Aim for a tax free legacy
Re: Hands off: tax-free share ideas (14 September 2012)
For a sizeable portfolio we would generally recommend greater diversification, and there are plenty more excellent Aim companies to chose from. On the two year rule it's worth noting that replacement property rules apply and one doesn't have to hold the same companies for two years. I believe that Young & Co have two shares classes and it's not clear if both qualify for BPR/IHT purposes. It's also possible to mitigate the risk/downside by using common hedging techniques.
Fundamental Asset Management (via the website)
A rough deal from registrars
Dear Sir,
Referring to your comment in a recent issue (No Free Lunch, 31 August 2012), as a private investor since the 1970s I compulsorily rely on share registrars since the introduction of nominee accounts supplanted the individual companies' own arrangements for liaison with shareholders. The comparative services is a disgrace. Like, I imagine, most private shareholders I routinely received interim and annual reports and proxy forms for voting at AGMs. Under the current system I only receive annual reports for a small number of my holdings on a random and inconsistent basis; my stockbroker has pointed out to these people at my request that I wish to receive these documents routinely but this has had no visible effect.
However, what I do get ad nauseam are frequent cold calls from firms wishing me to invest in land in Brazil, the Ukraine and unspecified plots in the UK, coloured diamonds, fine wines, carbon credits and invitations to participate in betting syndicates - on enquiring how these firms have obtained my location and phone numbers I am told it's from the registrars, the implication being that the latter are making this information widely available. I do not know whether there is some obligation on publicly quoted companies to allow free access to their records of shareholders but certainly when I first started investing I was never approached from cold callers in the above manner and I can see no point in this information being freely available.
In the light of your article pointing out the lucrative nature of the registrars' business I can only assume that they add to their income by saving the cost and bother of providing shareholders with information to which they are entitled annually or bi-annually and possibly charging people for providing them with lists of shareholders. At least as a subscriber to the IC for a number of years I can enjoy the expert analysis and comments on my investee firms' results.
Yours faithfully,
P.J. Chipping
