-
Slow to spot the offer of 60,000 Avios points 🙁
Went to see about getting the Premium card, but it’s asking for earning £35k/yearRetired, and don’t have that “income” … but do have considerable assets in ISA and pensions, etc.
Is there anyway to get pass this limitation?
Some discussion on this thread yesterday relating to what can be deemed ‘income’
https://www.headforpoints.com/forums/topic/retirement-2/page/2/
You could be sitting on a pot of £1m+ but only if you can actually show that you’re drawing £35k of income from it P.A. (including, of course, your other pensions, other income, etc.) would you meet the income threshold.
Some discussion on this thread yesterday relating to what can be deemed ‘income’
https://www.headforpoints.com/forums/topic/retirement-2/page/2/
Many thanks … interesting and useful post
You could be sitting on a pot of £1m+ but only if you can actually show that you’re drawing £35k of income from it P.A. (including, of course, your other pensions, other income, etc.) would you meet the income threshold.
Why so? I’ve always included rolled up investment income including within ISA & never been challenged.
You could be sitting on a pot of £1m+ but only if you can actually show that you’re drawing £35k of income from it P.A. (including, of course, your other pensions, other income, etc.) would you meet the income threshold.
Why so? I’ve always included rolled up investment income including within ISA & never been challenged.
I saw this discussion on the other thread, and I don’t agree.
But that’s only my opinion. The rules aren’t written down in black and white (at least not publicly available) so it comes down to, *IF* a financial institution such as Amex asked to examine your proof of income, would they be satisfied with showing them that you have a £1m pot and those funds/stocks had a published dividend of x% last year?
I suspect they wouldn’t accept this, however, if you could show you had £y flowing into your bank account every month, you’d have a far greater chance of it being accepted.My personal route is to invest in income funds, so I can produce an income report if requested to justify the numbers I give.
I’m more than happy to argue if necessary that investment income established over a number of years that I choose not to withdraw because I don’t need to is no different to interest on a cash savings account which I choose not to withdraw.
A financial institution may or may not agree, but I don’t think it’s ‘wrong’ or misrepresenting anything in principle.
You could be sitting on a pot of £1m+ but only if you can actually show that you’re drawing £35k of income from it P.A. (including, of course, your other pensions, other income, etc.) would you meet the income threshold.
Why so? I’ve always included rolled up investment income including within ISA & never been challenged.
I saw this discussion on the other thread, and I don’t agree.
But that’s only my opinion. The rules aren’t written down in black and white (at least not publicly available) so it comes down to, *IF* a financial institution such as Amex asked to examine your proof of income, would they be satisfied with showing them that you have a £1m pot and those funds/stocks had a published dividend of x% last year?
I suspect they wouldn’t accept this, however, if you could show you had £y flowing into your bank account every month, you’d have a far greater chance of it being accepted.The point is, it seems to rarely come to this. I’m not sure how often people have been asked to prove income but I can’t recall the last time. What I can do, however, is truthfully say that my income is £x by including all income sources rather than a far lower £y by excluding them. As a retiree not drawing income, it’s the difference between very little and quite a lot!!
If asked to prove income, tax return should cover all taxable income – fund manager would should eg ISA income. Gilt income is harder but possible. Undrawn pension income I agree should be excluded.
I guess my final point is my entire career was spent on the proper interpretation of contracts, law, Ts&Cs etc. if that sways anyone one way or the other. Though ultimately if eg Amex hold a view that’s contrary to the correct interpretation of anything, even their own policies, they win. A dead end arguing.
Anyway, let’s hope I don’t get asked. Though at least that would help answer this question one way or the other!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Popular articles this week:
