Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 54,416
Boss I think that Holy Grail might be an illusion. The key seems to be in getting the Revenue to recognise the investment as a share and not as a collective investment vehicle. It would seem that a key criterion for a share is that it would pay dividends. A vehicle which invests in shares and then reinvests its dividends would I think always qualify as a collective investment and be therefore subject to exit tax.Hi Rory
But isn't it a condition of the REIT that they must pay out all their income in dividends?
What I am looking for is a company which pays no dividends, so all its income is reflected in an increased share price.
Investment trusts which pay dividends are no different from shares which pay dividends for this purpose. But I believe that there are investment trusts which don't pay out any dividends.
Brendan
OK
So the best solution would be to buy a portfolio of shares which pay low or no dividends?
Brendan
I would have thought the stockbroking community, which has considerable muscle, could have taken the issue up directly with the Revenue or through the courts.
While in theory this might sound OK, it could result in a very volatile portfolio - non dividend paying companies tend to be either growth companies (small caps) or dogs and stuff one's portfolio full of them would not be a wise move.
Any further ideas on this?
I have been asked by someone who wants to invest the proceeds of the sale of their home for the long term. They have huge CGT losses forward from their bank shares.
Brendan
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?