young people looking for advice arguing about it.

the truth of the matter is, sugar came on here asking advice on mortgages and its been turned into something else.

offshore banking and tax evasion (i dont think this is too strong either) is not needed to be discussed here really, start a new thread on it.

or go and spunk some money on strippers down in soho, followed by a pint of shandy :wave:

:lol:

I'm from Bradford, if that was some silly reference to being a shandy drinking Southerner, and I don't think I've ever had a shandy in my life! :p In fact, randomly, Kermit and I went to the same school...

It has indeed turned into something else, which is just what happens on here. Ah well.

Regarding having something better to do, well, I'm having a night in (even people with money do that, you know) and unfortunately, as many people on here will agree, once you get embroiled in a discussion, it's quite hard to leave it.

[CheeseOnToast]

I don't get the implication that because someone has x amount of money they have better things to do.. I enjoy surfing the net and forums and I would do it no matter how much I had ..

I think it's plain to see why people usually don't declare their wealth or status online, it becomes just like in real life with an upwards alienation based on networth alone

[g_angel]

I don't get the implication that because someone has x amount of money they have better things to do.. I enjoy surfing the net and forums and I would do it no matter how much I had ..

I think it's plain to see why people usually don't declare their wealth or status online, it becomes just like in real life with an upwards alienation based on networth alone

:yes:

So many people I've hung around with through the last few years have ended up being so off with me once they find out what I do - and it's them that ask how much I earn. I'm not going to lie to them, and also I'm not the one to bring it up. Everything was cool, and then one person asks 'the question', and all of a sudden, I am left out of invites out etc as apparently I won't fit in. :( Was fine for the months prior to this. :confused: :rolleyes: In general, I hate talking about my job with people and so just brush over it when face to face. The people that are left, are my friends as shit like that doesn't matter.

ETA - and too fucking right I enjoy just laying around surfing the net! :) I, personally, rarely do the 'swanky' (overpriced) City bars etc as I just don't like the atmosphere. I was due to be seeing a mate DJing at The Cross (Kings Cross) tonight (much more my thing), but with my first chance to lay in bed late in the morning in a few weeks, I'm taking the chilled and easy option.

[Kermit]

Well, you're gonna have a minor heart attack when you hear I pay less tax than he does, and it's all perfectly, 100% above board. ... and in the UK.

It's the joy of being self-employed, I know.

Every tax dodge going is open to the rich self-employed, always has been, it's just us that are stuck on PAYE that have to pay for the selfishness and greed of the richest.

And strangely enough, HMRC never go after these people. They always bankrupt the old lady who forgot that her state retirement pension is taxable income.

I don't think there is anything wrong with people earning oodles of money, far from it, but I think those who are blessed with the intelligence and desire to get into top-paying jobs really do owe it to everyone else to pay their share. Sadly, the more money someone has, the less charitable they are.

I also don't understand why people get upset at people who earn lots of money. One of the wife's childhood friends is a very successful bank graduate (scum for it, btw;)) and she earns a fortune; hasn't changed her and hasn't changed our relationship with her. Even if she does have a nicer car than me, bitch:p

When it comes to it, the rules are laid down by a tiny, tiny minority at the top...People in an organisation like a bank simply cannot be autonomous, even at management level! There is the problem, and hence you label everybody 'scum'. Fair. :rolleyes:

I don't believe that companies are physical entities in their own rights. They behave as they do because the people running them make them behave like that. All employees of companies are partially responsible for how their company operates. "Just following orders" has never been a defence, and never will be.

Of course, the culpability is centred towards the senior management. I'd personally hang the fuckers, but then I'm kind and tolerant like that.

I don't think Ricardo should leave here just because he's got money; hell, I love reading his posts because they're hilarious. I think it's sad when people equate money with intelligence like he does, but it's him that's isolated not us.

[LuckyStrike]

I don't get the implication that because someone has x amount of money they have better things to do.. I enjoy surfing the net and forums and I would do it no matter how much I had ..

I think it's plain to see why people usually don't declare their wealth or status online, it becomes just like in real life with an upwards alienation based on networth alone

i have no problem with people earning a hell of a lot more money than me or even alienate people who do, especially in real life, i have constant contact at work with people who earn more in a month than i do in a year, i have a problem with people who cant fathom that they are actually quite privaledged and doing well for themselves and saying things about what people spend their money on and they save 75% of their wage a month, if i saved 75% of my wage a month half of my bills wouldnt get paid.

ETA: about not having better things to do then fine, whatever floats your boat. if i had more money i know i'd rather spend my friday night going out for dinner and drinks with my good lady rather than sat on here with some crap on the tv in the background

[g_angel]

It's the joy of being self-employed, I know.

Every tax dodge going is open to the rich self-employed, always has been, it's just us that are stuck on PAYE that have to pay for the selfishness and greed of the richest.

Glad this has calmed down a bit :)

You'd be surprised how many self employed aren't rich at all - the 'benefits' are available to all, but yes, if you are on a PAYE scheme you are a bit stuck in this sense.

And strangely enough, HMRC never go after these people. They always bankrupt the old lady who forgot that her state retirement pension is taxable income.

They do, but it seems like they don't as it's never reported as it's not shocking enough to be news. You have to keep your nose clean because if you DO get caught you're utterly, utterly stuffed. A friend of mine was caught out for £20k of, erm, underpaid taxes. Idiot.

I don't think there is anything wrong with people earning oodles of money, far from it, but I think those who are blessed with the intelligence and desire to get into top-paying jobs really do owe it to everyone else to pay their share. Sadly, the more money someone has, the less charitable they are.

Aye, in my own personal defence, I do contribute to numerous charities and on a smaller note, (for example) never buy a Big Issue, but instead just give them some money instead. I certainly don't mind getting my hand in my pocket in that sense. Paying my mum's mortgage, for her holidays etc as well as she is too ill to work is one other little thing I do (although the mortgage is now paid off).

I also don't understand why people get upset at people who earn lots of money. One of the wife's childhood friends is a very successful bank graduate (scum for it, btw;)) and she earns a fortune; hasn't changed her and hasn't changed our relationship with her. Even if she does have a nicer car than me, bitch:p

:lol::D But yeah, it has been pretty upsetting at times when a group of people that were your friends now feel you don't fit in simply down to what you earn. Frustrating as hell, but it just proved they were not really my friends - so in the long run, I'm well shut.

I don't believe that companies are physical entities in their own rights. They behave as they do because the people running them make them behave like that. All employees of companies are partially responsible for how their company operates. "Just following orders" has never been a defence, and never will be.

Of course, the culpability is centred towards the senior management. I'd personally hang the fuckers, but then I'm kind and tolerant like that.

Aye, if you have bad senior management, unfortunately it often rubs off on the ranks below. Very unhealthy, but it happens. A lot.

I don't think Ricardo should leave here just because he's got money; hell, I love reading his posts because they're hilarious. I think it's sad when people equate money with intelligence like he does, but it's him that's isolated not us.

Money certainly doesn't equal intelligence in my eyes, that's for sure! ;) Some of the toffs around here are thick as two short planks and just don't have a grip on reality.

[g_angel]

i have no problem with people earning a hell of a lot more money than me or even alienate people who do, especially in real life, i have constant contact at work with people who earn more in a month than i do in a year, i have a problem with people who cant fathom that they are actually quite privaledged and doing well for themselves and saying things about what people spend their money on and they save 75% of their wage a month, if i saved 75% of my wage a month half of my bills wouldnt get paid.

I *wish* I could save that much of my wage. Unfortunately in my profession, I am between contracts a lot. It's just the nature of the job, but I've had 6.5 months off out of the last 12. I'm fairly broke right now, and so it's not all roses. I also made some bad decisions financially in the past which has left me with some (quite shocking) debt which I am working to pay off. My fault, my problem - but I'm not complaining.

if i had more money i know i'd rather spend my friday night going out for dinner and drinks with my good lady rather than sat on here with some crap on the tv in the background

You know what though, sometimes it's nice to have a night in on the weekend. I tend to see the girls I am dating through the week so I have the weekend free to do what I want (which could indeed be spend time with a lady). As mentioned, I was due to be out clubbing, but I've worked 3 weeks without a proper day off and so the thought of getting to bed at 6am (if at all) was just not as appealing as a good feed, general cabbaging in the lounge and just expelling as little energy as possible. At the moment, this is bliss - even if I am blathering away on this. :lol: