Much of the financial industry, namely banks, break down their clientele into segments, according to the level of wealth of the customer/target. The more money you have deposited with them, determines the level of attention and service you get. Retail customers get 30minute queues or the ATM. Affluent customers get a 15minute queue, a chair to sit down in and a coffee plus a RM instead of a teller. High Net worth customers get a private banker and latte in a meeting room.
Well segmentation is taking a turn for the worse. Her Majesty's finest are now devoting manpower to serve, more correctly audit and hunt, according to your wealth: http://www.ifcreview.com/viewnews.aspx?articleId=3714
Eat the Rich
Thursday, November 3, 2011
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
Here Today, Gone Tomorrow
In case you missed it yesterday:
http://www.mas.gov.sg/news_room/statements/2011/Keynote_Speech_By_Mr_Ng_Nam_Sin_AMD_MAS_STEP_Asia_Conference.html
One must applaud Mr Ng and the MAS, as his speech was well prepared with just a right amount of sprinkling of relevant references to Cap-Gemini, the "Puppet Masters" Report, etc..
Of course, he reiterated the bomb that dropped last week by Mr Ng's boss Ravi Menon, that: Singapore plans to make criminal the laundering of proceeds from tax offences.
Will take 4 more months or so before there's even going to draft legislation.
Plenty of time, if you know what I mean
http://www.mas.gov.sg/news_room/statements/2011/Keynote_Speech_By_Mr_Ng_Nam_Sin_AMD_MAS_STEP_Asia_Conference.html
One must applaud Mr Ng and the MAS, as his speech was well prepared with just a right amount of sprinkling of relevant references to Cap-Gemini, the "Puppet Masters" Report, etc..
Of course, he reiterated the bomb that dropped last week by Mr Ng's boss Ravi Menon, that: Singapore plans to make criminal the laundering of proceeds from tax offences.
Will take 4 more months or so before there's even going to draft legislation.
Plenty of time, if you know what I mean
Saturday, October 29, 2011
What's in a Number?
A unusual piece of information from CS Trust in Hong Kong. Check out this job advertisement below and Role Summary item#3: review exactly 89 trusts in 1st year? Works out to be less than 2 per week!
Not only does CS Trust have no profitability worries (given their pricing or lack thereof) but it seems they don't need to worry about productivity either. Hope it's not too late to apply!
Trust and Estate Advisory - Director - Private Banking - Hong Kong
ROLE SUMMARY:
1. Working closely CST trust administration centers and conduct annual reviews for all existing trust clients as well as any new clients booked by TE&A.
2. Working closely with TE&A in Location Hong Kong in all matters relating to existing trust clients.
3. To conduct 89 trust reviews for the first year, prioritized in accordance with Invoiced Turnover, Value of CS Bankable Assets, and Value of 3rd Party Bankable Assets. Another 10 client reviews to be selected by TRM and RM together.
4. Ensure that the existing structure of each trust complies with the latest CST Directives and to follow up on any outstanding matters.
5. Identify potential risks in existing structure of each trust and work closely with CST LCD and Solution Structuring to mitigate those risks.
6. Identify potential business opportunities from the existing book of business, e.g. new trust business, NNA potential, etc.
TO QUALIFY, YOU MUST POSSESS:
•Bachelor's degree in Finance or related field required. Advanced degree in Finance, Law, or industry education desired.
•A minimum of 5 years of Trust and / or Estate Advisory and Management experience.
•Strong knowledge and proven technical proficiency in the Investment, Legal, and Tax issues relative to Trust and / or Estate Management and Administration.
•Proven strong communication skills are required, such to interact effectively with current and potential clients and / or their attorneys.
ORGANIZATIONAL MARKETING STATEMENT
As one of the world's leading financial services group, Credit Suisse provides its clients with investment banking, private banking and asset management services worldwide. Founded in 1856, Credit Suisse has a long tradition of meeting the complex financial needs of a wide range of clients, offering advisory services, comprehensive solutions and innovative products to companies, institutional clients and high-net-worth private clients globally. The Credit Suisse Group is active in over 50 countries and employs approximately 40,000 people. Further information can be found at www.credit-suisse.com.
Cultural diversity is essential to our success. As such, we employ people from more than 100 countries. Credit Suisse empowers employees to work openly and respectfully with each other and with clients, ultimately striving to deliver superior results while offering initiatives and programs to assist employees achieve a healthy work-life balance.
Right place, perfect opportunity
www.credit-suisse.com/careers
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
Credit Suisse is an Equal Opportunity Employer and does not discriminate in its employment decisions on the basis of any protected category.
To the extent permitted or required by applicable law, a candidate who is offered employment will be subject to a criminal record check and other background checks before the appointment is confirmed.
Not only does CS Trust have no profitability worries (given their pricing or lack thereof) but it seems they don't need to worry about productivity either. Hope it's not too late to apply!
Trust and Estate Advisory - Director - Private Banking - Hong Kong
ROLE SUMMARY:
1. Working closely CST trust administration centers and conduct annual reviews for all existing trust clients as well as any new clients booked by TE&A.
2. Working closely with TE&A in Location Hong Kong in all matters relating to existing trust clients.
3. To conduct 89 trust reviews for the first year, prioritized in accordance with Invoiced Turnover, Value of CS Bankable Assets, and Value of 3rd Party Bankable Assets. Another 10 client reviews to be selected by TRM and RM together.
4. Ensure that the existing structure of each trust complies with the latest CST Directives and to follow up on any outstanding matters.
5. Identify potential risks in existing structure of each trust and work closely with CST LCD and Solution Structuring to mitigate those risks.
6. Identify potential business opportunities from the existing book of business, e.g. new trust business, NNA potential, etc.
TO QUALIFY, YOU MUST POSSESS:
•Bachelor's degree in Finance or related field required. Advanced degree in Finance, Law, or industry education desired.
•A minimum of 5 years of Trust and / or Estate Advisory and Management experience.
•Strong knowledge and proven technical proficiency in the Investment, Legal, and Tax issues relative to Trust and / or Estate Management and Administration.
•Proven strong communication skills are required, such to interact effectively with current and potential clients and / or their attorneys.
ORGANIZATIONAL MARKETING STATEMENT
As one of the world's leading financial services group, Credit Suisse provides its clients with investment banking, private banking and asset management services worldwide. Founded in 1856, Credit Suisse has a long tradition of meeting the complex financial needs of a wide range of clients, offering advisory services, comprehensive solutions and innovative products to companies, institutional clients and high-net-worth private clients globally. The Credit Suisse Group is active in over 50 countries and employs approximately 40,000 people. Further information can be found at www.credit-suisse.com.
Cultural diversity is essential to our success. As such, we employ people from more than 100 countries. Credit Suisse empowers employees to work openly and respectfully with each other and with clients, ultimately striving to deliver superior results while offering initiatives and programs to assist employees achieve a healthy work-life balance.
Right place, perfect opportunity
www.credit-suisse.com/careers
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
Credit Suisse is an Equal Opportunity Employer and does not discriminate in its employment decisions on the basis of any protected category.
To the extent permitted or required by applicable law, a candidate who is offered employment will be subject to a criminal record check and other background checks before the appointment is confirmed.
Thursday, October 27, 2011
SFO MFO BFO UFOs? GTFOh!
Anyone attend the FO seminars 5 years ago? Anyone know what a FO was 10 years ago?
Well with the tidal surge in Asian wealth comes the upswell in Asian wealth management. And since the private banks have transformed themselves into product pushers, the void in service has been taken up by the Family Offices or FO's. And in the mish mash of every player from banks to brokerage houses saying they offer family office services, it's a crap shoot out there.
What does this have to do with us trustees? Well like it or not, FO's will play a part, perhaps an instrumental part, in driving where the money will be parked. They will influence whether a family (usually a UHNW family) uses a trust. They will help select advisors and trustees. How much to put in the trust. And where the trustees should invest with the money the family has put into the trust. In other words, they will be either your best friend or worst enemy.
You better warm up to the idea or get left behind. Richard Straus, Asia-Pacific head of global family office and institutions at Citigroup's private-banking unit said Richard Straus, Asia-Pacific head of global family office and institutions at Citigroup's private-banking unit said within the next seven to ten years, it is very likely that the number of family office will increase to 1,500, triple the present number. The reason for this is the growing number of millionaires in the region. [http://www.banking-business-review.com/news/family-offices-in-asia-to-triple-says-citigroup-241011]
Our renaisaance man: Eli Lenyoun is a board member of the Society of Family Offices, largely a Singapore based resource centre: http://sfoasia.org/index.html. I direct you to the list of service providers: http://sfoasia.org/Resources-directory.html [looks like a "pay to stay" advertising arrangement] but there 35 regional trust companies on that list. [Take a look at the so-called "Wealth Structuring Solutions companies. I remember a time when they were called insurance brokers]
Well with the tidal surge in Asian wealth comes the upswell in Asian wealth management. And since the private banks have transformed themselves into product pushers, the void in service has been taken up by the Family Offices or FO's. And in the mish mash of every player from banks to brokerage houses saying they offer family office services, it's a crap shoot out there.
What does this have to do with us trustees? Well like it or not, FO's will play a part, perhaps an instrumental part, in driving where the money will be parked. They will influence whether a family (usually a UHNW family) uses a trust. They will help select advisors and trustees. How much to put in the trust. And where the trustees should invest with the money the family has put into the trust. In other words, they will be either your best friend or worst enemy.
You better warm up to the idea or get left behind. Richard Straus, Asia-Pacific head of global family office and institutions at Citigroup's private-banking unit said Richard Straus, Asia-Pacific head of global family office and institutions at Citigroup's private-banking unit said within the next seven to ten years, it is very likely that the number of family office will increase to 1,500, triple the present number. The reason for this is the growing number of millionaires in the region. [http://www.banking-business-review.com/news/family-offices-in-asia-to-triple-says-citigroup-241011]
Our renaisaance man: Eli Lenyoun is a board member of the Society of Family Offices, largely a Singapore based resource centre: http://sfoasia.org/index.html. I direct you to the list of service providers: http://sfoasia.org/Resources-directory.html [looks like a "pay to stay" advertising arrangement] but there 35 regional trust companies on that list. [Take a look at the so-called "Wealth Structuring Solutions companies. I remember a time when they were called insurance brokers]
STEP Asia Conference 2011
SOLD OUT. Not surprising given that Singapore is still hot as far as offshore centers go (and it doeasn't hurt that the government subsidizes local participants so big players like the big banks can send 10 people for less than it would cost to send 2).
Looks to be an another mess since the venue was cramped before when it wasn't sold out.
Looks to be an another mess since the venue was cramped before when it wasn't sold out.
Living in the Past
As trustees, we are not only haunted by the things we do today, but also the things we and our predecessors did in the past. Now without details, this case may be a non-starter, but the summons', writs and general headaches of defending a suit is quite disruptive for any business, unless you're the litigators:
S 650/2011 (SUM 4502/2011)
KUNTJORO WIBAWA @ WONG KIN TJONG
(TOMMY CHOO MARK GO & PARTNERS)
(LING LEONG HUI)
V.
HARIANTY WIBAWA (WIDOW) & ORS
(RAJAH & TANN LLP)
(K MURALIDHARAN PILLAI)
NATURE: FOR INTERIM INJUNCTION
http://www.singaporelawwatch.sg/remweb/legal/ln2/rss/legalnews/73772.html?utm_source=web%20subscription&utm_medium=web&title=Indonesian%20man%20sues%20mother%2C%20five%20siblings%20to%20recover%20share%20of%20father's%20S%2457-million%20estate
A interesting case of cross-border heirship planning spanning Indonesia, Singapore and Jersey that started in 2003 by Peter Finch when he was at BNP. Ol' Peter (he of Singtrust and Singapore Trustees Association fame) alledgely smoothed talked a lady into creating a Jersey trust that to house the partiarch's money and apparently screwed the son of his "rightful" inheritance at the same time. Hence, he's suing BNP Paribas.
Welcome Mr Kenyon. Thank goodness he should be no stranger to lawsuits coming from the trust litigation capital, Jersey.
S 650/2011 (SUM 4502/2011)
KUNTJORO WIBAWA @ WONG KIN TJONG
(TOMMY CHOO MARK GO & PARTNERS)
(LING LEONG HUI)
V.
HARIANTY WIBAWA (WIDOW) & ORS
(RAJAH & TANN LLP)
(K MURALIDHARAN PILLAI)
NATURE: FOR INTERIM INJUNCTION
http://www.singaporelawwatch.sg/remweb/legal/ln2/rss/legalnews/73772.html?utm_source=web%20subscription&utm_medium=web&title=Indonesian%20man%20sues%20mother%2C%20five%20siblings%20to%20recover%20share%20of%20father's%20S%2457-million%20estate
A interesting case of cross-border heirship planning spanning Indonesia, Singapore and Jersey that started in 2003 by Peter Finch when he was at BNP. Ol' Peter (he of Singtrust and Singapore Trustees Association fame) alledgely smoothed talked a lady into creating a Jersey trust that to house the partiarch's money and apparently screwed the son of his "rightful" inheritance at the same time. Hence, he's suing BNP Paribas.
Welcome Mr Kenyon. Thank goodness he should be no stranger to lawsuits coming from the trust litigation capital, Jersey.
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
United We Stand
Take a look at the survey raised by STEP to its Asian members. Members were asked to choose to a degree how much agreed or disagreed (or neutral) to the statements below - typical five-level Likert item. The results will supposedly be turned into a report so people who make big decisions can make well, big decisions.
So let's rig the results, shall we? After all, we all want to keep our jobs and ensure the money faucet doesn't turn off right?
1. Which branch of STEP are you currently a member of?
2. Hong Kong and Singapore will continue to take divergent paths in wealth planning
3. Regulatory initiatives to increase tax compliance in Asia will increase
4. The regulatory regimes of Hong Kong and Singapore will converge
5. China is several decades away from making an impact on the wealth planning industry
6. Tax is not the major driver of demand for trust structures in Asia
7. Clients' awareness of the need for tax compliance is growing
8. Asian clients will remain unique in seeking very strong control over their assets
9. Asian clients will remain very sensitive to fees
10. Banks will continue to have major competitive advantages in Asian wealth planning
11. The lack of fiduciary and legal talent is a major constraint on the future growth of the industry
12. The perception of Asia as a low cost financial centre is inaccurate
13. New wealth planning business in Asia will continue to be private banker driven
14. Banks will continue to be the primary providers of investment services
15. Independent asset management boutiques will increase their share of the investment services market
16. Both Hong Kong and Singapore will remain primarily offshore focussed in wealth planning
17. Singapore will be the dominant centre for Private Client Trust Services in Asia
18. Private wealth management in Hong Kong will remain focussed on corporate structures
19. Trusts in Asia will continue to be used primarily for asset protection purposes
20. The widespread use of private trust companies is consistent with a health wealth planning industry
So let's rig the results, shall we? After all, we all want to keep our jobs and ensure the money faucet doesn't turn off right?
1. Which branch of STEP are you currently a member of?
2. Hong Kong and Singapore will continue to take divergent paths in wealth planning
3. Regulatory initiatives to increase tax compliance in Asia will increase
4. The regulatory regimes of Hong Kong and Singapore will converge
5. China is several decades away from making an impact on the wealth planning industry
6. Tax is not the major driver of demand for trust structures in Asia
7. Clients' awareness of the need for tax compliance is growing
8. Asian clients will remain unique in seeking very strong control over their assets
9. Asian clients will remain very sensitive to fees
10. Banks will continue to have major competitive advantages in Asian wealth planning
11. The lack of fiduciary and legal talent is a major constraint on the future growth of the industry
12. The perception of Asia as a low cost financial centre is inaccurate
13. New wealth planning business in Asia will continue to be private banker driven
14. Banks will continue to be the primary providers of investment services
15. Independent asset management boutiques will increase their share of the investment services market
16. Both Hong Kong and Singapore will remain primarily offshore focussed in wealth planning
17. Singapore will be the dominant centre for Private Client Trust Services in Asia
18. Private wealth management in Hong Kong will remain focussed on corporate structures
19. Trusts in Asia will continue to be used primarily for asset protection purposes
20. The widespread use of private trust companies is consistent with a health wealth planning industry
Sunday, September 4, 2011
I Read The News Today….Oh Boy
What to make of all the news these days?
You can’t run, but you can continue to hide. Germany and Switzerland sign a tax deal whereby German tax cheats who stashed undeclared money away in Swiss banks can pay a one-time fine of some 19-34% on the assets hidden and keep their identity a secret for an ongoing 26% withholding fee. Hmmmm, did anyone bother to read the EUSD beforehand? The deal cost the Swiss banks some $2B CHF but now they’ve got happy anonymous customers again. Probably take them 3 years to recoup, less if the markets rebound. I think they've also agreed not to buy CDs anymore: http://trustprofessioninasia.blogspot.com/2011/04/new-performance-benchmarks-for-roi-on.html
http://www.sif.admin.ch/00488/index.html?lang=en&msg-id=40533
The UK made a similar deal a few days later. But they only get $500M CHF lump sum from the banks but a slightly higher entry fee of 27-48% with the same 19-34% annual charge from the dodgy Brits. And for all those working in banks, please note that: “The United Kingdom further states that the criminal prosecution of bank employees due to participation in tax offences is highly unlikely.” In other words, carry on lads.
http://www.sif.admin.ch/00488/index.html?lang=en&msg-id=40731
Vive la différence, France, declined to enter such a deal preferring to tackle tax evasion the old way, whereas the others “not only respects the protection of bank clients' privacy, but also ensures the implementation of legitimate tax claims”. Of course who knows what the hell the new French Wealth taxes, including a nice section on trusts (trusts in France?!), will ultimately look like? Time to kick out the French clients I guess.
Of course, just blacklist the Swiss like the Italians did.
For the adventurous, some will tell you that Singapore should be a destination for your black money. http://www.accountancyage.com/aa/news/2106406/swiss-banks-help-clients-singapore
Nothing new, been happening for years. Of course if anyone has ever bother to read Annex A [http://iras.gov.sg/pv_obj_cache/pv_obj_id_633E3BEAD35D7E54B6C4AACEDF6BD0869B6E0300/filename/Protocol%20amending%20Singapore-United%20Kingdom%20DTA%20(Ratified)(9Dec10).pdf ], of the Agreement between UK and Singapore, you’ll have noted that it is the “new” standards so I’m not sure why author Jaimie Kaffesh says: “ Singapore, which has a secretive banking system, with no information sharing agreements with western states”. Must be a Yank.
[Update: on the 6th of Sept, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) decided to make a statement and reminded the banks to be more "alert" to agreements between countries to resolve tax issues.
This is because such agreements between countries may create increased risk of illicit fund flows, said MAS.
The central bank, which issued guidelines to all financial institutions here to safeguard the integrity of the financial system, also wants them to undertake a more critical review of any asset transfers into Singapore from such countries.
In its guidelines for financial institutions to safeguard the integrity of Singapore's financial system published Tuesday**, the MAS said: "Financial institutions should carefully evaluate the risks and establish the bona fides of customers before accepting such assets. If they have reason to suspect that the assets are illegitimate, they should file Suspicious Transaction Reports and where appropriate, discontinue the business relationship."
Since the customer is already a customer of my financial institution's Swiss branch, there's no way they would have illegitimate assets or not be bona fides right? In other words, no problem here, "double confirm la".
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporebusinessnews/view/1151436/1/.html
**http://www.mas.gov.sg/legislation_guidelines/banks/guidelines/Guidelines_for_FIs_to_Safeguard_the_Integrity_of_Singapore_Financial_System.html ]
Speaking of the Yanks, FATCA!! (turning out to be a nasty 5-letter word). Another year to for all sides to figure out what the hell is this? How the hell are we to implement this? How the hell are we to enforce this? Perhaps this was more about job creation/retention rather than taxes.
I guess Credit Suisse will have a nice US $1B provision in the books for its alleged sins against the US: http://www.ifcreview.com/viewnews.aspx?articleId=3352
https://www.credit-suisse.com/news/en/media_release.jsp?ns=41815
Well there are about to be some 10,000 financial/banking job cuts around the world but Asia seems to buck the trend. UBS’ Asia CEO Kathryn Shih says it hired some 300 people in the past 2 months alone, whereas Credit Suisse says it let go some 20% of its WM business in India (ok that 20% equates to like 12 out 60 people). Weird isn’t that they’re not expanding headcount by 4000trillion percent in the same country touted to be the next economic engine of the world. Geez, won’t they be undermanned to handle the doubling of HNWIs that will happen by 2015 per a report by Julius Baer?
And a warm welcome to Singapore for Hilary May. Who? A transfer (or refugee? So hard to tell this days) from Jersey to head up RBC trust proposition in Asia it seems. Transnational trusts eh? http://www.rbcwminternational.com/pdf/newsletter/RBC-appointments.pdf
Unfortunately, this is not the Not the Nine O'Clock News.
You can’t run, but you can continue to hide. Germany and Switzerland sign a tax deal whereby German tax cheats who stashed undeclared money away in Swiss banks can pay a one-time fine of some 19-34% on the assets hidden and keep their identity a secret for an ongoing 26% withholding fee. Hmmmm, did anyone bother to read the EUSD beforehand? The deal cost the Swiss banks some $2B CHF but now they’ve got happy anonymous customers again. Probably take them 3 years to recoup, less if the markets rebound. I think they've also agreed not to buy CDs anymore: http://trustprofessioninasia.blogspot.com/2011/04/new-performance-benchmarks-for-roi-on.html
http://www.sif.admin.ch/00488/index.html?lang=en&msg-id=40533
The UK made a similar deal a few days later. But they only get $500M CHF lump sum from the banks but a slightly higher entry fee of 27-48% with the same 19-34% annual charge from the dodgy Brits. And for all those working in banks, please note that: “The United Kingdom further states that the criminal prosecution of bank employees due to participation in tax offences is highly unlikely.” In other words, carry on lads.
http://www.sif.admin.ch/00488/index.html?lang=en&msg-id=40731
Vive la différence, France, declined to enter such a deal preferring to tackle tax evasion the old way, whereas the others “not only respects the protection of bank clients' privacy, but also ensures the implementation of legitimate tax claims”. Of course who knows what the hell the new French Wealth taxes, including a nice section on trusts (trusts in France?!), will ultimately look like? Time to kick out the French clients I guess.
Of course, just blacklist the Swiss like the Italians did.
For the adventurous, some will tell you that Singapore should be a destination for your black money. http://www.accountancyage.com/aa/news/2106406/swiss-banks-help-clients-singapore
Nothing new, been happening for years. Of course if anyone has ever bother to read Annex A [http://iras.gov.sg/pv_obj_cache/pv_obj_id_633E3BEAD35D7E54B6C4AACEDF6BD0869B6E0300/filename/Protocol%20amending%20Singapore-United%20Kingdom%20DTA%20(Ratified)(9Dec10).pdf ], of the Agreement between UK and Singapore, you’ll have noted that it is the “new” standards so I’m not sure why author Jaimie Kaffesh says: “ Singapore, which has a secretive banking system, with no information sharing agreements with western states”. Must be a Yank.
[Update: on the 6th of Sept, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) decided to make a statement and reminded the banks to be more "alert" to agreements between countries to resolve tax issues.
This is because such agreements between countries may create increased risk of illicit fund flows, said MAS.
The central bank, which issued guidelines to all financial institutions here to safeguard the integrity of the financial system, also wants them to undertake a more critical review of any asset transfers into Singapore from such countries.
In its guidelines for financial institutions to safeguard the integrity of Singapore's financial system published Tuesday**, the MAS said: "Financial institutions should carefully evaluate the risks and establish the bona fides of customers before accepting such assets. If they have reason to suspect that the assets are illegitimate, they should file Suspicious Transaction Reports and where appropriate, discontinue the business relationship."
Since the customer is already a customer of my financial institution's Swiss branch, there's no way they would have illegitimate assets or not be bona fides right? In other words, no problem here, "double confirm la".
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporebusinessnews/view/1151436/1/.html
**http://www.mas.gov.sg/legislation_guidelines/banks/guidelines/Guidelines_for_FIs_to_Safeguard_the_Integrity_of_Singapore_Financial_System.html ]
Speaking of the Yanks, FATCA!! (turning out to be a nasty 5-letter word). Another year to for all sides to figure out what the hell is this? How the hell are we to implement this? How the hell are we to enforce this? Perhaps this was more about job creation/retention rather than taxes.
I guess Credit Suisse will have a nice US $1B provision in the books for its alleged sins against the US: http://www.ifcreview.com/viewnews.aspx?articleId=3352
https://www.credit-suisse.com/news/en/media_release.jsp?ns=41815
Well there are about to be some 10,000 financial/banking job cuts around the world but Asia seems to buck the trend. UBS’ Asia CEO Kathryn Shih says it hired some 300 people in the past 2 months alone, whereas Credit Suisse says it let go some 20% of its WM business in India (ok that 20% equates to like 12 out 60 people). Weird isn’t that they’re not expanding headcount by 4000trillion percent in the same country touted to be the next economic engine of the world. Geez, won’t they be undermanned to handle the doubling of HNWIs that will happen by 2015 per a report by Julius Baer?
And a warm welcome to Singapore for Hilary May. Who? A transfer (or refugee? So hard to tell this days) from Jersey to head up RBC trust proposition in Asia it seems. Transnational trusts eh? http://www.rbcwminternational.com/pdf/newsletter/RBC-appointments.pdf
Unfortunately, this is not the Not the Nine O'Clock News.
Tuesday, August 23, 2011
Give A Little Bit
A very nice read from the good folks at UBS and Insead Business school: http://www.ubs.com/1/ShowMedia/wealthmanagement/philanthropy_valuesbased_investments?contentId=194353&name=Insead_Report.pdf
"Today the private wealth industry in Asia-Pacific offers
philanthropy advisory and investment services to their clients.
There have been a number of big firms leading in this space
for a number of years and the result of that has been a more
professional engagement by HNWIs resulting in strategic
investments to developing world non-profits. In partnership
with philanthropy and development experts empanelled with
them (or staff recruited from the development sector), banks
and wealth management firms today provide professional
advice to clients resulting in sound grant making, establishing
philanthropy infrastructure (trusts and foundations) and educational
programs/peer learning opportunities that help them
share and learn about philanthropic initiatives and practices."
"Today the private wealth industry in Asia-Pacific offers
philanthropy advisory and investment services to their clients.
There have been a number of big firms leading in this space
for a number of years and the result of that has been a more
professional engagement by HNWIs resulting in strategic
investments to developing world non-profits. In partnership
with philanthropy and development experts empanelled with
them (or staff recruited from the development sector), banks
and wealth management firms today provide professional
advice to clients resulting in sound grant making, establishing
philanthropy infrastructure (trusts and foundations) and educational
programs/peer learning opportunities that help them
share and learn about philanthropic initiatives and practices."
Sunday, August 7, 2011
Mumble Jumbo in Taiwan
Most trust people in Asia are so entrenched in the life insurance business that we sometimes feel like we're insurance people more than trust people. Why is that?
Insurance is an important tool of wealth (and sometimes tax and estate) planning. The benefits of insurance for the client are well known. But do you know why we trust companies like them too? The liquidity from the retrocessions we get from the insurance companies and brokers makes all "wealth management" bosses very happy. The low risk and the revenue stream from life insurance products makes it a priority product for many of the trust companies. According to a confidential informant....one banking group trustee sells 10 times more insurance and/or insurance stand-by trusts than normal trusts. Strange isn't it? People are ready to pay up to and over 500bps on insurance but not remotely the same for a trust. Ever see a customer hangle over premiums? How do you think insurance groups like AIA got so "big to fail"?
Well the bubble is bursting, at least in Taiwan. http://www.iflr.com/Article/2863215/Home/Canges-to-insurance-law.html "....to deter unapproved offshore insurance policies by raising the punishment from administrative fines of between NT$900,000 ($31,200) and NT$4.5 million to imprisonment of up to 3 years or criminal fines between NT$3 million and NT$20 million, or both" Ouch!
While the offshore and onshore sales of unregulated products to onshore markets (essentially the illegal "cross-border" business) is what all parties of the game are good at, heck we've been doing for the last 40 years....the stakes are getting higher. If Taiwan actually is able to enforce a case or two then it becomes a bark with a bite and not just a bark.
So before you go back to Taipei with those no-name term sheets and generic product features and your James Bond kits think about how easy it is for your client to turn you in should he or she ever chose to. Just send them tickets and book them into your local 5-star hotel. Come on, you can afford it, remember the 3-yr trailer you get.
Insurance is an important tool of wealth (and sometimes tax and estate) planning. The benefits of insurance for the client are well known. But do you know why we trust companies like them too? The liquidity from the retrocessions we get from the insurance companies and brokers makes all "wealth management" bosses very happy. The low risk and the revenue stream from life insurance products makes it a priority product for many of the trust companies. According to a confidential informant....one banking group trustee sells 10 times more insurance and/or insurance stand-by trusts than normal trusts. Strange isn't it? People are ready to pay up to and over 500bps on insurance but not remotely the same for a trust. Ever see a customer hangle over premiums? How do you think insurance groups like AIA got so "big to fail"?
Well the bubble is bursting, at least in Taiwan. http://www.iflr.com/Article/2863215/Home/Canges-to-insurance-law.html "....to deter unapproved offshore insurance policies by raising the punishment from administrative fines of between NT$900,000 ($31,200) and NT$4.5 million to imprisonment of up to 3 years or criminal fines between NT$3 million and NT$20 million, or both" Ouch!
While the offshore and onshore sales of unregulated products to onshore markets (essentially the illegal "cross-border" business) is what all parties of the game are good at, heck we've been doing for the last 40 years....the stakes are getting higher. If Taiwan actually is able to enforce a case or two then it becomes a bark with a bite and not just a bark.
So before you go back to Taipei with those no-name term sheets and generic product features and your James Bond kits think about how easy it is for your client to turn you in should he or she ever chose to. Just send them tickets and book them into your local 5-star hotel. Come on, you can afford it, remember the 3-yr trailer you get.
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
Covet Thy Comrade's Assets
The trust industry is often broken into 2 major sectors: private and corporate. Private deals with mainly individuals and families, charities, etc.. Corporate is largely business oriented: REITs, securitization, custody, pensions, etc. While there are some blurring of lines, typically an organisation will operate them as 2 distinct businesses with their own staff and systems.
Regardless of which side of the family you are from, this headline should perk up your interests: "China’s trust sector amasses Rmb3.7 trillion in assets" http://www.asianinvestor.net/News/264714,china8217s-trust-sector-amasses-rmb37-trillion-in-assets.aspx
Now before you all jump for joy, PRC trust companies are not your typical western corporate trust company. Therefore, it is not a simple as setting up a Joint-Venture or getting a license and off-you-go. However, we all have the infrastructure and 70% of the know-how to capture a piece of that pie. If your strategy people aren't already working on a way for you to tap into this market, then fire them as well as the people who hired them.
The PRC trust business offers another route to get to the HNWI market as well as a place to park money and investments outside of the traditional banking system. And sooner-or-later, your existing clients will be asking you to park your trust funds into these PRC trust company offerings so you better understand the system.
Regardless of which side of the family you are from, this headline should perk up your interests: "China’s trust sector amasses Rmb3.7 trillion in assets" http://www.asianinvestor.net/News/264714,china8217s-trust-sector-amasses-rmb37-trillion-in-assets.aspx
Now before you all jump for joy, PRC trust companies are not your typical western corporate trust company. Therefore, it is not a simple as setting up a Joint-Venture or getting a license and off-you-go. However, we all have the infrastructure and 70% of the know-how to capture a piece of that pie. If your strategy people aren't already working on a way for you to tap into this market, then fire them as well as the people who hired them.
The PRC trust business offers another route to get to the HNWI market as well as a place to park money and investments outside of the traditional banking system. And sooner-or-later, your existing clients will be asking you to park your trust funds into these PRC trust company offerings so you better understand the system.
Sunday, July 24, 2011
The Sidekick
Not Asian news but trust related. A comrade is in trouble. Josef Dörig was part of the Credit Suisse Group at one time. He was founder of Dörig Partner AG, a Zurich trust company and serves on the board of a couple of Swiss companies so he's not a total nobody. The company website is now conveniently offline. Try Moneyhouse.
Apparently Josef's relationship with CS was intimate enough for him to be indicted in connection to the CS-US tax evasion war. CS already has about 6 or 7 staff under indictment so that is likely to end up where the UBS-US tax war ended. Book that provision now.
So another stark reminder for all you independents, being a "preferred provider" of trust and related services to the banks is not all that it is cracked up to be. Just like the old movie/book cliché, these days, the sidekick can and will be killed. You spend precious time and resources buddying up to the banks, only to get the "high risk" stuff they can't or won't do in-house. The old joke for bank trustees has been: "you send the shit out-house". You get peanuts in comparison to their fees. Perhaps time to re-think the business model?
Apparently Josef's relationship with CS was intimate enough for him to be indicted in connection to the CS-US tax evasion war. CS already has about 6 or 7 staff under indictment so that is likely to end up where the UBS-US tax war ended. Book that provision now.
So another stark reminder for all you independents, being a "preferred provider" of trust and related services to the banks is not all that it is cracked up to be. Just like the old movie/book cliché, these days, the sidekick can and will be killed. You spend precious time and resources buddying up to the banks, only to get the "high risk" stuff they can't or won't do in-house. The old joke for bank trustees has been: "you send the shit out-house". You get peanuts in comparison to their fees. Perhaps time to re-think the business model?
Monday, June 27, 2011
Wire-to-Wire
Just came over the wire (probably fiber optic now but...) India and Singapore have revised their double tax treaty:
http://www.thehindu.com/business/Economy/article2132285.ece
The Protocol to be ratified (hence not effective today): http://www.iras.gov.sg/pv_obj_cache/pv_obj_id_FFCB86402606AD1BB409F254BEDF0EBCE7D40000/filename/Protocol%20amending%20Singapore-India%20DTA%20(Not%20in%20force)(24%20June%202011).pdf
This Protocol replaces Article 28 on Exchange of Information of the existing DTAA with the current OECD-model wording (paragraphs 4 & 5 to be more exact). Read carefully: “In no case shall the provisions of paragraph 3 be construed to permit a Contracting State to decline to supply information solely because the information is held by a bank, other financial institution, nominee or person acting in an agency or a fiduciary capacity or because it relates to ownership interests in a person.”
When researching this, I used the Google search engine. Now I noticed something unusual about the search results. Great Googly-Moogly, virtually all the hits were from India or Indian news/business websites. You would be hard pressed to find this news on Singapore news feeds. Hmmmmmm
Do you own search. Draw your own conclusions.
Sorry gotta run, many wire transfer forms to fill out.
http://www.thehindu.com/business/Economy/article2132285.ece
The Protocol to be ratified (hence not effective today): http://www.iras.gov.sg/pv_obj_cache/pv_obj_id_FFCB86402606AD1BB409F254BEDF0EBCE7D40000/filename/Protocol%20amending%20Singapore-India%20DTA%20(Not%20in%20force)(24%20June%202011).pdf
This Protocol replaces Article 28 on Exchange of Information of the existing DTAA with the current OECD-model wording (paragraphs 4 & 5 to be more exact). Read carefully: “In no case shall the provisions of paragraph 3 be construed to permit a Contracting State to decline to supply information solely because the information is held by a bank, other financial institution, nominee or person acting in an agency or a fiduciary capacity or because it relates to ownership interests in a person.”
When researching this, I used the Google search engine. Now I noticed something unusual about the search results. Great Googly-Moogly, virtually all the hits were from India or Indian news/business websites. You would be hard pressed to find this news on Singapore news feeds. Hmmmmmm
Do you own search. Draw your own conclusions.
Sorry gotta run, many wire transfer forms to fill out.
Monday, June 13, 2011
EX-rated Stuff
For us trustees, we like exculpatory clauses as much as anyone else and God knows we need them, here is an interesting "real" world application. It's not trust-related but I'm sure we'll all be thinking of what this judgment may mean to the way we do business.
For all you bank in-house counsels out there, this is a must read – time to secure your job for the next 12-months by doing a comprehensive review of account opening documentation and procedures.
For all you that book business into banks (like us trustees), this is also a must read – who knows, you may qualify to get back some of those trading losses or “exorbitant fees” yourself. Hire a bank account statement reader ASAP!
For you bank OPs guys, here comes another nightmare project.
Steven Chong, nice one!
EFG, back to the drawing board. In hindsight, they should have paid the measly restitution, got a gag and avoided looking "unconscionable" among other things.
Tony? Well’s he’s teaching at Nanyang Poly I understand
MAS? Hello? You there?
Jiang Ou v EFG Bank AG [2011] SGHC 149
http://www.singaporelawwatch.sg/remweb/legal/ln2/rss/judgment/12554.html?utm_source=web%20subscription&utm_medium=web&title=Jiang%20Ou%20v%20EFG%20Bank%20AG %5B2011%5D%20SGHC%20149
At the heart of the matter were some 160 transactions EFG did on the non-discretionary account of a customer. EFG practised their “craft” and managed to successfully lose some US$2.4M of the customer’s money (some 45% of the total value) as well earn some US$1M in transactional fees. Turns out the transactions weren’t authorised, therefore EFG tried to rely on shifting the burden to the customer, under those nasty "conclusive evidence" provisions that say if you didn’t object to your bank statements and do so in a timely manner then all’s well and you can’t sue us, nah-na-na-nah.
For all you bank in-house counsels out there, this is a must read – time to secure your job for the next 12-months by doing a comprehensive review of account opening documentation and procedures.
For all you that book business into banks (like us trustees), this is also a must read – who knows, you may qualify to get back some of those trading losses or “exorbitant fees” yourself. Hire a bank account statement reader ASAP!
For you bank OPs guys, here comes another nightmare project.
Steven Chong, nice one!
EFG, back to the drawing board. In hindsight, they should have paid the measly restitution, got a gag and avoided looking "unconscionable" among other things.
Tony? Well’s he’s teaching at Nanyang Poly I understand
MAS? Hello? You there?
Jiang Ou v EFG Bank AG [2011] SGHC 149
http://www.singaporelawwatch.sg/remweb/legal/ln2/rss/judgment/12554.html?utm_source=web%20subscription&utm_medium=web&title=Jiang%20Ou%20v%20EFG%20Bank%20AG %5B2011%5D%20SGHC%20149
At the heart of the matter were some 160 transactions EFG did on the non-discretionary account of a customer. EFG practised their “craft” and managed to successfully lose some US$2.4M of the customer’s money (some 45% of the total value) as well earn some US$1M in transactional fees. Turns out the transactions weren’t authorised, therefore EFG tried to rely on shifting the burden to the customer, under those nasty "conclusive evidence" provisions that say if you didn’t object to your bank statements and do so in a timely manner then all’s well and you can’t sue us, nah-na-na-nah.
Sunday, June 5, 2011
Welcome to The Jungle
Collas Crill (who?) - a small 15-partner Guernsey law firm is about to open an office in Singapore. (yawn!) http://www.law.com/jsp/tal/PubArticleAL.jsp?id=1202495434828&Channel_Islands_Firm_to_Launch_in_Singapore&slreturn=1&hbxlogin=1
Now I would think with the opening of the listing rules for Guernsey companies on the HK Stock Exchange would mean more legal work in HK than Singapore but what do I know?
The point I picked up on is that CC partnership owns a Guernsey trust company, aptly named "Guernsey Trust Company"! Now you know where (else) to go to should you need a Guernsey trust.
The Channel Islands have never been a top trust destination for Asian clients. When given a choice, virtually no one wants a CI administered trust. The only people that promote Guernsey or Jersey trusts are the banks that have a trust center there. With the exodus of trust companies/business from the CI, it seems no one else is either.
Now I would think with the opening of the listing rules for Guernsey companies on the HK Stock Exchange would mean more legal work in HK than Singapore but what do I know?
The point I picked up on is that CC partnership owns a Guernsey trust company, aptly named "Guernsey Trust Company"! Now you know where (else) to go to should you need a Guernsey trust.
The Channel Islands have never been a top trust destination for Asian clients. When given a choice, virtually no one wants a CI administered trust. The only people that promote Guernsey or Jersey trusts are the banks that have a trust center there. With the exodus of trust companies/business from the CI, it seems no one else is either.
What’s Mine is Mine, What’s Yours is Also Mine
If there’s anything as surreal and contemptuous or disrespectful of the “law” it’s taxes. Coming a close second is matrimonial or family law, actually the divorce courts to be more correct. Consider the recent UK case of Whaley v Whaley [2011] EWCA Civ 617. Husband who was not the settlor nor beneficiary of a trust had the courts rule that the trust assets were part of the matrimonial assets and therefore ex-wife was going to get her “fair” share (even though she was not a beneficiary herself). It would appear that the courts considered the Trustees were accustomed to giving/acting according to whatever the Husband wanted.
Just goes to show, leave us trustees alone, let us make the decisions or else your continued meddling and “control” will leave your asset protection plans to waste.
But if you do it "right", then trusts can and do work. In particular, note the Judges comment in [9] of AQT v AQU [2011] SGHC 138: http://www.singaporelawwatch.sg/remweb/legal/ln2/rss/judgment/12520.html?utm_source=web%20subscription&utm_medium=web&title=AQT%20v%20AQU %5B2011%5D%20SGHC%20138
http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed83679
Court of Appeal regards ‘dynastic trusts’ as matrimonial property
Husband’s appeal dismissed in Whaley v Whaley
The Court of Appeal has dismissed the appeal of Athelstan Whaley the owner of a Spanish hotel chain, who had sought to overturn Baron J's award of a lump sum of £3m to his former wife, Belinda Whaley. For the full judgment see Whaley v Whaley [2011] EWCA Civ 617.
The Whaleys married in 1987 after two years of cohabitation and separated in 2008. The husband, aged 60, and wife, aged 47, have four children aged from 12 to 20. The parties lived between England and Spain.
The dispute between the couple focused largely upon the status of two dynastic trusts. The husband argued that these should be regarded as non-matrimonial property. On that basis, he claimed that the matrimonial assets amounted to just over £3 million net after legal costs whereas the wife puts the assets at over £11 million net after legal costs.
Baron J had found that there was just over £10 million available to the parties of which nearly £7 million was made up of assets in the two trusts. The judge accepted the wife's case that the trust assets should be seen as resources likely to be available to the husband. The assets which the parties had outside of the trusts had a value of nearly £4 million net of debts. In summary, the judge ordered the husband to pay the wife a lump sum of nearly £3 million by 10 months after the date of the order and in the interim to the wife periodical payments at £40,000 per annum. Provision was also made for school and college fees etc. The judge calculated that the order would leave the wife with some 36% of the net assets, on top of which her debts net of bank balances in the sum of £331,000 would have to be met for her. The judge's departure from equality took account of the husband's pre-marital wealth and wealth supplied by his parent's via the trust funds.
In the Court of Appeal the husband argued, inter alia, that Baron J's order could not be satisfied without his having recourse to trust assets in order to meet his most basic needs, such as housing. Leading and junior counsel for the husband sought to persuade the Court of Appeal that the judge's order put "improper pressure" on the trustees of the trust which would require them, against their stated intentions and ignoring their duties to other beneficiaries, to realise assets at a time that would be unpropitious commercially in order to make a payment to the wife, who was not a beneficiary of the trust, in a way that would represent a departure from the previous history of dealings between the trust and the husband, and in disregard of the fact that the husband was not himself the settlor of the trust. It was also argued by the husband that it was wrong of the judge to take any account of a golf course (valued at £2.38 million) because it was held within a trust of which the husband was not a beneficiary.
The Court of Appeal rejected the husband's arguments and stated that the judge had asked herself the proper questions and arrived at the unassailable answer that the trustees were likely to make available such resources as the husband requests. Given that the husband had access to the trust funds, the arguments that there had not been a fair division of the "copper-bottomed" assets and illiquid assets also failed.
Just goes to show, leave us trustees alone, let us make the decisions or else your continued meddling and “control” will leave your asset protection plans to waste.
But if you do it "right", then trusts can and do work. In particular, note the Judges comment in [9] of AQT v AQU [2011] SGHC 138: http://www.singaporelawwatch.sg/remweb/legal/ln2/rss/judgment/12520.html?utm_source=web%20subscription&utm_medium=web&title=AQT%20v%20AQU %5B2011%5D%20SGHC%20138
http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed83679
Court of Appeal regards ‘dynastic trusts’ as matrimonial property
Husband’s appeal dismissed in Whaley v Whaley
The Court of Appeal has dismissed the appeal of Athelstan Whaley the owner of a Spanish hotel chain, who had sought to overturn Baron J's award of a lump sum of £3m to his former wife, Belinda Whaley. For the full judgment see Whaley v Whaley [2011] EWCA Civ 617.
The Whaleys married in 1987 after two years of cohabitation and separated in 2008. The husband, aged 60, and wife, aged 47, have four children aged from 12 to 20. The parties lived between England and Spain.
The dispute between the couple focused largely upon the status of two dynastic trusts. The husband argued that these should be regarded as non-matrimonial property. On that basis, he claimed that the matrimonial assets amounted to just over £3 million net after legal costs whereas the wife puts the assets at over £11 million net after legal costs.
Baron J had found that there was just over £10 million available to the parties of which nearly £7 million was made up of assets in the two trusts. The judge accepted the wife's case that the trust assets should be seen as resources likely to be available to the husband. The assets which the parties had outside of the trusts had a value of nearly £4 million net of debts. In summary, the judge ordered the husband to pay the wife a lump sum of nearly £3 million by 10 months after the date of the order and in the interim to the wife periodical payments at £40,000 per annum. Provision was also made for school and college fees etc. The judge calculated that the order would leave the wife with some 36% of the net assets, on top of which her debts net of bank balances in the sum of £331,000 would have to be met for her. The judge's departure from equality took account of the husband's pre-marital wealth and wealth supplied by his parent's via the trust funds.
In the Court of Appeal the husband argued, inter alia, that Baron J's order could not be satisfied without his having recourse to trust assets in order to meet his most basic needs, such as housing. Leading and junior counsel for the husband sought to persuade the Court of Appeal that the judge's order put "improper pressure" on the trustees of the trust which would require them, against their stated intentions and ignoring their duties to other beneficiaries, to realise assets at a time that would be unpropitious commercially in order to make a payment to the wife, who was not a beneficiary of the trust, in a way that would represent a departure from the previous history of dealings between the trust and the husband, and in disregard of the fact that the husband was not himself the settlor of the trust. It was also argued by the husband that it was wrong of the judge to take any account of a golf course (valued at £2.38 million) because it was held within a trust of which the husband was not a beneficiary.
The Court of Appeal rejected the husband's arguments and stated that the judge had asked herself the proper questions and arrived at the unassailable answer that the trustees were likely to make available such resources as the husband requests. Given that the husband had access to the trust funds, the arguments that there had not been a fair division of the "copper-bottomed" assets and illiquid assets also failed.
Sunday, April 17, 2011
New Performance Benchmarks for ROI on CDs
Pssst! How would you like a 250 times return on your investment??? Can’t verify most of the numbers but the trend is clear. Now if I was advising the sovereign wealth funds, I would say screw the financial markets, client data CDs is where the money’s at.
In 2008, the German government used about €5 million to buy the infamous LGT CD. That stolen client data was used to gross about €200 million in back taxes and fines. So a ROI of 40 times!!!! http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,675723,00.html
Now I can’t keep track of all the CDs on the market and all the “over-the-counter” CD transactions, but consider the Julius Baer German Tax settlement. The return was a whopping €50m!!!! Was the purchase price of this CD only €180000??? Perhaps a little disappointing since there were estimates of recovering some €75-100m in taxes…but 50 cents on the dollar isn’t bad.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-06-09/germany-buys-cd-containing-data-on-20-000-swiss-bank-accounts.html
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/6890fb9e-11a7-11df-bceb-00144feab49a.html#axzz1Jpn7U2Yg
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d55bb1d2-665c-11e0-ac4d-00144feab49a.html#axzz1Jpn7U2Yg
The economics of law: no crime was charged, the bank wasn’t admitting guilt, yet we have a huge “extraordinary charge” on the books. Just another cost of doing business fee?
In 2008, the German government used about €5 million to buy the infamous LGT CD. That stolen client data was used to gross about €200 million in back taxes and fines. So a ROI of 40 times!!!! http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,675723,00.html
Now I can’t keep track of all the CDs on the market and all the “over-the-counter” CD transactions, but consider the Julius Baer German Tax settlement. The return was a whopping €50m!!!! Was the purchase price of this CD only €180000??? Perhaps a little disappointing since there were estimates of recovering some €75-100m in taxes…but 50 cents on the dollar isn’t bad.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-06-09/germany-buys-cd-containing-data-on-20-000-swiss-bank-accounts.html
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/6890fb9e-11a7-11df-bceb-00144feab49a.html#axzz1Jpn7U2Yg
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d55bb1d2-665c-11e0-ac4d-00144feab49a.html#axzz1Jpn7U2Yg
The economics of law: no crime was charged, the bank wasn’t admitting guilt, yet we have a huge “extraordinary charge” on the books. Just another cost of doing business fee?
Thursday, April 14, 2011
Biz U
In a world where formal "training" is a rarity, kudos to UBS for opening another Business University, this time in Hong Kong in addition to their other Asian U in Singapore: http://www.ubs.com/1/e/media_overview/media_asiapacific/releases.html?newsId=190759
Obviously it will be geared toward the financial side of things but from what I've gleaned there are usually some succession/estate/trust offerings.
Unfortunately, formal training on a scale like this is often a waste of time and money despite all the great intentions. Much more so for the trust industry than the banking sector. Usually the biggest complaint is that often the people who plan the curriculum and deliver the courses aren't the people from the actual business. The topics are disjointed, the information isn't practical or business-specific enough, etc.
One trust company Managing Director professed to me, in all his years, he and his people were never asked to help with his company's Training Campus. Everything was handled by the Learning directors and presented by "good people" but just not people from the trust industry. Many of us will have attended some session where the lack of practical experience or knowledge of "in house procedures" ruins the creditability of the presenter in a matter of seconds. Those who can, do...those who can't, teach.
And part of the fault also lies with the participants too. You pretty much got to force-feed people to learn. They all want the "abridged" version. When they do turn up (and actually turn off the Blackberry/smartphone) they want real life examples, practical answers, free advice, user friendly apps. Save your breath and just give me the answer. Look dude, I don't want to know about Londonderry, just tell me is the LOW a trust document or not? Delivering a session on theory or statute is more painful than root canal....for both.
Obviously it will be geared toward the financial side of things but from what I've gleaned there are usually some succession/estate/trust offerings.
Unfortunately, formal training on a scale like this is often a waste of time and money despite all the great intentions. Much more so for the trust industry than the banking sector. Usually the biggest complaint is that often the people who plan the curriculum and deliver the courses aren't the people from the actual business. The topics are disjointed, the information isn't practical or business-specific enough, etc.
One trust company Managing Director professed to me, in all his years, he and his people were never asked to help with his company's Training Campus. Everything was handled by the Learning directors and presented by "good people" but just not people from the trust industry. Many of us will have attended some session where the lack of practical experience or knowledge of "in house procedures" ruins the creditability of the presenter in a matter of seconds. Those who can, do...those who can't, teach.
And part of the fault also lies with the participants too. You pretty much got to force-feed people to learn. They all want the "abridged" version. When they do turn up (and actually turn off the Blackberry/smartphone) they want real life examples, practical answers, free advice, user friendly apps. Save your breath and just give me the answer. Look dude, I don't want to know about Londonderry, just tell me is the LOW a trust document or not? Delivering a session on theory or statute is more painful than root canal....for both.
Sunday, April 10, 2011
NRIs
NRI used to stand for “Non-resident Indians” but now, it seems like “Nowhere to Run Indians”. If you have dodgy Indian clients then this is turning into a very “interesting” year.
The homeland quest for information is getting some traction (first discussed here: http://trustprofessioninasia.blogspot.com/2011/01/clash-of-titans.html) http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-04-07/news/29392727_1_fishing-expeditions-dtaa-information-without-domestic-interest
So sometime early next year, a bunch of Swiss bank accounts will be released.
On the overseas side, those Indians with HSBC-USA connections may be subject to a “John Doe” summons somewhat akin to what the US used against UBS a couple of years ago: http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2011/04/07/business-financials-us-hsbc-tax-probe_8397088.html
If the court grants such a summons, then anyone who banked with HSBC-USA will have an IRS filed open for "special" scrutiny. Apparently HSBC closed down that NRI service earlier so the money is now somewhere else. Wherever the money trail leads to, that institution may very well be next on the hit list. Didn’t happen to take a transfer from HSBC-USA did you? Throw all those amounts into your “At Risk” ledger and wait for your "John Doe" summons.
The homeland quest for information is getting some traction (first discussed here: http://trustprofessioninasia.blogspot.com/2011/01/clash-of-titans.html) http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-04-07/news/29392727_1_fishing-expeditions-dtaa-information-without-domestic-interest
So sometime early next year, a bunch of Swiss bank accounts will be released.
On the overseas side, those Indians with HSBC-USA connections may be subject to a “John Doe” summons somewhat akin to what the US used against UBS a couple of years ago: http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2011/04/07/business-financials-us-hsbc-tax-probe_8397088.html
If the court grants such a summons, then anyone who banked with HSBC-USA will have an IRS filed open for "special" scrutiny. Apparently HSBC closed down that NRI service earlier so the money is now somewhere else. Wherever the money trail leads to, that institution may very well be next on the hit list. Didn’t happen to take a transfer from HSBC-USA did you? Throw all those amounts into your “At Risk” ledger and wait for your "John Doe" summons.
Thursday, April 7, 2011
Teach Our Children Well…
I love reading/hearing the academia view on our industry. Akin to politics, there is a right wing, a left wing and a slew of moderates. Academics are usually skewed to one side when it comes to the trust industry. They tend to over rely on the effectiveness or enforcement of laws, regulations and place much emphasis on selected statistics then draw inferences and conclusions there from. As a practitioner, I’m probably skewed towards the other end of the spectrum. I see things they don’t and vice-versa.
For all you law students attending the lecture below, challenge the speaker, challenge me. Never take what is said for more than face value. The greatest skill you can get from university is the ability to read between the lines, debate and see the other side(s). It’s like most people will tell you that (cow’s) milk is a great source of nutrition and everyone should have a glass of milk regularly. Have you given thought to the deforestation needed to have grazing pastures for dairy cattle? The methane gas emissions? The means used to keep cows pregnant and lactating?
Is Singapore a major trust jurisdiction? Where does the 50 odd licensed trust companies compare to others centers like Jersey or Bermuda of Hong Kong? How many trusts are there? The MAS has statistics. There is much grumbling about the lack of qualified bankers and other financial service providers in Singapore, so what about qualified trust people? Are they employing Singaporeans or are they importing labour? How many of the licensed trust companies have clean MAS audits? Quantity does not mean quality. What are the audit findings or deficiencies if any? The MAS knows, but does Dr Tang? How many cases of breach of trust have been brought before the courts?
Is the trust industry and trust laws a driver of the wealth management industry growth or is trust a by-product of the wealth management growth? Given the amount of paper the used, I could argue that the recycling industry is driving the growth of the wealth management industry. What is the penetration rate of trusts into banking or financial services consumers? What percentage of Singapore trust assets are actually in Singapore that would require managing (and job/business opportunities for Singapore)? Consider that a typical structure is a Singapore trust holding an offshore company which in turn holds assets ranging from real estate, operating companies and bank accounts. How much of that real estate or operating companies or bank accounts are actually in Singapore? Has the “one-dragon” business model been realized? Or is there really double or over-counting of assets under management? What about the tax discrimination against Singaporeans using Singaporean trust services? Why is the government driving its own people to other trust jurisdictions? What about the money Singapore is attracting? How much of that "hot" money?
Isn’t it interesting the talk will include the “asset protection” aspects of a Singapore trust? People that seek out creditor/divorce or heirship protection trusts are usually people that have (or expect to have problems). In other words “high risk” customers. It’s like saying we have a sports team that won’t do drug testing. Every doper will want to join your team. Does Dr Tang have statistics on how many times the High Court has allowed enquiries into Singapore trusts? How many convictions under the “data protection/secrecy” rules? (Just one or is the AG using “improper use of computers” to prosecute instead?). High risk usually means litigation or arbitration opportunities, so pay close attention, it may be the defining moment for you to change career paths.
The Dot is Hot: The Rise of Singapore as a Major Trust Jurisdiction
posted by Faculty of Law for HKU and Public
Event Type: Seminar/Workshop/Lecture/Talk/Conference
Event Nature: Law and Politics
Event Details
Dr Tang Hang-Wu
Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore
* * * * *
This presentation will track the various developments in Singapore trust law which has led Singapore to be a major wealth management centre in Asia. In particular, the speaker will consider the ability of the Singapore trust to withstand external attacks from creditors, divorcing spouses and disgruntled heirs. The speaker will also consider in outline the Singapore Business Trust Act and its recent applications.
ABOUT THE SPEAKER: Dr Tang Hang-Wu is an Associate Professor at the Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore where he teaches and writes on land law, equity, trusts and restitution. Hang-Wu has published widely and his publications have been relied on by law reform committees (Singapore, New Zealand, Scotland and Ireland), leading textbooks and law journals in the Commonwealth. His work has also been cited by the Caribbean Court of Appeal and all levels of the Singapore courts. He has given expert evidence on fiduciary law and advised members of Singapore's legal profession and relevant government ministries on complex legal issues pertaining to restitution, land, trusts and charities.
For all you law students attending the lecture below, challenge the speaker, challenge me. Never take what is said for more than face value. The greatest skill you can get from university is the ability to read between the lines, debate and see the other side(s). It’s like most people will tell you that (cow’s) milk is a great source of nutrition and everyone should have a glass of milk regularly. Have you given thought to the deforestation needed to have grazing pastures for dairy cattle? The methane gas emissions? The means used to keep cows pregnant and lactating?
Is Singapore a major trust jurisdiction? Where does the 50 odd licensed trust companies compare to others centers like Jersey or Bermuda of Hong Kong? How many trusts are there? The MAS has statistics. There is much grumbling about the lack of qualified bankers and other financial service providers in Singapore, so what about qualified trust people? Are they employing Singaporeans or are they importing labour? How many of the licensed trust companies have clean MAS audits? Quantity does not mean quality. What are the audit findings or deficiencies if any? The MAS knows, but does Dr Tang? How many cases of breach of trust have been brought before the courts?
Is the trust industry and trust laws a driver of the wealth management industry growth or is trust a by-product of the wealth management growth? Given the amount of paper the used, I could argue that the recycling industry is driving the growth of the wealth management industry. What is the penetration rate of trusts into banking or financial services consumers? What percentage of Singapore trust assets are actually in Singapore that would require managing (and job/business opportunities for Singapore)? Consider that a typical structure is a Singapore trust holding an offshore company which in turn holds assets ranging from real estate, operating companies and bank accounts. How much of that real estate or operating companies or bank accounts are actually in Singapore? Has the “one-dragon” business model been realized? Or is there really double or over-counting of assets under management? What about the tax discrimination against Singaporeans using Singaporean trust services? Why is the government driving its own people to other trust jurisdictions? What about the money Singapore is attracting? How much of that "hot" money?
Isn’t it interesting the talk will include the “asset protection” aspects of a Singapore trust? People that seek out creditor/divorce or heirship protection trusts are usually people that have (or expect to have problems). In other words “high risk” customers. It’s like saying we have a sports team that won’t do drug testing. Every doper will want to join your team. Does Dr Tang have statistics on how many times the High Court has allowed enquiries into Singapore trusts? How many convictions under the “data protection/secrecy” rules? (Just one or is the AG using “improper use of computers” to prosecute instead?). High risk usually means litigation or arbitration opportunities, so pay close attention, it may be the defining moment for you to change career paths.
The Dot is Hot: The Rise of Singapore as a Major Trust Jurisdiction
posted by Faculty of Law for HKU and Public
Event Type: Seminar/Workshop/Lecture/Talk/Conference
Event Nature: Law and Politics
Event Details
Dr Tang Hang-Wu
Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore
* * * * *
This presentation will track the various developments in Singapore trust law which has led Singapore to be a major wealth management centre in Asia. In particular, the speaker will consider the ability of the Singapore trust to withstand external attacks from creditors, divorcing spouses and disgruntled heirs. The speaker will also consider in outline the Singapore Business Trust Act and its recent applications.
ABOUT THE SPEAKER: Dr Tang Hang-Wu is an Associate Professor at the Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore where he teaches and writes on land law, equity, trusts and restitution. Hang-Wu has published widely and his publications have been relied on by law reform committees (Singapore, New Zealand, Scotland and Ireland), leading textbooks and law journals in the Commonwealth. His work has also been cited by the Caribbean Court of Appeal and all levels of the Singapore courts. He has given expert evidence on fiduciary law and advised members of Singapore's legal profession and relevant government ministries on complex legal issues pertaining to restitution, land, trusts and charities.
Monday, April 4, 2011
The Da Vinci Code
Instead of writing long emails which may be used against you in court of law, I suggest that our industry adopt the following code words:
Instead of "Breach of Trust" let’s use "cracked egg" [example- We have might have a cracked egg on that last distribution. Or, Are you asking me to crack an egg?]
Instead of "if you don’t do it, we lose the client/account to a competitor", let use "Dante" as in Dante Alighieri’s writings [example- Bob is saying that if the transaction isn’t done by 3pm, the deal will Dante. The settlor will Dante if you don’t issue that POA.]
Instead of saying the tax lawyer is proposing some tax evasion or something illegal, we’ll use "thickness", as in the difference between tax avoidance and evasion has been famously described as the thickness of a prison wall. [example- I think that this transaction has some thickness to it. Or, there is much thickness to the client's Indonesian tax position]
Instead of saying the client or banker has no idea what a trust is, let’s say "half-full" [example- the client is half-full on the idea of a trust]
Instead of telling people to back-date documents, we’ll use "McFly" as in Marty McFly, Back to the Future [example- McFly that Trustee’s resolution to 2004]
Instead of saying your in-house trust expert is a moron, we’ll use "deep-rooted" [example – don’t let him near the client, he’s too deep-rooted. Or His assessment was deep-rooted.]
Instead of saying sham, let’s use "pumpkin" as in Cinderella’s pumpkin [example – this trust could pumpkin on us. Or, This is a pumpkin trust]
Instead of saying "nominee", let’s use "BFF" [example – Ramish the settlor is Santosh’s BFF. Or, can we have a BFF director?]
Instead of saying "who?" as in I have no idea who they are, let’s use "Horton" from Horton Hears a Who! [example – Hey Barclays just hired a Horton. Or, there is a class of beneficiaries that are Horton.]
Instead of saying "we’re caving in to the settlor’s demands", let’s use "amicable". [example- the price reduction is amicable. Or, we are amicable to the transaction proposed.
Happy April Fools
Instead of "Breach of Trust" let’s use "cracked egg" [example- We have might have a cracked egg on that last distribution. Or, Are you asking me to crack an egg?]
Instead of "if you don’t do it, we lose the client/account to a competitor", let use "Dante" as in Dante Alighieri’s writings [example- Bob is saying that if the transaction isn’t done by 3pm, the deal will Dante. The settlor will Dante if you don’t issue that POA.]
Instead of saying the tax lawyer is proposing some tax evasion or something illegal, we’ll use "thickness", as in the difference between tax avoidance and evasion has been famously described as the thickness of a prison wall. [example- I think that this transaction has some thickness to it. Or, there is much thickness to the client's Indonesian tax position]
Instead of saying the client or banker has no idea what a trust is, let’s say "half-full" [example- the client is half-full on the idea of a trust]
Instead of telling people to back-date documents, we’ll use "McFly" as in Marty McFly, Back to the Future [example- McFly that Trustee’s resolution to 2004]
Instead of saying your in-house trust expert is a moron, we’ll use "deep-rooted" [example – don’t let him near the client, he’s too deep-rooted. Or His assessment was deep-rooted.]
Instead of saying sham, let’s use "pumpkin" as in Cinderella’s pumpkin [example – this trust could pumpkin on us. Or, This is a pumpkin trust]
Instead of saying "nominee", let’s use "BFF" [example – Ramish the settlor is Santosh’s BFF. Or, can we have a BFF director?]
Instead of saying "who?" as in I have no idea who they are, let’s use "Horton" from Horton Hears a Who! [example – Hey Barclays just hired a Horton. Or, there is a class of beneficiaries that are Horton.]
Instead of saying "we’re caving in to the settlor’s demands", let’s use "amicable". [example- the price reduction is amicable. Or, we are amicable to the transaction proposed.
Happy April Fools
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Striking OIL
I wonder if the partners of Harney Westwood & Riegels ("HWR") could have imagined what would become of their little baby.
In the pre-computer age when international business was done on light-sensitive faxes, HWR set up a company incorporations arm, called Offshore Incorporations Inc."("OIL"). OIL capitalised on the surging Asian demand for IBC in the late 80's, particularly BVI IBCs.
Since then OIL has captured a huge market share of that business particularly in HK and Singapore. Much to the chagrin of others who can't do business at wholesale (or below wholesale) prices. Along the way, affliated companies like Acceptor and Credence Trust were set up or acquired.
Now today, OIL again will change hands to the group behind Vistra (IK Investment Partners, a PE group). Price tag around US$250M-300M.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/24/offshore-ikpartners-idUSL3E7EO1IS20110324
http://www.vistra.com/content/254
I hope that this merger creates more opportunities for trust people in the region but from a trust services perspective, I wouldn't lose any sleep over this.
In the pre-computer age when international business was done on light-sensitive faxes, HWR set up a company incorporations arm, called Offshore Incorporations Inc."("OIL"). OIL capitalised on the surging Asian demand for IBC in the late 80's, particularly BVI IBCs.
Since then OIL has captured a huge market share of that business particularly in HK and Singapore. Much to the chagrin of others who can't do business at wholesale (or below wholesale) prices. Along the way, affliated companies like Acceptor and Credence Trust were set up or acquired.
Now today, OIL again will change hands to the group behind Vistra (IK Investment Partners, a PE group). Price tag around US$250M-300M.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/24/offshore-ikpartners-idUSL3E7EO1IS20110324
http://www.vistra.com/content/254
I hope that this merger creates more opportunities for trust people in the region but from a trust services perspective, I wouldn't lose any sleep over this.
Saturday, March 12, 2011
Employee Number 007: Licensed to.....
Headline: Merrill Banker Indicted With 18 in Brazil Says He's Scapegoat
http://news.businessweek.com/article.asp?documentKey=1376-LBOLML0UQVI901-74S1VTOIBUAKLFQHBKH7UE2TQG or
http://news.businessweek.com/article.asp?documentKey=1377-a_EY9MLo0vtk-3TVAHOOB3A3SQFUL4UPNIJI3PT
The above is a rather shocking article. I mean arresting bankers with machine guns, accusing banking heads of sanctioning and violating banking and currency exchange laws, tax evasion......shocking, just shocking...........that they only got 18!
But is there an Asian connection? Not directly but there are plenty of banks booking South American money into Singapore and Hong Kong, so some of the money trails will lead here. Who's got Brazilian clients, raise your hand? Which Asian banks have Brazilian or Latam teams sitting down the hall?
Do you know which Asian countries have exchange controls? Which permit un-constrained remittances? Which leads to the whole cross-border business can-of-worms.
Most people assume that an international bank can do business in any country where it has an office. Wrong. Each country "branch" is typically only licensed to market and do business in that particular country. So Bank ABC in HK is only allowed to do business within HK, regardless if there is a Bank ABC in Singapore or Thailand, etc.. If you're employed by Bank ABC in HK and you are asked to travel for marketing or any "restricted" activity in say Indonesia, then you are in violation of Indonesian law. If you do anything to entice, solicit or help move money outside Indonesia then you probably have violated more Indonesian laws. And as trustee of funds that may have been improperly sourced then who knows if they arrest you too at the airport? Thankfully, most trust activities are not considered "restricted", but have you checked yourself?
Some where deep down in the list of rules and regs that bankers signed off as reading and complying with when they were employed will be a policy or manual on cross-border business. These are the Commandants. Didn't follow them? Sorry, we can't help rogues. Ask to break the Rules? Seek legal counsel and a headhunter as you'll be on the street soon and with the reputation of being "uncooperative" and "difficult". Good luck meeting your targets if you can only sit and wait for some customer to fly in to meet you.
I guess those that market into countries where they are not licensed to do so will have to upgrade their "James Bond" kits for their people. The kit usually includes:
- 1 gmail account
- 1 disposal/top up mobile phone card
- "business card" that has only the name, above phone number and email address. Must absolutely not contain any information as to where this person works or the company name/details.
- encrypted laptop, but not recommended as are most other hand-held technologies (although RIM/Blackberry did have some good anti-snooping features hence their attempted/temporary ban in some countries)
- 1 self-booked and self-paid airplane ticket
- 1 self-booked and self-paid hotel reservation
- tip sheet on how to lie to Immigration or others should they ask
- tourist maps, suntan lotion and swimsuit to support your assertion that you're on vacation.
- DHL or FedEx hotlines so you can readily get documents in and out of the country fast
Laugh, but every day, there are dozens of James Bonds in the hotel lobbies, at the airport lounge, in the coffee shop near the office they are visiting. Heck some of them are brazen enough to talk shop so indiscreetly that you know they are "agents" and the mission they are on.
[Of course as face-recognition technologies increase, our James Bonds may have trouble getting by without some Nathan Hunt makeup kit.]
If you have one of these Bond kits, then don't surprised if you get dragged off in the middle of the night as you're likely the Asian version of Alexandre Caiado.
http://news.businessweek.com/article.asp?documentKey=1376-LBOLML0UQVI901-74S1VTOIBUAKLFQHBKH7UE2TQG or
http://news.businessweek.com/article.asp?documentKey=1377-a_EY9MLo0vtk-3TVAHOOB3A3SQFUL4UPNIJI3PT
The above is a rather shocking article. I mean arresting bankers with machine guns, accusing banking heads of sanctioning and violating banking and currency exchange laws, tax evasion......shocking, just shocking...........that they only got 18!
But is there an Asian connection? Not directly but there are plenty of banks booking South American money into Singapore and Hong Kong, so some of the money trails will lead here. Who's got Brazilian clients, raise your hand? Which Asian banks have Brazilian or Latam teams sitting down the hall?
Do you know which Asian countries have exchange controls? Which permit un-constrained remittances? Which leads to the whole cross-border business can-of-worms.
Most people assume that an international bank can do business in any country where it has an office. Wrong. Each country "branch" is typically only licensed to market and do business in that particular country. So Bank ABC in HK is only allowed to do business within HK, regardless if there is a Bank ABC in Singapore or Thailand, etc.. If you're employed by Bank ABC in HK and you are asked to travel for marketing or any "restricted" activity in say Indonesia, then you are in violation of Indonesian law. If you do anything to entice, solicit or help move money outside Indonesia then you probably have violated more Indonesian laws. And as trustee of funds that may have been improperly sourced then who knows if they arrest you too at the airport? Thankfully, most trust activities are not considered "restricted", but have you checked yourself?
Some where deep down in the list of rules and regs that bankers signed off as reading and complying with when they were employed will be a policy or manual on cross-border business. These are the Commandants. Didn't follow them? Sorry, we can't help rogues. Ask to break the Rules? Seek legal counsel and a headhunter as you'll be on the street soon and with the reputation of being "uncooperative" and "difficult". Good luck meeting your targets if you can only sit and wait for some customer to fly in to meet you.
I guess those that market into countries where they are not licensed to do so will have to upgrade their "James Bond" kits for their people. The kit usually includes:
- 1 gmail account
- 1 disposal/top up mobile phone card
- "business card" that has only the name, above phone number and email address. Must absolutely not contain any information as to where this person works or the company name/details.
- encrypted laptop, but not recommended as are most other hand-held technologies (although RIM/Blackberry did have some good anti-snooping features hence their attempted/temporary ban in some countries)
- 1 self-booked and self-paid airplane ticket
- 1 self-booked and self-paid hotel reservation
- tip sheet on how to lie to Immigration or others should they ask
- tourist maps, suntan lotion and swimsuit to support your assertion that you're on vacation.
- DHL or FedEx hotlines so you can readily get documents in and out of the country fast
Laugh, but every day, there are dozens of James Bonds in the hotel lobbies, at the airport lounge, in the coffee shop near the office they are visiting. Heck some of them are brazen enough to talk shop so indiscreetly that you know they are "agents" and the mission they are on.
[Of course as face-recognition technologies increase, our James Bonds may have trouble getting by without some Nathan Hunt makeup kit.]
If you have one of these Bond kits, then don't surprised if you get dragged off in the middle of the night as you're likely the Asian version of Alexandre Caiado.
Thursday, March 10, 2011
We Are Family......
Aw....a happy ending to the Stanly Ho saga......at least for today:
http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?we_cat=11&art_id=109010&sid=31603906&con_type=1&d_str=20110311&fc=8
http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?we_cat=11&art_id=109010&sid=31603906&con_type=1&d_str=20110311&fc=8
Monday, February 28, 2011
Free Advertising
Just a laugh at other’s expense:
CS-lite, officially known as Sarasin, has finally got their Singapore trust license [http://www.sarasin.ch/internet/iech/en/index_iech/news_iech?reference=118826&checkSum=8599521F49A8C67E1E2852EF85D8CE7D] and their new trust company is being touted as the “latest addition to the holistic Private Banking offering of the Sarasin Group, and a further step in implementing its future focus on acquiring and managing declared assets in the best interests of its clients.”
- How politically correct!
The spiel goes further…..”The Trust services are growing in importance globally as part of the wide array of asset management services offered by financial institutions.”
- Where have you been the last 40years?
“Trusts have become an integral part of estate and succession planning.”
- Always were.
“To this end, Sarasin Trust provides discretionary trusts (providing trusteeships for full protection trusts, tailor-made, holding liquid and non-liquid assets) and insurance trusts (holding life insurance policies only), as well as corporate services, providing the management of offshore companies.”
- What a (grammatically poor) mouth full!
Then there are lies, damn lies and statistics
Be it Twain or Disraeli, neither of whom were math people, this was a pretty astute observation. A headline (uh…advertisement) making the rounds is: SocGen’s Singaporean Estate Planning Unit to Boost Staff by 33% [http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-02-25/socgen-s-singaporean-estate-planning-unit-to-boost-staff-by-33-.html]
However, the numbers say the increase is from 30 to 40 over 2 years. While increasing headcount by 10 is still an impressive feat, how about if I increase the number of blogs this month by 200% by writing just 1 more entry?
CS-lite, officially known as Sarasin, has finally got their Singapore trust license [http://www.sarasin.ch/internet/iech/en/index_iech/news_iech?reference=118826&checkSum=8599521F49A8C67E1E2852EF85D8CE7D] and their new trust company is being touted as the “latest addition to the holistic Private Banking offering of the Sarasin Group, and a further step in implementing its future focus on acquiring and managing declared assets in the best interests of its clients.”
- How politically correct!
The spiel goes further…..”The Trust services are growing in importance globally as part of the wide array of asset management services offered by financial institutions.”
- Where have you been the last 40years?
“Trusts have become an integral part of estate and succession planning.”
- Always were.
“To this end, Sarasin Trust provides discretionary trusts (providing trusteeships for full protection trusts, tailor-made, holding liquid and non-liquid assets) and insurance trusts (holding life insurance policies only), as well as corporate services, providing the management of offshore companies.”
- What a (grammatically poor) mouth full!
Then there are lies, damn lies and statistics
Be it Twain or Disraeli, neither of whom were math people, this was a pretty astute observation. A headline (uh…advertisement) making the rounds is: SocGen’s Singaporean Estate Planning Unit to Boost Staff by 33% [http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-02-25/socgen-s-singaporean-estate-planning-unit-to-boost-staff-by-33-.html]
However, the numbers say the increase is from 30 to 40 over 2 years. While increasing headcount by 10 is still an impressive feat, how about if I increase the number of blogs this month by 200% by writing just 1 more entry?
Saturday, February 19, 2011
You learn Something New Each Day
Well, each day seems to bring on a new twist to the Stanley Ho saga. I've lost track of who's suing who, who's on whose side....: http://trustprofessioninasia.blogspot.com/2011/01/dead-men-tell-no-tales.html
Well, just when we thought we have heard the last of Tony Chan as his "totally dishonest" Appeal failed, he is now seeking police assistance as he alleges evidence tampering causing him lose the case in the first place: http://law.lexisnexis.com/webcenters/hk/News/Main-Topic-1/Fung-shui-master-loses-appeal-over-billionaires-will and http://trustprofessioninasia.blogspot.com/2011/01/oh-my-piggy-wiggly-boo-poo-ga-ga.html
And among the commentators, is this Wall Street Journal (HK) entry by a Ms Cathy Yan: http://blogs.wsj.com/hong-kong/2011/01/27/hong-kongs-feuding-families/
"Institutional structures for wealth planning and succession are relatively new to Hong Kong — and far less accepted than in the West. Setting up trusts years in advance of the death of a patriarch used to be a way to avoid inheritance tax. But the legal safeguard has become even less popular after inheritance tax was abolished in 2006.
- The earliest family trusts in HK that I have seen date back to the 1960s, There are records of trusts in HK well before that. How relative is that? As with private arrangements, who knows they exist until they are compelled to disclose? Some are disclose under Securities rules (of listed companies), others via other precedings.... Just because you can't see it or find it doesn't mean it's there not there, or existed at some point in time.
- Less accepted, sure.....but I believe every one of those families you have listed have had trust structures somewhere, sometime. The effectiveness of their trusts for succession planning is another matter. My experience is people are still tax driven and the succession issues planning usually takes a back seat. Understandable as the possible tax savings benefits are usually more immediate and quantifiable but as this article helps illustrate, tax may be the least of the worries
- HK didn't have an Inheritance tax. There was an Estate Duty, which isn't the same thing.
- [Trusts] Even Less popular? Sure, take away one of the drivers for creating trusts and some will lose and some will win. But overall, I seem to be getting busier, how about you?
Can't believe every you read can you?
Well, just when we thought we have heard the last of Tony Chan as his "totally dishonest" Appeal failed, he is now seeking police assistance as he alleges evidence tampering causing him lose the case in the first place: http://law.lexisnexis.com/webcenters/hk/News/Main-Topic-1/Fung-shui-master-loses-appeal-over-billionaires-will and http://trustprofessioninasia.blogspot.com/2011/01/oh-my-piggy-wiggly-boo-poo-ga-ga.html
And among the commentators, is this Wall Street Journal (HK) entry by a Ms Cathy Yan: http://blogs.wsj.com/hong-kong/2011/01/27/hong-kongs-feuding-families/
"Institutional structures for wealth planning and succession are relatively new to Hong Kong — and far less accepted than in the West. Setting up trusts years in advance of the death of a patriarch used to be a way to avoid inheritance tax. But the legal safeguard has become even less popular after inheritance tax was abolished in 2006.
- The earliest family trusts in HK that I have seen date back to the 1960s, There are records of trusts in HK well before that. How relative is that? As with private arrangements, who knows they exist until they are compelled to disclose? Some are disclose under Securities rules (of listed companies), others via other precedings.... Just because you can't see it or find it doesn't mean it's there not there, or existed at some point in time.
- Less accepted, sure.....but I believe every one of those families you have listed have had trust structures somewhere, sometime. The effectiveness of their trusts for succession planning is another matter. My experience is people are still tax driven and the succession issues planning usually takes a back seat. Understandable as the possible tax savings benefits are usually more immediate and quantifiable but as this article helps illustrate, tax may be the least of the worries
- HK didn't have an Inheritance tax. There was an Estate Duty, which isn't the same thing.
- [Trusts] Even Less popular? Sure, take away one of the drivers for creating trusts and some will lose and some will win. But overall, I seem to be getting busier, how about you?
Can't believe every you read can you?
Friday, January 21, 2011
Clash of the Titans
Not the cheesy movie or re-makes.
In the red corner, we have the Supreme Court of India and in the blue corner we have the government of India.
http://www.legallyindia.com/201101201702/Bar-Bench-Litigation/black-money-pil-government-dilly-dallies-wont-do-anything-says-divan and http://www.thehindu.com/news/article1103263.ece
Ram Jethmalani, a noted lawyer and honorable Member of Parliament, and former Law Minister, and others filed a petition for the government to release names of suspected tax dodgers who have alledgedly parked their money with LGT Bank and UBS outside India (and retrieve that money I guess).
Thus far, the govenerment has said it can't due to obligations under tax treaties. The Court's response: "It is a pure and simple theft of the national money. We are talking about mind-boggling crime. We are not on the niceties of various treaties,"
WOW!
The government also tried to limit the scope of the petition to information on LGT Bank only but was asked: “Why are you limiting the matter to the Liechtenstein Bank?” Pointing out that nothing would stop or preclude the court from expanding the scope of the writ petition in the public interest, he [Justice S.S. Nijjar] said, “All we want is that you give all information about the money deposited in the foreign banks by Indians. You cannot confine the petition to one bank.” DOUBLE WOW!!
In the red corner, we have the Supreme Court of India and in the blue corner we have the government of India.
http://www.legallyindia.com/201101201702/Bar-Bench-Litigation/black-money-pil-government-dilly-dallies-wont-do-anything-says-divan and http://www.thehindu.com/news/article1103263.ece
Ram Jethmalani, a noted lawyer and honorable Member of Parliament, and former Law Minister, and others filed a petition for the government to release names of suspected tax dodgers who have alledgedly parked their money with LGT Bank and UBS outside India (and retrieve that money I guess).
Thus far, the govenerment has said it can't due to obligations under tax treaties. The Court's response: "It is a pure and simple theft of the national money. We are talking about mind-boggling crime. We are not on the niceties of various treaties,"
WOW!
The government also tried to limit the scope of the petition to information on LGT Bank only but was asked: “Why are you limiting the matter to the Liechtenstein Bank?” Pointing out that nothing would stop or preclude the court from expanding the scope of the writ petition in the public interest, he [Justice S.S. Nijjar] said, “All we want is that you give all information about the money deposited in the foreign banks by Indians. You cannot confine the petition to one bank.” DOUBLE WOW!!
Monday, January 17, 2011
Dead Men Tell No Tales?
For all you successful and wealthy men and women out there, particularly those with children and loved ones, one of the greatest things you can do before you go (and unfortunately, most of us don’t know when we might go) is to get your affairs in order.
There are countless cases where your heirs, your executor, your trustee...is left with the excruciating problem of how to deal with your assets. Who gets what? When? How? Etc. Families have splintered and become sworn enemies because of your failure to make things crystal clear. Sometimes there will be guesswork, sometimes there will be long bitter fights which not only help to make the lawyers rich but also may end up unintended or undesirable results.
A lot of Asians, particularly the older generations have relied on “secret trusts” or nominee relationships to effect wealth transfers, wealth holding, probate/transfer tax avoidance, etc.. Sometimes gifts are gifts, sometimes they are not. Sometimes loans are loans, sometimes loans are not. Sometimes bequeaths are bequeaths, sometimes, they’re not. This isn’t a great issue when the patriarch/matriarch is alive, but it becomes a mess when he/she dies. No one else knows the “truth”.
A recent Singapore case highlights some of these issues [Wong Chong Yue v Wong Chong Thai [2011] SGHC 3]. Not a great case by any means (but some nice Asian flavour) and just to show how where these cases usually end up. The short of it was that Father made some transfers of the family business company’s shares to the children. One child claimed it was an “express trust” in favour of him. The other siblings disagreed. Had Father made some (better and more) explicit declarations, say a Deed of Gift or Loan Agreement or a formal trust, there would probably would be no argument as to his intentions. [Of course nothing prevents people from challenging anything but with less merits or less uncertainty, the sooner frivolous or fraudulent claims can be laid to rest.] Instead, we the courts having to decide. And in the absence of good compelling evidence, the courts could easily get it wrong.
But dead men can tell tales…..only if you do it before you die. Get your affairs in order by leaving no questions unanswered. Otherwise your heirs will be burning money, not as an offering to you but as legal fees.
[Update 26 Jan: I see HK/Macau gambling tycoon Stanley Ho Hung-sun (何鴻燊) took my advice.....hasn't gone totally smoothly and you can see all the ruckus it is causing....but since he is alive (and apparently has full mental capacity despite his recent stroke), he should be able to squash any "uncertainties" over his desired wealth splitting. The TV appearance was a nice touch. We can only imagine the years of litigation [tough luck HK lawyers!] it might have took to settle his estate had he chosen not to make this bold step. Your turn. ]
There are countless cases where your heirs, your executor, your trustee...is left with the excruciating problem of how to deal with your assets. Who gets what? When? How? Etc. Families have splintered and become sworn enemies because of your failure to make things crystal clear. Sometimes there will be guesswork, sometimes there will be long bitter fights which not only help to make the lawyers rich but also may end up unintended or undesirable results.
A lot of Asians, particularly the older generations have relied on “secret trusts” or nominee relationships to effect wealth transfers, wealth holding, probate/transfer tax avoidance, etc.. Sometimes gifts are gifts, sometimes they are not. Sometimes loans are loans, sometimes loans are not. Sometimes bequeaths are bequeaths, sometimes, they’re not. This isn’t a great issue when the patriarch/matriarch is alive, but it becomes a mess when he/she dies. No one else knows the “truth”.
A recent Singapore case highlights some of these issues [Wong Chong Yue v Wong Chong Thai [2011] SGHC 3]. Not a great case by any means (but some nice Asian flavour) and just to show how where these cases usually end up. The short of it was that Father made some transfers of the family business company’s shares to the children. One child claimed it was an “express trust” in favour of him. The other siblings disagreed. Had Father made some (better and more) explicit declarations, say a Deed of Gift or Loan Agreement or a formal trust, there would probably would be no argument as to his intentions. [Of course nothing prevents people from challenging anything but with less merits or less uncertainty, the sooner frivolous or fraudulent claims can be laid to rest.] Instead, we the courts having to decide. And in the absence of good compelling evidence, the courts could easily get it wrong.
But dead men can tell tales…..only if you do it before you die. Get your affairs in order by leaving no questions unanswered. Otherwise your heirs will be burning money, not as an offering to you but as legal fees.
[Update 26 Jan: I see HK/Macau gambling tycoon Stanley Ho Hung-sun (何鴻燊) took my advice.....hasn't gone totally smoothly and you can see all the ruckus it is causing....but since he is alive (and apparently has full mental capacity despite his recent stroke), he should be able to squash any "uncertainties" over his desired wealth splitting. The TV appearance was a nice touch. We can only imagine the years of litigation [tough luck HK lawyers!] it might have took to settle his estate had he chosen not to make this bold step. Your turn. ]
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Oh my Piggy-wiggly boo poo ga-ga........
Tony has a mushy love video to help with his appeal over Nina Wang's estate: http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?we_cat=11&art_id=106932&sid=30868118&con_type=1&d_str=20110111&fc=1
Continuation of the saga http://trustprofessioninasia.blogspot.com/2010/02/hey-tony-chan-what-say-buddha.html
Continuation of the saga http://trustprofessioninasia.blogspot.com/2010/02/hey-tony-chan-what-say-buddha.html
New Year’s Resolution
Not so much a resolution but a wish list:
1. I wish trust people would learn to say: “I don’t know”. Not “don’t know” when they should know…..like a trustee should know what’s in the trust fund….they should always know that, but rather people should start saying “don’t know” when they reasonably need not or should not know. There are plenty of things in law and tax where there are no good answers. There’s a very dangerous trait of try to impress clients by spewing out all sorts of horsesh*t that might be mistaken for knowledge. There is an insane fear of appearing not to know everything. Nothing good can come from pretending to know something. We have salemen who think they are advisors because they have LawInContext. Ahem…you have LawInContext because you “don’t know”. And not to knock LawInContext but you certainly won’t reach enlightenment even if you memorized everything they have in the database. We have banking lawyers drafting dispositive powers when it’s clear after 10 words, they don’t have (or have never bother to read) a drafting/precedents book in their library. They “don’t know”. We have some Channel Islands refugee in Singapore talking about Mexican tax and the wonders of New Zealand trusts who shouldn’t have attempted to answer questions as all it did was establish clearly to the audience that he really “didn’t know” much about New Zealand or Mexico or Singapore. There is absolutely no shame in not knowing everything. And for you clients, don’t expect one or even a few people to have all the expert answers. Just consider how many doctors do you have? A Dentist, an Optometrist, A GP, A ObGy, etc. How many places do you get investment/market advice from? A few bankers? Some Analysts and Brokers? Bernie Lo? The fish monger at the wet market? Show some respect to those that say they “don’t know”. At the end of the day, they may be the better advisor. But what do I know…..
2. Am I the only one not getting kickbacks from the BVI? I fail to see why some many damn bankers in Asia thinks a VISTA trust is the optimal solution especially when it is used just to cover a bank account (sales targets and bonuses aside of course). Bank accounts have a life span of a fruit fly. Remember all those Liechtenstein/Panama foundations some of the banks pushed onto their (namely Indian and NRI) clients years ago and are now scrambling to get them off their books now? I see the same blind-leading-the-blind exercises except now it’s a little more ruthless and pointless. Let’s see, there wouldn’t even be a BVI BC in the picture if you hadn’t “sold” the client to protect his bank portfolio by transferring it into a BC in the first place? So now we have a different set of succession issues. What did you tell him? Avoid probate? Well (potentially) avoiding probate or succession issues on 1 bank account isn’t going to do much when the client still has other assets outside the trust. Let’s see, does the client want control? That’s like asking if kids want candy. Things like tooth decay, chronic obesity and diabetes are conveniently forgotten by most. Unfettered control, especially among the second or third generations is something many conveniently or ignorantly forget to advise upon. Look forward to helping you unwind that VISTA of yours in a few years.
3. Start training. Think of everything issue that has popped up in the past year. How many were preventable? What if the Trust Sales had taken the time to really work through the settlor’s requirements instead of trying to meet his 10 trust per week target? What if your Investment Committee actually discussed investments with the settlor instead of getting a risk/investor profile form? What if you knew something about the duty to monitor? What if you insisted on this or that? What if you knew that big transaction was coming weeks before hand? Who knew that 50% of your intellectual capital was tied up in that one Manager that CitiTrust just poached from you. Probably 80% or more of the problems you’ve faced were self-inflicted. Only by training people to know what can and can’t be done, training people on what to expect, only by sharing knowledge will you stop being “blindsided”.
1. I wish trust people would learn to say: “I don’t know”. Not “don’t know” when they should know…..like a trustee should know what’s in the trust fund….they should always know that, but rather people should start saying “don’t know” when they reasonably need not or should not know. There are plenty of things in law and tax where there are no good answers. There’s a very dangerous trait of try to impress clients by spewing out all sorts of horsesh*t that might be mistaken for knowledge. There is an insane fear of appearing not to know everything. Nothing good can come from pretending to know something. We have salemen who think they are advisors because they have LawInContext. Ahem…you have LawInContext because you “don’t know”. And not to knock LawInContext but you certainly won’t reach enlightenment even if you memorized everything they have in the database. We have banking lawyers drafting dispositive powers when it’s clear after 10 words, they don’t have (or have never bother to read) a drafting/precedents book in their library. They “don’t know”. We have some Channel Islands refugee in Singapore talking about Mexican tax and the wonders of New Zealand trusts who shouldn’t have attempted to answer questions as all it did was establish clearly to the audience that he really “didn’t know” much about New Zealand or Mexico or Singapore. There is absolutely no shame in not knowing everything. And for you clients, don’t expect one or even a few people to have all the expert answers. Just consider how many doctors do you have? A Dentist, an Optometrist, A GP, A ObGy, etc. How many places do you get investment/market advice from? A few bankers? Some Analysts and Brokers? Bernie Lo? The fish monger at the wet market? Show some respect to those that say they “don’t know”. At the end of the day, they may be the better advisor. But what do I know…..
2. Am I the only one not getting kickbacks from the BVI? I fail to see why some many damn bankers in Asia thinks a VISTA trust is the optimal solution especially when it is used just to cover a bank account (sales targets and bonuses aside of course). Bank accounts have a life span of a fruit fly. Remember all those Liechtenstein/Panama foundations some of the banks pushed onto their (namely Indian and NRI) clients years ago and are now scrambling to get them off their books now? I see the same blind-leading-the-blind exercises except now it’s a little more ruthless and pointless. Let’s see, there wouldn’t even be a BVI BC in the picture if you hadn’t “sold” the client to protect his bank portfolio by transferring it into a BC in the first place? So now we have a different set of succession issues. What did you tell him? Avoid probate? Well (potentially) avoiding probate or succession issues on 1 bank account isn’t going to do much when the client still has other assets outside the trust. Let’s see, does the client want control? That’s like asking if kids want candy. Things like tooth decay, chronic obesity and diabetes are conveniently forgotten by most. Unfettered control, especially among the second or third generations is something many conveniently or ignorantly forget to advise upon. Look forward to helping you unwind that VISTA of yours in a few years.
3. Start training. Think of everything issue that has popped up in the past year. How many were preventable? What if the Trust Sales had taken the time to really work through the settlor’s requirements instead of trying to meet his 10 trust per week target? What if your Investment Committee actually discussed investments with the settlor instead of getting a risk/investor profile form? What if you knew something about the duty to monitor? What if you insisted on this or that? What if you knew that big transaction was coming weeks before hand? Who knew that 50% of your intellectual capital was tied up in that one Manager that CitiTrust just poached from you. Probably 80% or more of the problems you’ve faced were self-inflicted. Only by training people to know what can and can’t be done, training people on what to expect, only by sharing knowledge will you stop being “blindsided”.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)