NZ Herald 28 October 2006
Q&As: A reader finds a flaw in my “avoid the rear-view mirror” argument. Or does he?; Would NZ’s tax revenue actually increase if we all invested offshore?; Inland Revenue says it can’t fix everything at once.
Q&As: A reader finds a flaw in my “avoid the rear-view mirror” argument. Or does he?; Would NZ’s tax revenue actually increase if we all invested offshore?; Inland Revenue says it can’t fix everything at once.
Why some advisers don’t recommend index funds. A while back I wrote that I still think index funds are the best way for most people to invest in shares, even though they are scheduled to lose their tax advantage next year. That has prompted an intriguing question from a reader: “If index funds outperform all other forms of sharemarket investing over a long period of time (10 years?), then why do advisers recommend other forms? Is it simply due to their commission?”
Q&As: Is there an 18-year cycle for industrial and resource shares?; Why index fund of Aussie shares has done much worse than its index; Limited submissions on tax changes not good enough; NZ shares, already favoured, shouldn’t get still more favourable tax treatment.
Q&As: Why I won’t do research on an Aussie resource index fund; Too little time to study the new tax plans for international share investments.
Moving money across the globe is a risky tactic. The situation of a reader may not seem relevant to many others. But there are lessons here for practically everyone.
Q&As: Should you portfolio be regularly serviced? And how do you calculate the return on it?; How to work out which term deposit is better; What’s in a finance company name?