We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register to chat with like-minded investors on our interactive forums.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capital Gearing Trust Plc | CGT | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10.00 | 0.21% | 4,715.00 | 16:35:08 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4,740.00 | 4,705.00 | 4,740.00 | 4,715.00 | 4,705.00 |
| Industry Sector |
|---|
| EQUITY INVESTMENT INSTRUMENTS |
| Announcement Date | Type | Currency | Dividend Amount | Ex Date | Record Date | Payment Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 26/01/2024 | Special | GBP | 0.11 | 01/02/2024 | 02/02/2024 | 23/02/2024 |
| 24/05/2023 | Final | GBP | 0.6 | 01/06/2023 | 02/06/2023 | 10/07/2023 |
| 30/05/2022 | Final | GBP | 0.46 | 09/06/2022 | 10/06/2022 | 15/07/2022 |
| 21/05/2021 | Final | GBP | 0.45 | 10/06/2021 | 11/06/2021 | 16/07/2021 |
| 27/05/2020 | Final | GBP | 0.25 | 04/06/2020 | 05/06/2020 | 17/07/2020 |
| 29/05/2019 | Final | GBP | 0.23 | 13/06/2019 | 14/06/2019 | 19/07/2019 |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 18/1/2024 17:25 by red nutter Doing my self assessment.1st time with profit on shares for the year. Was a £10k investment. Is well within the £12k cgt limit. Do I still need to show on tax return as no cgt is due? |
Posted at 14/11/2023 19:44 by spectoacc Citywire, fwiw:I'm rarely in the wealth preservers, and delighted not to be the past couple of years, but had the great pleasure of meeting Jonathan Ruffer this week, albeit not to talk investing unfortunately. RICA's the only one I've currently a small holding in. If I can get over disappointment at the performance of RICA/CGT/PNL, I'm likely to see CGT's discount widening out as an opportunity. Yes, they may never reign it back in, but should they? I don't see the point of buying back your shares at par - why not buy them back at a discount and improve NAV? Imagine if they come back in great size when the discount is say 10%. Maybe that's the discount tail wagging the investment case dog. But I like their vast allocation to US TIPs - surely the wealth preservers can't underperform forever. And it really is underperformance - some of the benchmarks (like RPI+) are being missed by country miles. Dangerous to make predictions, especially about the future (H/t Yogi Berra), but a rally into Xmas to sell into, then a tricky decision on now to position for next year, that surely has either direct holdings of Linkers/TIPs/Gilts/T |
Posted at 31/10/2023 17:14 by topvest It will certainly be interesting to see what happens here when they can't control the discount. They only bought 6k today. Peter Spiller is a great chap, but he must be incredibly frustrated with all of this. The RNS implies someone might have made some administrative errors, either at CGT or at the legal end. Not a great positive for NI being, maybe the only, Northern Ireland based listed company. I had a look at the Annual Report for last year and there was no mention of this as a risk or anything. It was not mentioned in the buy-back risk section. I guess the speed of the buy-backs and doom has caught them out...big time! When the markets lose confidence in the discount control mechanism, it will be difficult to regain confidence. The buy-back early in 2024 may have to be huge, which sadly could endanger this fantastic trust. The clock is ticking for performance to improve! |
Posted at 31/10/2023 16:20 by rambutan2 You gotta larf!The N Irish court service doesn't believe in speed, as they should have known. A number of managers must be sorely tempted to short CGT purely out of spite. A big pile of steaming humble pie must be on the menu for Peter Perfect... |
Posted at 01/7/2023 12:08 by sleveen1 Incorrect."Jon Skint Smith 4 Sep '01 - 16:14 0 0 0 Does anyone know of or use any software that is capable of calculating CGT liability for share transaction including all the latest rules etc?" Thread started in 2001 for CGT. The capital gearing trust is here: With a grand total of 87 posts from 2004. |
Posted at 05/6/2023 16:22 by cynicalsteve Todays fall is a bit of a shock, this isn't supposed to happen to CGT.I expect to see big share buybacks reported later, if not the market will start to doubt their commitment to the discount control mechanism. Some of the recent poor performance is down to TIPS and Index Linked Gilts not behaving as expected, also CGT lost money on REITs. A wealth preservation trust that doesn't preserve your wealth will struggle to find buyers at around NAV. PS I'm assuming the NAV hasn't fallen of course! |
Posted at 16/10/2021 12:27 by gengulphus Srtu,... the following info came from CGT calculator. I suspect something is going wrong in CGT calculator. I'm practically certain that something is going wrong in CGTcalculator, because of two obviously wrong bits of information in the extra output you've provided. The first that struck me was: Total number of trades = 7 Total number of buys = 4 Total number of sells = 3 There are 7 trades in your input, but they comprise 4 buys, 2 sells and a rights issue. So it looks as if CGTcalculator is counting the rights issue as a sell, not a buy. It's actually neither a sell nor a buy - but it's a lot closer to being a buy than a sell! It differs from a buy only in that unlike a buy, it cannot be matched to a sell under the same-day or 30-day rules (something that only rarely makes a difference, and doesn't for your example), but from a sell in that it absorbs cash and adds shares rather than the other way around (something which will always make a difference). This led me to check the rest of the information more carefully, and in the "INFORMATION FOR TAX RETURN" section, I saw "Disposals = 2". Those are clearly the two sells, so CGTcalculator seems to be treating the rights issue as a sell that is not a disposal... But the first sell has disposal proceeds of 2842*£3.90729 = £11,104.52 and the second 60333*£1.06330 = £64,152.08 (note that their commissions of £6.95 each don't enter into their "Disposal Proceeds" calculations, but instead into the "Allowable Costs" calculations). Rounding those down to whole numbers of pounds, that produces total disposal proceeds for the two sells of £11,104+£64,152 = £75,256, which is £14,851 short of the £90,107 disposal proceeds reported by CGTcalculator. And £14,851 is exactly the result of the disposal proceeds calculation to the rights issue data (46410*£0.32000 = £14,851.20) and rounding down to a whole number of pounds. So it appears that CGTcalculator is treating the rights issue as a sell that is not a disposal but does have disposal proceeds, when it clearly doesn't have any such proceeds... I'm afraid I cannot help beyond identifying that inconsistency - that requires me to be able to see the full details of CGTcalculator's internal calculations, which I am not. Sorry incidentally that my last post suggested that you might be able to provide them. I was working from a memory that those were available from CGTcalculator that turns out to have been false - I think it's actually something provided by the Stonebanks calculator rather than by CGTcalculator (but I'm afraid I don't think the Stonebanks calculator would solve your problem, because I cannot see that it has any facility to input rights issues). So that's basically as far as I can go - CGTcalculator's author is presumably the only person who can provide more details of how CGTcalculator is doing the calculations and/or correct any problems with them. If you want a work-around for the problem, though, I'd suggest you search your CGTcalculator input data for rights issues, and then check each rights issue for sales of the same type of share on the same day or in the preceding 30 days. If there isn't any such sale, change the "Rights" line to a "Buy" line (and append a note to the CGTcalculator output saying something like "The 09/11/2020 buy is actually shares obtained from a rights issue, but treating it as a buy does not alter how it is matched to share sales"). If there is such a sale, extract all the data for that company and do the calculation by hand - but given that rights issues are quite rare and it still requires some bad luck to have sold the same type of share on the same day or in the preceding 30 days, that case shouldn't happen at all often (hopefully not at all). Gengulphus |
Posted at 29/7/2021 23:37 by gengulphus squidd,... in recent years, as I aged (now 90), I greatly simplified my affairs to only pension and ISA investments only, so had to do no tax return for about 6 years. But one of my ISA investments has turned sour, and prompted me to look again to this site, where I'm delighted to find you still at it, and hopeful that you can advise. I held MESH shares in an ISA, but a couple of years ago, pending reorganisation and transformation, they delisted from AIM. Then a couple of months ago my brokers, EQi (formerly Selftrade) wrote telling me that MESH were no longer eligible for an ISA listing and they transferred my holding to a Dealing Account at zero value and zero cost. Thus exposing me to CGT etc at any valuation above zero. To further complicate matters, EQi are themselves reorganising, and they transferred my account to Interactive Investor. Meanwhile MESH have announced that reorganisation is nearing completion, and they hope to transform the shares into another company AAQA, by way of a special one for one dividend, which will then be listed on an exchange. I assume that this is the deal described in . It's a messy situation that I don't completely understand, and neither do the authors of that document, judging by its statement that "When the title of an investment in an ISA is transferred from an ISA manager to an investor, the investor is deemed to have sold the investment for a market value sum and immediately reacquired it for the same amount. Any notional gain on the deemed sale is exempt from charge. Any future capital gains or losses are calculated by reference to the value of the shares when they left the ISA. This is the combined effect of regulation 22 and 34 of the Individual Savings Account Regulations 1998. It is not, however, clear how this general tax treatment applies when shares are transferred out of an ISA after a delisting." I'm a bit surprised that EQi decided that the transfer-out-of-ISA happened at zero value, given that it appears that the shares still have some value - I rather suspect that they took the view that shares which cannot be sold in a stockmarket have zero market value, when "market value" is supposed to be what one can reasonably expect to sell an asset for to a willing buyer. However, that might not result in a "market value" which is all that much more than zero - i.e. it may not make all that much difference to CGT calculations, and so EQi's zero valuation at the time of the transfer out of the ISA may not be worth fighting... And there's another point: if you sell no more than a CGT allowance's worth of shares in a tax year, then unless you realise some other gain in the tax year (which your post suggests is most unlikely!), then your total realised gains in that tax year cannot be more than the CGT allowance - so you won't have any CGT to pay, and even if HMRC require you to fill in a tax return, you won't have to fill in its capital gains section or submit any capital gains computations. So the way I would be inclined to deal with the situation is to sell your MESH shares as soon as you can, except don't sell more than £12,300 worth in this tax year or the relevant year's CGT allowance worth in any future tax year. I.e. basically absorb this messy CGT situation harmlessly in your CGT allowances as soon as it's possible to do so... Having said that, I'm not clear whether any opportunity to sell your MESH shares will arise - the MESH announcement might mean that MESH ends up winding itself up with a distribution of about 2p per share without ever being able to be sold on a market. If so, I believe that would basically be treated like a forced sale for about 2p per share for CGT - so it shouldn't be a CGT problem unless you have more than about 615,000 MESH shares. If the AAQA shares (which I assume the "AAA shares" in the MESH announcement) are distributed as a special dividend, I believe the tax treatment is that they count as dividend income equal to their value when distributed, and their base cost for CGT purposes is that same value. So I think the CGT position on them will be clear, and you should be able to avoid any CGT needing to be paid on them by selling them before their price rises enough to create a gain of more than £12,300. But Income Tax will probably have to be paid on the special dividend if it plus any other non-ISAed dividends you receive are more than your dividend allowance of £2,000. But I'm afraid you can't take any of what I say above as a definite answer - the documents I'm basing it on simply contain too many uncertainties for definite answers to exist at this stage (e.g. the "It is currently envisaged that, subject to further tax, legal and other considerations, ..." at the start of the sentence about the special dividend in the MESH announcement pretty clearly indicates that what is envisaged might change if those considerations don't work out well). Hopefully things will become more definite in the future. Gengulphus |
Posted at 23/9/2020 19:00 by gengulphus Does anyone else out there think CGT might be an easy target for the chancellor in his quest to fill the financial black hole caused by Covid?I don't. A target, quite possibly - but not an easy target... It's not easy because to a large extent, CGT is a voluntary tax - make changes designed to raise more CGT from investors, and investors are likely to respond by changing their strategies to be more likely to hold on to investments carrying a large unrealised capital gain rather than selling them and realising the gain... Doing that won't always be possible - sometimes people need the cash or the sale is compulsory for one reason or another - but I suspect there will be plenty who shift to a long-term buy & hold strategy if CGT becomes a serious burden... Also, the investors most likely to want not to do that are those who use shorter-term 'trading' strategies. But many of them will have bought their shares last year and so will be sitting on plenty of unrealised losses, not gains... He might remove the £12300 allowance, he might increase rates, he might do both. Removing the CGT allowance strikes me as very unlikely, at least as things stand. Why? Because then everybody who makes even a small capital gain becomes liable to account for CGT, either in a tax return or using some sort of adjustment to their tax code - but that adjustment is likely to change every year, in a hard-to-predict way, so would require some sort of annual return from the taxpayer anyway. Either way, there would be a big increase in the number of CGT returns HMRC would need to process, quite often for very small amounts of tax collected - so removing the CGT allowance entirely would probably not be cost-effective because of high collection costs relative to the amount of tax collected. And in addition, it would also have high political costs for the government - a CGT return is a distinctly user-unfriendly bit of bureaucracy and making large numbers of voters do them who hadn't had to before is likely to alienate a considerable number of voters! That said, I do think reducing the CGT allowance might be an option for the Chancellor. E.g. halving it rather than removing it entirely would affect far fewer taxpayers and would tend to be focussed on those with the largest capital gains among those who currently don't pay CGT, as well as producing a substantial increase in CGT collected from those who do currently pay CGT. That's more likely to be cost-effective from the Chancellor's point of view, both with regard to collection costs and political costs. And increasing CGT rates is also an option. But both reducing the allowance and increasing rates are going to be limited in terms of how much they're likely to raise, due to the 'largely a voluntary tax' nature of CGT mentioned above. Various parts of that assume that the structure of CGT and collecting it remain largely as they are at present, and there are possibilities available for more fundamental revisions of CGT that would change the argument. For instance, brokers cannot currently give definitive statements about what capital gains and losses have been realised by sales in a broker account they provide, because if the accountholder has other holdings of a share (either certificated or held with another broker), CGT rules require the capital gains and losses to be calculated from the merged transaction record for all the holdings, not separately for each holding and the results added together. If CGT were revised to work on a 'separately on each holding and add together' basis, it would become possible for brokers to produce definitive CGT statements, and therefore for the government to require them to do so. And if that were done, CGT returns by individual taxpayers could become just a matter of taking the figures from each broker they use and adding them up - much as they handle dividends at present. That would be likely to reduce the costs significantly, both collection costs and political costs. Another example of a fundamental revision that might be attractive to the Chancellor is finding some way to tax all gains, whether realised or not (though the attractiveness of that might not be all that high at present, given recent losses...). But both of these fundamental revisions have a whole mass of practical detail to be designed - for example, how are transfers from one broker to another handled? how are certificated holdings handled? what happens if someone has big unrealised gains on shares that for some reason they cannot sell? and many others... So while fundamental reform of the CGT system might be a way for the Chancellor to effectively target CGT as a source of significant extra tax revenues, I'm pretty sure it's not an easy way for him to do so. Gengulphus |
Posted at 31/8/2019 15:06 by gengulphus attrader,I have a question about CGT tax bracket. I have a company where I receive all my income in dividends and I pay dividend tax rate. For CGT, would I be classified as Basic Rate payer or High rate payer since I don’t receive any salaried income ? I cannot really answer that question as it stands, because nobody is really classified as either a basic-rate taxpayer or a higher-rate taxpayer for CGT purposes. Rather, their taxable capital gains are taxed by CGT at either the lower rates of CGT (10%, or 18% for residential property) or the higher rates (20%, or 28% for residential property), as follows: 1) Work out the total of their taxable capital gains realised during the year. 2) Deduct allowable capital losses according to the rules for doing so: first deduct ones realised during the same year as far as possible (i.e. deduct all those losses if they're less than the gains, or an amount equal to the gains if they're greater). Then if the remaining gains are above the CGT allowance and there are losses brought forward from earlier years, deduct them until either they run out or the gains are reduced to the CGT allowance. (Any losses left undeducted at the end of this are carried forward to the next year.) 3) The remaining gains are the net taxable capital gains. They are taxed as follows: * First, an amount up to the CGT allowance is not taxed. * Second, if there are gains left after the first step (i.e. the net taxable capital gains were more than the CGT allowance), an amount up to the amount of the Income Tax basic-rate band that was not used for income in the Income Tax calculation is taxed at the lower rates. * Finally, if there are still gains left after the first two steps, they are taxed at the higher rates. So the simple case (which I would guess doesn't apply to you) is that if you're a higher-rate taxpayer (or above) as seen by Income Tax, i.e. if your Income Tax calculation takes you into higher-rate tax, it will have used your entire basic-rate band, there will be nothing left for the second step to use, and so none of your net taxable capital gains will be taxed at the lower rates. I.e. up to the CGT allowance will be untaxed, and anything over that is taxed at the higher rates. But if you're a basic-rate taxpayer as seen by Income Tax, i.e. if your Income Tax calculation takes you into basic-rate tax but not into higher-rate tax, you probably didn't use all of your basic-rate band in that calculation (not quite certainly because your taxable income might be exactly equal to the higher-rate threshold, taking you all the way through the basic-rate band but not quite into higher-rate tax). Up to the CGT allowance of net taxable capital gains is untaxed and up to your amount of unused basic-rate band is taxed at the lower rates, and anything not covered by those is taxed at the higher rates. Or if you're a non-taxpayer as seen by Income Tax, i.e. if your Income Tax calculation has all of your taxable income covered by your personal allowance and any other proper Income Tax allowances you happen to have (though see below about some 'allowances' introduced in recent years) and so doesn't take you into basic-rate tax, the same applies except that all of your basic-rate band is available, not just some of it. Note that unused allowances do not count as unused basic-rate band. In particular, unused Income Tax personal allowance is completely wasted and doesn't affect the CGT calculation, just as unused CGT allowance is completely wasted and does not affect the Income Tax calculation. So basically, it's the gains that are classified as being covered by the CGT allowance, taxed at the lower rates or taxed at the higher rates, and you could well end up having some taxed at each rate. So asking how you are classified is somewhat off-target... (*) A couple of other things to say: first, the Income Tax calculation does of course look at all your taxable income - salary, interest and dividends (unless received in an ISA or other tax shelter), pensions, etc. So the amount of salaried income you receive is not enough on its own to determine how much basic-rate band your Income Tax calculation leaves unused - and the dividends you receive do count towards taxable income. "Dividend tax" is not a different thing from Income Tax - it is Income Tax, just paid at a lower rate than for most taxable income. And secondly, the so-called 'dividend allowance' is not what I called a "proper Income Tax allowance" above, in that it doesn't prevent the dividend income it covers being counted against the tax bands: it is just an especially low tax rate of 0% that applies to the dividend income it covers. I.e. 'dividend allowance' is a rather poor description of it, since it's applied in a rather different way to the personal allowance and that different way does affect how the basic-rate band is used. And other "allowances" introduced in fairly recent years may need careful looking at to see whether something similar applies to them... (*) Note that this is little different from the situation with Income Tax - higher-rate taxpayers generally have part of their income taxed at basic rate and the rest at higher rate. So it is customary to take "higher-rate taxpayer" to mean someone in that situation, and there is a convention that one describes a taxpayer according to the highest rate of Income Tax that they pay. One could have a similar convention with regard to CGT, so that one describes someone as a "higher-rate CGT payer", a "lower-rate CGT payer" or a "CGT nonpayer" according to whether they pay CGT at the higher rates (possibly accompanied by also paying it at the lower rates), and if not, whether they pay it at the lower rates. But just as what rate of Income Tax taxpayer one is normally regarded as is an output from the Income Tax calculation, not an input to it, what rate of CGT taxpayer one is by that definition is an output from the CGT calculation, not an input to it. One needs to know all the inputs to the CGT calculation to determine it, not just the facts you give! Gengulphus |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
Hot Features
Premium
