As I understand it, the least bad option is to hold shares in individual companies in a S&S ISA. But you are still liable for US capital gains tax.

The fact that Cash ISAs have been so successful (or too successful) suggests that offering a tax break is an effective way to get savings out of mattresses.

People don't like risk, but they dislike paying taxes even more.

If there were separate annual limits for cash ISAs and shares ISAs and the balances had to be kept separate, then the government would have a tool they use to encourage investment. Many people would try to max out both separate limits if they could.

I was under the impression that ISAs (both cash and shares) do not afford any protection at all from the IRS for UK-resident US citizens, as they are not mentioned in the US-UK tax treaty. Unlike pensions, which are protected by the treaty.

At least in the U.K. it’s more likely due to a very different employment law environment that compels treating workers better.

"Move slow and don't break anything": a good motto for govt, if not for the tech industry.

I would've thought that govt is the last place you would want to remove humans from the loop. If you get the wrong answer, you can't shop around for another provider with a better AI model.

www.theguardian.com/artanddesign...