
Lifetime Isas may need to carry warnings for some savers
The savings accounts enable people to save for their first home or their retirement in one pot.
But the Treasury Committee said the dual-purpose design of the Lifetime Isa, or Lisa, may be diverting people away from more suitable products.
MPs found that the objectives to help people save for both the short and long term make it more likely that people will choose unsuitable investment strategies.
Lisas held in cash may suit those saving for a first home, but may not achieve the best outcome for those using accounts as a retirement savings product, as they are unable to invest in higher-risk but potentially higher-return products such as bonds and equities, the committee said.
It also described current rules penalising benefit claimants as 'nonsensical'.
Under the current system, any savings held in a Lisa can affect eligibility for universal credit or housing benefit, despite this not being the case for other personal or workplace pension schemes, the committee said.
The report said: 'The Government provides higher levels of contribution through tax relief to many other pension products that are not included in the universal credit eligibility assessment, such as workplace pensions and Sipps (self-invested personal pensions). Treating one retirement product differently from others in that regard is nonsensical.'
The report added: 'If the Government is unwilling to equalise the treatment of the Lifetime Isa with other Government-subsidised retirement savings products in universal credit assessments, Lifetime Isa products must include warnings that the Lifetime Isa is an inferior product for anyone who might one day be in receipt of universal credit.
'Such warnings would guard against savers being sold products that are not in their best financial interests, which might well constitute mis-selling.'
Savers can put in up to £4,000 into a Lisa each year, until they reach 50. They must make their first payment into their Lisa before the age of 40.
The Government will add a 25% bonus to Lisa savings, up to a maximum of £1,000 per year.
People can withdraw money from their Lisa if they are buying their first home, aged 60 or over or terminally ill with less than 12 months to live.
People withdrawing money from a Lisa for any other reason face a 25% withdrawal charge, and can end up with less money than they put in.
The report said: 'The withdrawal charge of 25% is applied to unauthorised withdrawals, causing Lisa holders to lose the Government bonuses that they have received, plus 6.25% of their own contributions.
'Several witnesses described that loss of 6.25% as a 'withdrawal penalty'.'
There are also restrictions on when Lisas can be used to buy a first home, including that the property must cost £450,000 or less.
The report said: 'Many people have lost a portion of their savings due to a lack of understanding of the withdrawal charge or because of unforeseen changes in their circumstances, such as buying a first home at a price greater than the cap.
'However, the case for reducing the charge must be balanced against the impact on Government spending. The Lifetime Isa must include a deterrent to discourage savers from withdrawing funds from long-term saving.'
It also added: 'Before considering any increase in the house price cap, the Government must analyse whether the Lifetime Isa is the most effective way in which to spend taxpayers' money to support first-time buyers.'
The committee noted that in the 2023-24 financial year, nearly double the number of people made an unauthorised withdrawal (99,650) compared to the number of people who used their Lisa to buy a home (56,900).
This should be considered a possible indication that the product is not working as intended, the committee said.
At the end of the tax year 2023–24, around 1.3 million Lisa accounts were open, the report said.
The Office for Budget Responsibility predicts spending on bonuses paid to account holders will cost the Treasury around £3 billion over the five years to 2029-30 – and the committee questioned whether this product is the best use of public money given the current financial strain.
MPs also raised concerns that the product may not be well enough targeted towards those in need of financial support and could be subsidising the cost of a first home for wealthier people.
It said the data on this issue remains unclear.
The report also highlighted the benefits of certain elements of the Lisa, including being an option for the self-employed to save for retirement.
Treasury Committee chairwoman Dame Meg Hillier said: 'The committee is firmly behind the objectives of the Lifetime Isa, which are to help those who need it onto the property ladder and to help people save for retirement from an early age. The question is whether the Lifetime Isa is the best way to spend billions of pounds over several years to achieve those goals.
'We know that the Government is looking at Isa reform imminently, which means this is the perfect time to assess if this is the best way to help the people who need it.
'We are still awaiting further data that may shed some light on who exactly the product is helping. What we already know, though, is that the Lifetime Isa needs to be reformed before it can genuinely be described as a market-leading savings product for both prospective home buyers and those who want to start saving for their retirement at a young age.'
Brian Byrnes, head of personal finance at Lifetime Isa provider Moneybox said: 'The report marks a further opportunity to engage with policymakers and continue the conversations needed to ensure the Lisa continues to offer the best level of support to those that need it most.'
He added: 'While it is right that the Government ensures the Lisa provides value for money as part of its review of the product, it is our view that it absolutely does…
'The Lisa has proven particularly valuable for first-time buyers on lower to middle incomes, with 80% of Moneybox Lisa savers earning £40,000 or less.'
He continued: 'We firmly believe that by future-proofing the house price cap and amending the withdrawal penalty, the Lisa would continue to serve as a highly effective product, helping young people build and embed positive saving behaviours early in life, get more people onto the property ladder, and prepare for a more secure retirement.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Rhyl Journal
32 minutes ago
- Rhyl Journal
Human rights group loses legal challenge over exports of jet parts to Israel
Al-Haq took legal action against the Department for Business and Trade (DBT) over its decision to continue licensing exports of components for F-35 fighter jets, telling a hearing in May that it was unlawful and 'gives rise to a significant risk of facilitating crime'. In September last year, the Government suspended export licences for weapons and military equipment following a review of Israel's compliance with international humanitarian law in the conflict. But an exemption was made for some licences related to parts for F-35s, which are part of an international defence programme. The DBT defended the challenge, with its barristers telling a four-day hearing in London that the carve-out is 'consistent with the rules of international law'. In a 72-page ruling on Monday, Lord Justice Males and Mrs Justice Steyn dismissed the legal challenge. The senior judges said that 'the conduct of international relations' is a matter for the executive, rather than the courts, and that it would be unnecessary to decide whether there was a 'significant risk' that the carve-out could facilitate crimes. They added: 'The grave risk to life in the ongoing military operations in the Gaza Strip is not created by the F-35 carve-out, and would not be removed by suspension of the export from the UK of F-35 parts into the F-35 programme.' The High Court was previously told that the decision to 'carve out' licences related to F-35 components followed advice from Defence Secretary John Healey, who said a suspension would impact the 'whole F-35 programme' and have a 'profound impact on international peace and security'. The F-35 programme is an international defence programme which produces and maintains the fighter jets, with the UK contributing components for both assembly lines and an international pool. Israel is not one of the 'partner nations' of the programme, the court heard, but is a customer and can order new F-35 aircraft and draw on a pool for spare parts. The two judges later said they agreed with barristers for the DBT, who said it was not possible for the UK to 'unilaterally' ensure that UK-made parts did not reach Israel. Lord Justice Males and Mrs Justice Steyn said: 'In short, the Secretary of State reasonably concluded that there was no realistic possibility of persuading all other partner nations that F-35 exports to Israel should be suspended.' 'Accordingly he was faced with the blunt choice of accepting the F-35 carve-out or withdrawing from the F-35 Programme and accepting all the defence and diplomatic consequences which would ensue,' they added. The two judges also said the case was about a 'much more focused issue' than the carve-out itself. They continued: 'That issue is whether it is open to the court to rule that the UK must withdraw from a specific multilateral defence collaboration which is reasonably regarded by the responsible ministers as vital to the defence of the UK and to international peace and security, because of the prospect that some UK manufactured components will or may ultimately be supplied to Israel, and may be used in the commission of a serious violation of international humanitarian law in the conflict in Gaza. 'Under our constitution that acutely sensitive and political issue is a matter for the executive which is democratically accountable to Parliament and ultimately to the electorate, not for the courts.'

Rhyl Journal
33 minutes ago
- Rhyl Journal
Fuel margins remain high despite lower prices at the pump, watchdog finds
The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) said retailers' margins – the difference between what they pay for fuel and what they sell it at – remained high compared to historic levels. Fuel prices across the UK fell for both petrol and diesel over the three months to the end of May by 7.6 pence per litre (ppl) and 8.4 ppl respectively. But the CMA found that fuel margins were similar to the high levels seen during its road fuel market study – a review of the market to understand the factors influencing fuel prices undertaken in 2023 – which suggested overall competition in the UK's road fuel retail market remained 'weak'. Supermarket fuel margins fell from 8.9% in December 2024 to 7.9% in February 2025, before rising to 8.3% in March 2025, the regulator found. Non-supermarket fuel margins fell from 9.9% in December 2024 to 8.9% in January 2025, before rising to 10.4% in March 2025. The CMA also looked at the retail spread – the average price that drivers pay at the pump compared to the benchmarked price that retailers buy fuel at – across the UK from March 2025 to May 2025. It found that petrol retail spreads averaged 15.4 ppl, which was 1.5 ppl higher than the previous four-month period – and still more than double the average of 6.5 ppl over 2015 to 2019. Diesel retail spreads averaged 18.8 ppl, which was 4.6 ppl higher than the previous four-month period and more than double the average of 8.6 ppl in 2015 to 2019. Dan Turnbull, senior director of markets at the CMA, said: 'While there is uncertainty over how global events will impact the price of oil, our report shows fuel margins remain high compared to historic levels despite lower prices at the pump in recent months. 'The Government committed to launching a 'fuel finder' scheme following our recommendation to help drivers compare real-time prices and boost competition. 'Once launched, it will make it easier than ever to shop around and find the best deals.' RAC head of policy Simon Williams said: 'Given fuel is a major expense for households, and with eight in 10 drivers dependent on their cars, it's disappointing to see they've paid over the odds yet again. 'We have to hope the launch of the Government-backed Fuel Finder scheme, due at the end of the year, will stimulate competition and finally lead to fairer pump prices.' AA president Edmund King said: 'Once again, the CMA has exposed boosted margins and profits from petrol and diesel. Road fuel is a critical part of a consumer and family budgets. Increased fuel costs have a major influence on inflation. 'While the hope is that pump price reporting, which becomes mandatory at the start of the next year, might bring about more competition, what is happening now is not only bad news for drivers and businesses but also siphoning off potential consumer spending for the likes of tourism and others.' Mr King added: 'The clear and present danger now is the cost of petrol and diesel along holiday routes. Some of the prices are outrageous and we can only hope that drivers take maximum advantage of the price transparency provided by the CMA's voluntary reporting scheme to locate the competitive forecourts.'


Glasgow Times
an hour ago
- Glasgow Times
Lifetime ISAs are penalising benefit claimants say MPs
They added the products may need to carry warnings for some people, they may be diverting people away from more suitable products. Under the current system, any savings held in a Lisa can affect eligibility for universal credit or housing benefit, despite this not being the case for other personal or workplace pension schemes, the committee said. The report said: 'The Government provides higher levels of contribution through tax relief to many other pension products that are not included in the universal credit eligibility assessment, such as workplace pensions and Sipps (self-invested personal pensions). Treating one retirement product differently from others in that regard is nonsensical.' Lifetime ISA win coming in budget?! Good news! @POLITICOEurope has a scoop by @JamesFitzJourno that Chancellor will follow my suggestion and wipe the 6.25% Lisa withdrawal fine for anyone buying a home. If true, this'd fix the current dire system whereby when people are priced… — Martin Lewis (@MartinSLewis) February 22, 2024 The report added: 'If the Government is unwilling to equalise the treatment of the Lifetime Isa with other Government-subsidised retirement savings products in universal credit assessments, Lifetime Isa products must include warnings that the Lifetime Isa is an inferior product for anyone who might one day be in receipt of universal credit. 'Such warnings would guard against savers being sold products that are not in their best financial interests, which might well constitute mis-selling.' The savings accounts enable people to save for their first home or their retirement in one pot. But the Treasury Committee said the dual-purpose design of the Lifetime Isa, or Lisa, may be diverting people away from more suitable products. MPs found that the objectives to help people save for both the short and long term make it more likely that people will choose unsuitable investment strategies. Lisas held in cash may suit those saving for a first home, but may not achieve the best outcome for those using accounts as a retirement savings product, as they are unable to invest in higher-risk but potentially higher-return products such as bonds and equities, the committee said. If the Government is unwilling to equalise the treatment of the Lifetime Isa with other Government-subsidised retirement savings products in universal credit assessments, Lifetime Isa products must include warnings that the Lifetime Isa is an inferior product for anyone who might one day be in receipt of universal credit Savers can put in up to £4,000 into a Lisa each year, until they reach 50. They must make their first payment into their Lisa before the age of 40. The Government will add a 25% bonus to Lisa savings, up to a maximum of £1,000 per year. People can withdraw money from their Lisa if they are buying their first home, aged 60 or over or terminally ill with less than 12 months to live. People withdrawing money from a Lisa for any other reason face a 25% withdrawal charge, and can end up with less money than they put in. The report said: 'The withdrawal charge of 25% is applied to unauthorised withdrawals, causing Lisa holders to lose the Government bonuses that they have received, plus 6.25% of their own contributions. 'Several witnesses described that loss of 6.25% as a 'withdrawal penalty'.' What is a Lifetime ISA? A LISA is a savings product for people under 40 and saving for either a first home or retirement. Damien Jordan, founder of Financial Interest and Damien Talks Money says: "The government adds a 25% bonus to your contributions, which is unmatched by other savings accounts, and you still generate interest on top of this. However, there are penalties if you wish to withdraw the money for any reason other than buying your first home or retirement. You should also be aware that a LISA can only be used on house purchases worth £450,000 or less. This in particular has been an issue for home buyers in the South of England where property prices often exceed this limit." He adds: "Personally, I would use a Cash LISA to save for a home as I'd want to take advantage of the 25% top up (up to £1,000) from the government, but I wouldn't want to risk a short-term drop in the stock market affecting my ability to buy a home when I planned. For retirement, because the time scales are much longer, I would suggest a Stocks & Shares LISA in order to maximise potential growth." What's the problem been with Lifetime ISAs? Many people have lost a portion of their savings due to a lack of understanding of the withdrawal charge or because of unforeseen changes in their circumstances. There are also restrictions on when Lisas can be used to buy a first home, including that the property must cost £450,000 or less. The report said: 'Many people have lost a portion of their savings due to a lack of understanding of the withdrawal charge or because of unforeseen changes in their circumstances, such as buying a first home at a price greater than the cap. 'However, the case for reducing the charge must be balanced against the impact on Government spending. The Lifetime Isa must include a deterrent to discourage savers from withdrawing funds from long-term saving.' It also added: 'Before considering any increase in the house price cap, the Government must analyse whether the Lifetime Isa is the most effective way in which to spend taxpayers' money to support first-time buyers.' The committee noted that in the 2023-24 financial year, nearly double the number of people made an unauthorised withdrawal (99,650) compared to the number of people who used their Lisa to buy a home (56,900). This should be considered a possible indication that the product is not working as intended, the committee said. At the end of the tax year 2023–24, around 1.3 million Lisa accounts were open, the report said. The Office for Budget Responsibility predicts spending on bonuses paid to account holders will cost the Treasury around £3 billion over the five years to 2029-30 – and the committee questioned whether this product is the best use of public money given the current financial strain. MPs also raised concerns that the product may not be well enough targeted towards those in need of financial support and could be subsidising the cost of a first home for wealthier people. It said the data on this issue remains unclear. The report also highlighted the benefits of certain elements of the Lisa, including being an option for the self-employed to save for retirement. The question is whether the Lifetime Isa is the best way to spend billions of pounds over several years to achieve those goals Treasury Committee chairwoman Dame Meg Hillier said: 'The committee is firmly behind the objectives of the Lifetime Isa, which are to help those who need it onto the property ladder and to help people save for retirement from an early age. The question is whether the Lifetime Isa is the best way to spend billions of pounds over several years to achieve those goals. 'We know that the Government is looking at Isa reform imminently, which means this is the perfect time to assess if this is the best way to help the people who need it. 'We are still awaiting further data that may shed some light on who exactly the product is helping. What we already know, though, is that the Lifetime Isa needs to be reformed before it can genuinely be described as a market-leading savings product for both prospective home buyers and those who want to start saving for their retirement at a young age.' Recommended reading: Brian Byrnes, head of personal finance at Lifetime Isa provider Moneybox said: 'Having campaigned for many years on behalf of the UK's largest community of Lifetime ISA savers, we welcome the report today from the Treasury Select Committee as another step towards future-proofing this vital, incentivised saving and investing product." He added: "Nearly 3 million young savers and investors have already benefited from using a LISA, developing healthy saving and investing habits that stick with them for life and nearly 250,000 first time buyers have used the LISA to purchase their first home. All of this has been achieved for a fraction of the overall government budget. 'The LISA has proven particularly valuable for first time buyers on lower to middle incomes, with 80% of Moneybox LISA savers earning £40k or less. Reducing the unauthorised withdrawal penalty to 20% would be particularly beneficial to this group, especially in light of persistent cost of living pressures. In 2024, emergencies were the leading reason for LISA savers making unauthorised withdrawals (57%) so this change alone could remove a significant barrier to saving and encourage more young people to open and stay invested in a LISA'