SIPP, overseas unlisted shares.
Discussion
Don't suppose anyone knows of SIPP provider who will talk to me?
I want to sell £50,000 of shares held in a Family Trust in NZ to my SIPP, the shares are in a local shopping mall valued at about £25m.
I want the cash to help plant 100,000 trees for carbon credits, which I can sell to buy back the shares and take the cash out (in a few years).
I need a SIPP provider who can cater for unlisted overseas shares without going through a financial adviser.
E mails have been sent to four such providers, none have got back to me yet.
Condi said:
I highly doubt you'll find anyone allowing you to do that with out going through a financial advisor, as much for any financial firms due diligence as anything else. They have a duty to be aware of where the money is coming and going to.
This. The self investment element will be subject to restrictions. I suspect this will fall outside of most providers allowable investments.darreni said:
Condi said:
I highly doubt you'll find anyone allowing you to do that with out going through a financial advisor, as much for any financial firms due diligence as anything else. They have a duty to be aware of where the money is coming and going to.
This. The self investment element will be subject to restrictions. I suspect this will fall outside of most providers allowable investments.I don't know why Rowanmoor are prepared to accept these investments when other bigger providers won't, but if people are happy to go with them then that is their call.
I personally wouldn't touch it!
Dentons will let you put Unlisted UK Equity into a SIPP but there are restrictions around things like voting rights etc.
You can use them as a sub account of your main SIPP effectively. My SIPP provider wouldn't take unlisted equity so I used Dentons.
https://www.dentonspensions.co.uk/Home/
You can use them as a sub account of your main SIPP effectively. My SIPP provider wouldn't take unlisted equity so I used Dentons.
https://www.dentonspensions.co.uk/Home/
Ginge R said:
JulianPH said:
The last time I looked people could go against the warnings of others and make their own decisions. Why would you think that is not their call???
I imagine that we are both looking at this through different prisms. Why do you think it is not someones call to make a decision, even if advised against it?
Typically, you are refusing to address a point you, yourself, raised.
Taking aside that I assume you meant we were both looking at the subject matter through different sides of the same prism (rather than looking through different prisms), you have recently been questioning many of my comments and ignoring or deflecting my replies to you.
I know you know your stuff, so what is the problem?
Why do you question people's right to do what they want to do (regardless of advice to the contrary)?
That is a specific and highly loaded train of thought that would wipe away self-determination (the cornerstone of every democracy) in an instant.
So my question isn't flippant in the slightest. It is genuine and important.
Obviously I don't agree with you on this, but like you I enjoy debate. So let's keep to the point on this matter.
So...?
Taking aside that I assume you meant we were both looking at the subject matter through different sides of the same prism (rather than looking through different prisms), you have recently been questioning many of my comments and ignoring or deflecting my replies to you.
I know you know your stuff, so what is the problem?
Why do you question people's right to do what they want to do (regardless of advice to the contrary)?
That is a specific and highly loaded train of thought that would wipe away self-determination (the cornerstone of every democracy) in an instant.
So my question isn't flippant in the slightest. It is genuine and important.
Obviously I don't agree with you on this, but like you I enjoy debate. So let's keep to the point on this matter.
So...?
darreni said:
Clients are indeed free to do whatever they wish to do, though I will decline the business if it is contrary to my specific advice.
Some pension transfers being a typical example.
Out of interest, are you obliged to decline such business, or is it just your choice/ preference to do so?Some pension transfers being a typical example.
darreni said:
If I don’t believe it’s genuinly in the clients best interests, I’ll decline.
To advise against a particular course of action & then still transact the business would conflict with my own advice, something I’d rather not be explaining to the regulator during an on site visit.
To advise against a particular course of action & then still transact the business would conflict with my own advice, something I’d rather not be explaining to the regulator during an on site visit.
JulianPH said:
As always, you make a bold statement you cannot back up.
You then give a pathetic excuse and retreat.
I like you Al, I just cen't respect you or your views at this moment.
You can't (or won't) answer a simple question that you, yourself, set. That is not clever.
Hi Julian,You then give a pathetic excuse and retreat.
I like you Al, I just cen't respect you or your views at this moment.
You can't (or won't) answer a simple question that you, yourself, set. That is not clever.
I have spent the evening editing a report for a couple of national agencies in respect of a a large recent alleged DB miss-selling incident. I think your premise was incorrect, as you did mine. That's fine - there seemed to be a crossover between regulation and morality and philosophy.
Just because someone wants to do something, that doesn't mean a professional should let them (I believe that FOS will take an increasingly patriarchial approach to complaints), if my kids had always wanted Haribo for tea every night, and if I had acquiesced and allowed it at every turn, would that have made me a good parent? Granted, a SIPP investor is deemed to have capacity and my kids didn't, but so too, does a financial services professional have a duty to act in their clients' best interests.. namely, a client doesn't always know what a client doesn't always know, and just because a SIPP provider *can* do something, that doesn't mean they should. The Handbook already includes a rule and principles that we must act honestly, fairly and professionally in accordance with the client’s best interests.
We of course, also already have RPPD. And if the FCA gets its way by suggesting that *acquiring* an asset in a SIPP forms part of *operating* the SIPP, then section 22 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, (establishing and operating a SIPP, as well as buying and selling securities) become regulated activities, and therefore Principles 2 and 6 apply. In other words, SIPP operators must conduct their business with “skill, care and diligence” (Principle 2) and “pay due regard to the interests of its customers and treat them fairly” (Principle 6).
We live in interesting times - I don't know a single diligent practitioner though, who would be party to a piece of advice to proceed with a suggested course of action, that he or she didn't agree with. You seem to be referring to the practice of being an order taker - maybe I was more thinking about things from the perspective of a professional who adopts a fiduciary responsibility. "What do SIPP companies do for their annual fees?" as a thread maybe?
Ginge R said:
Hi Julian,
I have spent the evening editing a report for a couple of national agencies in respect of a a large recent alleged DB miss-selling incident. I think your premise was incorrect, as you did mine. That's fine - there seemed to be a crossover between regulation and morality and philosophy.
Just because someone wants to do something, that doesn't mean a professional should let them (I believe that FOS will take an increasingly patriarchial approach to complaints), if my kids had always wanted Haribo for tea every night, and if I had acquiesced and allowed it at every turn, would that have made me a good parent? Granted, a SIPP investor is deemed to have capacity and my kids didn't, but so too, does a financial services professional have a duty to act in their clients' best interests.. namely, a client doesn't always know what a client doesn't always know, and just because a SIPP provider *can* do something, that doesn't mean they should. The Handbook already includes a rule and principles that we must act honestly, fairly and professionally in accordance with the client’s best interests.
We of course, also already have RPPD. And if the FCA gets its way by suggesting that *acquiring* an asset in a SIPP forms part of *operating* the SIPP, then section 22 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, (establishing and operating a SIPP, as well as buying and selling securities) become regulated activities, and therefore Principles 2 and 6 apply. In other words, SIPP operators must conduct their business with “skill, care and diligence” (Principle 2) and “pay due regard to the interests of its customers and treat them fairly” (Principle 6).
We live in interesting times - I don't know a single diligent practitioner though, who would be party to a piece of advice to proceed with a suggested course of action, that he or she didn't agree with. You seem to be referring to the practice of being an order taker - maybe I was more thinking about things from the perspective of a professional who adopts a fiduciary responsibility. "What do SIPP companies do for their annual fees?" as a thread maybe?
Hi AlI have spent the evening editing a report for a couple of national agencies in respect of a a large recent alleged DB miss-selling incident. I think your premise was incorrect, as you did mine. That's fine - there seemed to be a crossover between regulation and morality and philosophy.
Just because someone wants to do something, that doesn't mean a professional should let them (I believe that FOS will take an increasingly patriarchial approach to complaints), if my kids had always wanted Haribo for tea every night, and if I had acquiesced and allowed it at every turn, would that have made me a good parent? Granted, a SIPP investor is deemed to have capacity and my kids didn't, but so too, does a financial services professional have a duty to act in their clients' best interests.. namely, a client doesn't always know what a client doesn't always know, and just because a SIPP provider *can* do something, that doesn't mean they should. The Handbook already includes a rule and principles that we must act honestly, fairly and professionally in accordance with the client’s best interests.
We of course, also already have RPPD. And if the FCA gets its way by suggesting that *acquiring* an asset in a SIPP forms part of *operating* the SIPP, then section 22 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, (establishing and operating a SIPP, as well as buying and selling securities) become regulated activities, and therefore Principles 2 and 6 apply. In other words, SIPP operators must conduct their business with “skill, care and diligence” (Principle 2) and “pay due regard to the interests of its customers and treat them fairly” (Principle 6).
We live in interesting times - I don't know a single diligent practitioner though, who would be party to a piece of advice to proceed with a suggested course of action, that he or she didn't agree with. You seem to be referring to the practice of being an order taker - maybe I was more thinking about things from the perspective of a professional who adopts a fiduciary responsibility. "What do SIPP companies do for their annual fees?" as a thread maybe?
This is all getting very off topic. The OP wants his SIPP to buy shares he already owns through a trust fund. It is not like someone is selling him a scam investment. As I said, I wouldn't take them on as the regulatory risks and costs are prohibitive, but there are SIPP providers that would.
By the way, there is no such category/permission as "establishing and operating a SIPP". It is 'Establishing/operating/winding up a personal pension scheme'. This is because a SIPP is simply a type of personal pension (just like a Stakeholder, for example).
SIPP providers (just like insurers/platforms/DFMs) effectively do take orders from regulated advisers representing their clients. However, any provider that does not require a regulated adviser be in place is asking for trouble if things go wrong for any reason. And any provider that is stupid enough to deal with unregulated introducers and/or non-standard assets deserves everything they get as far as I am concerned.
With regards to "What do SIPP companies do for their annual fees?" I can answer that here in a far less excruciating way the the 'what do financial advisers do for their annual fees' thread went:
- Provide illustrations
- Establish each member's pension
- Open a dedicated client money bank account for each member
- Set up and process monthly Direct Debits
- Process initial and ad hoc lump sum investments
- Reclaim basic rate tax relief at source from HMRC for all of the above two contributions
- Process pension transfers (and partial transfers) in and out on behalf of each member
- Check and follow all underlying investment requests
- Process PCLS payments
- Process monthly drawdown payments
- Collect and pay to HMRC income tax due on the above through payroll systems
- Process annual SMPIs
- Calculate and pay pension death benefits
- Undergo annual external auditing on all schemes
- Deal with all enquires from advisers and their clients
Not bad value for a flat fixed fee that on average equates to c. 0.1% a year if represented as a percentage based fee (so one tenth of the cost of the average financial advisers annual fee - hence my question in the other thread).
And if the FCA get its way (something you seem very keen on) you can add to that list:
- Take full responsibility for the advice given by financial advisers and therefore have to sign off their advice before accepting a client
JulianPH said:
Hi Al
This is all getting very off topic. The OP wants his SIPP to buy shares he already owns through a trust fund. It is not like someone is selling him a scam investment. As I said, I wouldn't take them on as the regulatory risks and costs are prohibitive, but there are SIPP providers that would.
By the way, there is no such category/permission as "establishing and operating a SIPP". It is 'Establishing/operating/winding up a personal pension scheme'. This is because a SIPP is simply a type of personal pension (just like a Stakeholder, for example).
SIPP providers (just like insurers/platforms/DFMs) effectively do take orders from regulated advisers representing their clients. However, any provider that does not require a regulated adviser be in place is asking for trouble if things go wrong for any reason. And any provider that is stupid enough to deal with unregulated introducers and/or non-standard assets deserves everything they get as far as I am concerned.
With regards to "What do SIPP companies do for their annual fees?" I can answer that here in a far less excruciating way the the 'what do financial advisers do for their annual fees' thread went:
Not bad value for a flat fixed fee that on average equates to c. 0.1% a year if represented as a percentage based fee (so one tenth of the cost of the average financial advisers annual fee - hence my question in the other thread).
And if the FCA get its way (something you seem very keen on) you can add to that list:
Not many SIPP providers do all that for a fixed fee. This is all getting very off topic. The OP wants his SIPP to buy shares he already owns through a trust fund. It is not like someone is selling him a scam investment. As I said, I wouldn't take them on as the regulatory risks and costs are prohibitive, but there are SIPP providers that would.
By the way, there is no such category/permission as "establishing and operating a SIPP". It is 'Establishing/operating/winding up a personal pension scheme'. This is because a SIPP is simply a type of personal pension (just like a Stakeholder, for example).
SIPP providers (just like insurers/platforms/DFMs) effectively do take orders from regulated advisers representing their clients. However, any provider that does not require a regulated adviser be in place is asking for trouble if things go wrong for any reason. And any provider that is stupid enough to deal with unregulated introducers and/or non-standard assets deserves everything they get as far as I am concerned.
With regards to "What do SIPP companies do for their annual fees?" I can answer that here in a far less excruciating way the the 'what do financial advisers do for their annual fees' thread went:
- Provide illustrations
- Establish each member's pension
- Open a dedicated client money bank account for each member
- Set up and process monthly Direct Debits
- Process initial and ad hoc lump sum investments
- Reclaim basic rate tax relief at source from HMRC for all of the above two contributions
- Process pension transfers (and partial transfers) in and out on behalf of each member
- Check and follow all underlying investment requests
- Process PCLS payments
- Process monthly drawdown payments
- Collect and pay to HMRC income tax due on the above through payroll systems
- Process annual SMPIs
- Calculate and pay pension death benefits
- Undergo annual external auditing on all schemes
- Deal with all enquires from advisers and their clients
Not bad value for a flat fixed fee that on average equates to c. 0.1% a year if represented as a percentage based fee (so one tenth of the cost of the average financial advisers annual fee - hence my question in the other thread).
And if the FCA get its way (something you seem very keen on) you can add to that list:
- Take full responsibility for the advice given by financial advisers and therefore have to sign off their advice before accepting a client
Some providers fee scale runs to several pages of A4.
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff