Changes Archives - Financial Planning in Surrey

What’s Your Opinion About the Budget?

Dominic Thomas
Nov 2025 • 4 min read

What’s Your Opinion About the Budget?

There was a palpable sense of adolescent schoolchildren during the Budget. The team here couldn’t quite fathom the petulant behaviour of adults. It didn’t help women’s causes that the three main characters seemed like characters from St Trinian’s, Grange Hill and Mean Girls. You can decide who was who.

The short version – nothing much happened. The Budget is often an exercise in shuffling the deck attempting to please the public who want more for less, the media who want sensationalism and the markets which want certainty. If we are honest the “greater good” should prioritise the planet, society and the economy in that order, but little is achieved without money, so the reverse generally holds.

A main problem that any Government has is that roughly 10% of all taxes ends up going towards servicing interest on loans the UK has received, (it’s now almost as much as the entire spend on education). This includes paying you your interest on your UK Government Bonds and Gilts or National Savings. As it is just the interest (not actually repaying the debt) market responses to a Budget can increase this considerably.

I’m not sure that I can really comment on the Budget without getting ‘political’, but … I think it’s a pity that:

Young people attempting to buy a home were not given any good news
The Landlord tax will likely only increase rents, which seems entirely counter-productive
Tax relief on pensions could have been simplified to a single rate for all
Working taxes are punishing work and are overly complicated. If you want to get people spending, raise the personal allowance and give it to everyone irrespective of income. I’d be bold with this
NI needs to be sorted properly and with gumption, employers have seen enormous increases in staffing costs, which results in both inflation and reduced new hires as well as possibly redundancies. I don’t know what the solution is, but I think I would amalgamate it into income tax
Small farms haven’t had any relief of note, these people feed us and look after the countryside and are being squeezed on their own margins. I think the £5m exemption would seem fairer
There is about £11bn of uncollected corporation tax that is hidden offshore by multinationals. This can and should be collected
I’m curious to know how EV mileage will be monitored
We need to encourage entrepreneurs who take a risk to start a business and employ people in good jobs with good salaries which generate tax. So the cut in reliefs isn’t helpful
Clearly tax simplification isn’t that simple

To me, tax is a bit like someone who plants a tree for future generations to sit in its shade, whilst never doing so themselves. It’s a price paid to the future.

I don’t pretend to have the answers and it is very easy to criticise a Government. I rewatched the disastrous Kwasi Kwarteng Budget of September 2022. I would imagine that most people would actually agree with his policies to reduce income taxes and welcome many of his proposals at the time, but we are beholden to the servicing of debt on the Bond market. All Chancellors are subject to the wisdom of Proverbs 22:7 “The borrower is a slave to the lender”. [For your interest – it is generally believed that King Solomon wrote the Book of Proverbs.]

Anyway, perhaps you have some thoughts of your own?

BACK TO ALL BLOGS

What’s Your Opinion About the Budget?Jemima Thomas2025-11-27T14:28:54+00:00

Government’s homebuying fixer-upper

Daniel Liddicott
Nov 2025 • 2 min read

Government’s homebuying fixer-upper

At the beginning of October, the Government announced some significant planned changes to the homebuying process. These reforms also include a focus on digitising the process, rather than relying quite so heavily on sending physical copies of documents and spending countless hours on the phone chasing conveyancing solicitors for updates. For those of you who have been through this painstaking process in the past, the phrase “About time!” might spring to mind.

These changes were announced with the hope that they will reduce the timeframe for completing the purchase of a new home by around four weeks. One of the key proposed differences is the requirement for searches and surveys to be published by sellers and estate agents prior to a property listing being made public.

This would save homebuyers both the time and money required to instruct searches and surveys on their prospective new home. It is also expected that this would lead to fewer property sales falling through as this will enable buyers to be far more informed from the outset. With the surprises that can arise as a result of these searches and surveys, this would appear to be a good way to reduce the number of buyers getting ‘cold feet’ and pulling out due to previously unforeseen problems.

There is also the potential for legally binding contracts to be introduced earlier in the process, to reduce the likelihood of prospective buyers pulling out months after having had their initial offer accepted.

According to an article by Financial Reporter, the mandatory information that would need to be provided under these reforms prior to a property being placed on the market include:

council tax band
EPC rating
property type
legal and transactional information such as title information and seller ID verification
leasehold terms
building safety data
standard searches
property condition assessments tailored to property age and type
service charges
planning consents
flood risk data
chain status
clear floor plans

As for digitisation, more widespread use of digital ID verification and standardised data sharing aim to smooth the journey to completion of purchase, improving transparency and reducing the number of sticking points that so frequently arise under the current system.

This is a promising announcement, and one that feels massively overdue. Better late than never! The government is set to lay out the roadmap for making these changes in the new year. Until then, we must wait to find out how the government plans to deliver this system overhaul.

Let’s hope this reform doesn’t fall through before completion.

BACK TO ALL BLOGS

Government’s homebuying fixer-upperJemima Thomas2025-11-04T13:03:23+00:00

Does everything have to cost the earth?

Dominic Thomas
Oct 2025 • 3 min read

Does everything have to cost the earth?

I’ve been advising clients and helping them to invest for their future since 1991 and it was only when I became an Independent Financial Adviser in May 1992 that I could offer anyone ethically screened investment choices. The sector and choices have evolved an awful lot since then resulting in some rather cynical funds launched by investment companies keen to get on the bandwagon rather than actually improve the way we treat each other and the planet. The term “greenwashing” was apt for this as we witnessed misleading marketing imagery (windmills, trees etc) to suggest something that wasn’t always true.

The regulator (another reason why we do need one) rightly stepped up and called time on this practice and have reset the bar for labelling such funds. The approach has, as is often the case, been far from perfect, laborious and probably bureaucratic, but is well intended. However, we are now gradually ‘getting there’ so that both advisers and investors can have greater confidence in what is said and done being aligned.

Unfortunately, despite the data and scientific evidence, a number of politicians and media owners have decided that saving the planet from climate crisis is not a priority and not worth doing (paying for and changing). We have one planet and there isn’t a viable alternative that we can reach.

At a recent socially responsible investment conference, we discussed the current challenges and some solutions, but the stark reality is that the transition that needs to happen within our economies means that we must engage with the ‘villains’ (the polluters and abusers) of the piece. We might term this as a choice between the extractive and exploitative economy versus a solutions economy. We have to counter the narratives with facts and appeal to shared values of protecting our families, homes and countries of the future. Who, after all, doesn’t want clean air and water, and other than a psychopath, who would not want this for everyone.

The investment piece is therefore far from pure or perfect. What many either don’t know (or don’t understand) is that these funds advocate and engage with companies, attempting to induce positive changes in their behaviour. You cannot really do that if you simply exclude, point and shout … much as the idealist in me would wish to. It means engaging with the perpetrator and holding a stake in their business, buying the right to be in the discussion and leading them into a better future.

This is far from easy to accept, it can feel like placating an abuser and it’s something that most activists, who are ultimately the thought leaders at the front of a movement that will eventually benefit all, often struggle to admit. I was at a screening of the documentary by Fiona Cunningham-Reid Ackroyd & Harvey: The Art of Activism and we discussed the contents with her, Dan Harvey and Heather Ackroyd. They have been actively engaged in expressing concern about the environment for their entire adult life, making some truly remarkable art and living out their ethics. They remain hopeful and thankful whilst engaged in the problem and using their creativity to highlight concerns. They don’t stay in their studio preaching, but are actively engaged in the local and global community, using art to focus our engagement.

There was a moment in the discussion where this very issue reared its head – where opinion was divided about engagement and exclusion. Context and purpose are everything and I favour the way they have chosen – not to take the easy money from corporations to help them gain greener credentials (such as the Board of Monsanto wanting a Board member piece in their iconic grass image – this was a hard “no”, but that doesn’t preclude engaging with Monsanto – who we need to change their practices if we are to prevent an agricultural disaster).

This is obviously the more expensive and harder path, whilst the orange felon throws his tantrums and threatens corporations and civilians, it has become harder to resist and easier to capitulate to folly, but whilst it sometimes appears that the ‘bullies’ and dullards are winning, the reality is that the language may have changed, but the processes have not. DEI may not be the term, but companies understand that a fairly employed workforce that represents the real world is one with a future and energy saving ultimately benefits their bottom line. We all want a future and our planet is our only home.

Talk to me to discuss how your financial plan and your portfolio can be based on your values. Investing doesn’t have to cost the earth.

BACK TO ALL BLOGS

Does everything have to cost the earth?Jemima Thomas2025-10-28T14:01:30+00:00

Recycling: The possibilities are not endless

Daniel Liddicott
Aug 2024 • 3 min read

Recycling: The possibilities are not endless

There has been a great deal of speculation on potential changes to pension rules, amongst others, as we lead up to Labour’s Autumn Budget on 30^th October. However, one rule that we do not expect to change is the ability to take 25% of your pension pot as a tax-free lump sum.

Whilst Sir Keir Starmer did insinuate during the pre-election process that this current tax-free cash entitlement may not be safe from alteration, it was fairly swiftly followed by various Labour spokespeople claiming that this was “an old-fashioned mistake”. It does not appear therefore that this will change – after all, removing the 25% tax-free lump sum entitlement from pensions would be something akin to political suicide.

So, with this likely to remain for the foreseeable future, it is a good time to remind you of the rules on ‘recycling’ the tax-free cash from your pensions. Recycling in this instance is the act of paying any tax-free cash taken from your pension back into the same or another pension in order to benefit from additional tax relief. There are rules in place to prevent people from exploiting this loophole; otherwise it would be possible to repeatedly withdraw tax-free money from a pension and reinvest it to unfairly boost your pension savings.

When might you break pension tax-free cash recycling rules?

In order to break these recycling rules, ALL of the following must have occurred:

You must have received tax-free cash from a pension
Received more than £7,500 in tax-free cash over 12 months
As a result, pension contributions must have increased by more than 30% of what was expected (e.g., you paid in £10,000 each year before and are now paying in more than £13,000)
The additional amount you are contributing must be more than 30% of the tax-free lump sum received (e.g., you received £30,000 in tax-free cash and are now paying £9,000 or more into pensions)
The recycling was pre-planned

If only one of the above did not occur, you will not have been deemed to have broken the rules.

If all five points had occurred, you will have been deemed to have broken these rules and would likely be forced to pay tax on what would have otherwise been a tax-free lump sum.

In reality, it is not easy to hit all of the above criteria and break the recycling rules. However, it is useful to be aware of these rules to help to avoid paying unnecessary tax on those precious tax-free lump sums from your pensions. We are also, of course, here to help you to avoid such pitfalls. Please get in touch should you have any concerns about the above.

In direct contrast to, and to paraphrase a national TV advertisement campaign from the early 2000s, the message here is this – “Recycling: The possibilities are not endless.”

BACK TO ALL BLOGS

Recycling: The possibilities are not endlessJemima Thomas2024-08-23T16:20:43+01:00

Purpose – how to plan…

I have shelves of books about financial planning, investing and anything that helps me to improve how I do what I do and how to simplify, explain and address issues that actually matter to you our clients.

One of the lessons that I have learned over the last three decades is that planning for the future is often too far into the future to be meaningful. We all hope to have a rewarding, purposeful and enjoyable life, but thinking about the next thirty years (2052) often feels too distant from the present.

TIME TRAVEL

As I write, it is November 2022, and looking backwards is easier. Three decades ago (November 1992) is the same distance backwards as it is forwards to 2052. Back in 1992 we had just had the ERM crisis, unemployment was 2.7m, Charles & Diana were still unhappily married. The same time traveller distance back to November 1962 and 007 premiered Dr No and Z-Cars was first aired. The Cuban Missile Crisis had just happened, and The Beatles had just released their first single ‘Love Me Do’.

Suffice to say thirty years is a long time and much changes, though most of it is barely noticed on a day-to-day basis. As humans we tend to have short memories, often having to relearn the same lessons.

The cashflow modelling that we have been using with you since it was available, suffers from the same problem, projecting decades out into the future. Of course, I remind you that “this is a version of the future that almost certainly will not happen, as life is not linear and stuff happens” or something along those lines.

On the one hand I need to extol the rationale, logic and purpose of having a long-term mindset, and on the other I am aware that we really cannot predict anything. The last five years were probably unthinkable to most of us decade ago.

So we focus on the gradual accumulation of small changes that all add up to a better future. Taking advantage of improvements in technology, lower charges and efficiencies. Yet I still find the daily use of pad and paper something that I am unlikely to give up easily. Even holding a printed document is better than a pdf.

Planning ahead for me means considering the year, quarters, weeks and days. I use a planner and despite all the workflows and tech, the planner is really my personal account and guide. This is really a place for my values and aspirations or goals both personally and for the business. The self-accounting enables me to not simply get things done, but to get the important things done… or at least progressed.

Quarterly planning is nothing to do with investment valuations or market conditions, but ensuring you are taking action to progress towards your goals whilst living out your own values consistently and authentically. Planning with purpose.

You can read more articles about Pensions, Wealth Management, Retirement, Investments, Financial Planning and Estate Planning on my blog which gets updated every week. If you would like to talk to me about your personal wealth planning and how we can make you stay wealthier for longer then please get in touch by calling 08000 736 273 or email info@solomonsifa.co.uk

BACK TO ALL BLOGS

Purpose – how to plan…Jemima Thomas2023-12-01T12:12:42+00:00