
Lifetime Isas may need to carry warnings for some savers
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


Daily Mirror
an hour ago
- Daily Mirror
Council tax bills may be slashed by up to 17%
Households with disabled adults or children are urged to check if they qualify The Disabled Band Reduction Scheme is a programme aimed at assisting disabled people with the additional housing costs they incur due to their disability. To qualify, there must be at least one disabled person residing in the house, whether an adult or a child. You also need to demonstrate that the disability means there's a need to live in a bigger home than would otherwise be required if the person were not disabled. This could be because caring for the disabled person requires an extra bathroom, a specially adapted kitchen or other rooms, or if the property needs to be larger inside to accommodate a wheelchair. The disabled individual doesn't have to be the one footing the council tax bill to qualify. This discount could reduce your council tax bill by a full band. If your property falls under Band D, your bill will be adjusted to match the cheaper rates of Band C. If you're on the lowest rate, Band A, you'll receive a 17% discount on your bill instead. You can check your eligibility for the scheme and apply online via the website. There are other council tax discounts available for disabled residents. This includes the severely mentally impaired discount, which can slash your council tax bill by 100%. To have the entire bill disregarded, you need to prove you're severely mentally impaired and living alone, with other severely mentally impaired individuals or full-time students. If everyone else in your home is disregarded for other reasons, you can get a 50% discount. However, if you are severely mentally impaired and living with another adult without a disability who isn't disregarded, you're only entitled to a maximum of a 25% council tax discount. Currently, there's an open consultation in England aimed at revamping this discount. The government's draft policy notes: "The government believes the current name and definition of this disregard is outdated and alienating to those who suffer with these conditions and may create a barrier for them from claiming the support they are entitled to." The proposal includes updating the title and definition for the council tax exemption to mirror the Welsh Government, which has renamed it 'significant cognitive impairment'. Additionally, there are plans to streamline the application process as the present system is considered a hurdle for some. This involves various councils having differing procedures, placing the responsibility on households to obtain the correct council forms and doctors' certificates. The proposed policy statement declares: "The government believes it is right that there is a straightforward and simple pathway for those who are eligible to claim this support." It also acknowledges that individuals who qualify (and/or their families) should proactively seek out the disregard, and councils should tailor their approach to best serve their local communities. If these alterations are implemented in England, they wouldn't impact individuals who are already eligible for the discount. Those currently receiving it shouldn't have to undergo a reassessment either.


Daily Mirror
3 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
DWP State Pension uplift could see people receive extra £657
The Triple Lock policy has been making headlines recently State pensioners born after 1951 could be in for a financial boost, with a potential £657 increase on the cards under the Triple Lock proposal. For the 2025/26 tax year, anyone eligible for the full new State Pension can expect to pocket £11,973 annually or £230.25 each week. Thanks to the Triple Lock being tied to an impressive 5.5% earnings growth, weekly state pension payments might see a spike to £242.90. That's nearly £972 over four weeks and leads to a favourable yearly sum of £12,630.80. The Triple Lock scheme is DWP' s promise to uprate pensions yearly based off the highest of three measures: average annual pay bump observed from May to July, CPI come September, or a fixed rate of 2.5%. This comes amid the UK's economy facing a slight 0.1% dip in growth this past May, despite the Office for National Statistics (ONS) revealing positive signs, with GDP hopping up by 0.5% in the March to May 2025 quarter, just above the expected 0.4%. Professor Joe Nellis, expert at MHA, said: "This is a far cry from the strong growth in the first quarter of the year when a surge in exports and a robust performance in the services sector placed the UK among the G7's top performers. Growth over the first half of the year is now expected to be modest. "Despite a more positive outlook for the remainder of the year, this presents a challenge to the Chancellor - her fiscal headroom remains limited by high levels of public borrowing and debt and her spending plans are heavily reliant on kickstarting the economy. "Just as last year, we now wait tentatively for the Autumn Budget to find out how the Chancellor aims to solve her fiscal problems." Mr Nellis added: "Something must change - she must either cut spending, increase borrowing, or raise taxes. We expect a squeeze on unprotected Government budgets to cut spending, but the recent rebellion in the Labour Party against the welfare reform bill shows that major spending cuts may be too politically dangerous for the Government. "The OBR's July report highlighted the intense burden that the triple lock on the state pension places on the UK economy - demographic and economic shifts have made this policy difficult to uphold, but any attempt to undo it would move the Government into treacherous waters."

The National
3 hours ago
- The National
Labour minister refuses to rule out tax rises
Rumours of an incoming wealth tax were spurred after Prime Minister Keir Starmer ignored a question from Tory leader Kemi Badenoch when he was asked about implementing one. On Sunday, Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander refused to be drawn on the issue. She also said that Cabinet ministers did not 'directly' talk about the idea of a wealth tax during an away day at the Prime Minister's Chequers country estate this week. READ MORE: Ultra-Unionist fringe group fails to reach crowdfunder target According to the Financial Times (FT), analysts have suggested Chancellor Rachel Reeves will have to plug a £20 billion black hole in the public finances. This was made deeper by the £6.2bn cost after the UK Government was forced to U-turn on its planned changes to disability benefits after a backbench revolt. After committing not to increase income tax, VAT and employee payroll tax, in its manifesto, Reeves will have to find other ways to balance the books. The Chancellor has refused to rule out tax rises at the budget since ministers were forced into the U-turn. Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar has previously said that introducing a wealth tax would be the 'wrong solution'. But, former Labour leader Neil Kinnock has called for a two per cent annual levy on assets over £10m, claiming this could raise about £10bn a year. Unite has called for a one per cent wealth tax on the super rich, while Scottish Greens leadership contender Ross Greer called for one to be introduced in Scotland as he launched his campaign last week. (Image: Jeff Overs/BBC/PA Wire) Fiscal watchdog the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) this week warned that the UK's state finances are on an 'unsustainable' path due to a raft of public spending promises the Government 'cannot afford' in the longer term. Meanwhile, economists have warned Reeves on several occasions that her fiscal headroom – the leeway within the Government's self-imposed spending rules – could be eroded by unexpected economic turns. Asked by Sky News if such a tax had been discussed at the Cabinet away day on Friday, Alexander said: 'Not directly at the away day.' Pressed on what she meant by not directly, the minister replied: 'I think your viewers would be surprised if we didn't recognise that, at the budget, the Chancellor will need to look at the OBR forecast that is given to her, and will make decisions in line with the fiscal rules that she has set out. 'We made a commitment in our manifesto not to be putting up taxes on people on modest incomes, working people. We have stuck to that.' READ MORE: Inside the Scottish Greens leadership contest Asked again if this meant there will be tax rises in the budget, Alexander replied: 'So, the Chancellor will set her budget. I'm not going to sit in a TV studio today and speculate on what the contents of that budget might be. 'When it comes to taxation, fairness is going to be our guiding principle.' In response, shadow home secretary Chris Philp told Sky News's Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips: 'That sounds to me like a barely disguised reference to tax rises coming in the autumn.' Philp said tax rises were now being discussed due to the economy shrinking in consecutive months, unemployment being 12 per cent higher than when Labour came to office and that the Government had 'completely failed' to reform welfare. He added: 'They can't get anything past their own back benches. The consequence of all of that is going to be tax rises for people who are working hard and on businesses. 'It's nothing to do with fairness, it's a symptom of Labour failure.'