Globally Speaking October 2026 – practical challenges of international family wealth

The UK government faces the difficult task of balancing the need to raise revenue, support economic growth and maintain the UK’s attractiveness to internationally mobile families, entrepreneurs and investors. Recent tax reforms have led some to reassess their personal and commercial arrangements in the UK and many will be watching closely to see how future policy evolves in response to broader economic and fiscal priorities.

As the government looks to deliver on Prime Minister Andy Burnham’s ambitions for economic expansion and a closer relationship with Europe, the forthcoming Budget may offer an indication of the direction of travel. Many internationally mobile individuals, families and businesses will be watching closely for any measures affecting cross-border investment, mobility and taxation, as well as indications of how the government intends to reconcile its growth agenda with its wider fiscal and policy objectives.

This month, Globally Speaking focuses on international family wealth and the practical challenges that arise when families, assets and legal arrangements span multiple jurisdictions. From international pre-nuptial agreements and overseas Wills to forced heirship rules and the management of overseas assets through powers of attorney, our contributors examine some of the key issues that internationally mobile individuals and families need to consider.

In this issue

  • International pre-nuptial agreements: tips and traps for the internationally mobile —  for couples with international lives, a pre-nuptial agreement can provide greater clarity and protection. However, approaches to recognition and enforcement vary significantly between jurisdictions, making specialist advice and careful cross-border planning essential.
  • Making your Wills speak the same language — when assets, family members and personal connections span multiple countries, estate planning can become increasingly complex. Coordinating your succession planning across jurisdictions can help avoid unintended consequences, delays and unnecessary tax exposure.
  • When choice gives way to law: planning around forced heirship — not every jurisdiction allows complete freedom over who inherits. Understanding how forced heirship regimes operate can help internationally connected families structure their affairs more effectively and reduce the risk of unexpected outcomes on death.
  • Managing overseas assets: the reach and limits of a Lasting Power of Attorney —  many people assume that a Lasting Power of Attorney made in England and Wales will automatically be effective overseas. In reality, the position can vary widely from one jurisdiction to another. We examine the limits of LPAs in an international context.

Jurisdiction Focus: The Caribbean

The Caribbean remains a key jurisdiction for internationally mobile individuals and families, particularly those with cross-border wealth and succession planning needs.

Jurisdictions such as the Cayman Islands, British Virgin Islands, Bahamas and Barbados offer established legal frameworks, sophisticated fiduciary services and long-standing expertise in trust and wealth structuring. Trusts established in these jurisdictions can play an important role in asset protection, family governance, succession planning and the holding of international investments. While the UK tax treatment of offshore structures requires careful consideration, established Caribbean trust jurisdictions can continue to offer valuable planning opportunities where structures are implemented and administered appropriately and tailored to a family’s objectives. Wedlake Bell regularly works with trustees, fiduciary providers and family offices across the region, helping clients establish, review and manage wealth, succession and governance arrangements on a coordinated cross-border basis.

Wedlake Bell also advises individuals and families with Caribbean heritage or Caribbean connections, including those with family, business or investment interests spanning multiple jurisdictions. We help clients navigate the interaction between UK tax rules, succession planning, and existing offshore structures, ensuring wealth is preserved and passed efficiently across generations and jurisdictions.

In the press

When choice gives way to law: planning around forced heirship

However, in many countries, succession laws impose mandatory rules that reserve part of a deceased person’s estate for certain family members, typically children and sometimes spouses, regardless of the deceased’s wishes. These rules are commonly known as forced heirship.

Where do forced heirship rules apply?

Forced heirship is common in civil law jurisdictions and particularly in continental Europe, Latin America, the Middle East and parts of Asia. In these jurisdictions, a Will that seeks to disinherit protected heirs may be ineffective.

This differs markedly from the position in England and Wales, where the principle of testamentary freedom allows an individual to leave their estate to whomever they choose, subject to potential claims for reasonable financial provision under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975.

For internationally mobile families and those with assets in multiple jurisdictions, forced heirship can have a significant impact on estate planning and, if overlooked, may undermine succession arrangements.

Succession planning should involve consideration of the location of assets and local succession laws, the residence of relevant family members and any related tax consequences.

Why does it matter?

Clients may assume that a professionally drafted English Will will govern the succession of all their worldwide assets. Unfortunately, that is not always the case.

For example, whilst an English Will may provide that all assets pass to a surviving spouse, local forced heirship rules may entitle children to a compulsory share regardless of the terms of the English Will.

The result can be a range of unexpected outcomes, including:

  • beneficiaries receiving less than intended;
  • disputes between family members;
  • delays in estate administration;
  • difficulties selling or transferring overseas assets; and
  • unexpected tax consequences.

Interaction with tax planning

Forced heirship frequently affects tax planning. Although the legal and tax analyses are distinct, they should be considered together when developing a coordinated global estate plan.

For example, an estate plan may depend upon assets passing to a surviving spouse to benefit from the UK inheritance tax spouse exemption. If local succession law instead diverts part of those assets to protected heirs other than the spouse, the anticipated tax treatment may change significantly.

Planning around forced heirship

The available planning opportunities depend entirely on the jurisdictions involved. Potential options may include the following.

Choosing the applicable succession law

  • Under the EU Succession Regulation (commonly known as Brussels IV), an individual may elect for the law of their nationality to govern the succession of their estate. This can provide greater flexibility where assets are situated in participating EU Member States and may, in some cases, help mitigate the impact of local forced heirship rules.

Lifetime planning

  • In some jurisdictions, lifetime gifts may reduce the impact of forced heirship.
  • Certain lifetime transfers may be brought back into account, however, when calculating compulsory shares. In addition, gift taxes or similar transfer taxes may apply in the relevant jurisdiction.

Trust and corporate structures

  • These structures can sometimes assist, particularly where assets are held across multiple jurisdictions.
  • That said, not all countries recognise trusts in the same manner as the UK. In some jurisdictions, trusts may give rise to adverse tax consequences.

Local Wills

  • Whilst having a Will prepared under the law of the jurisdiction in which assets are situate does not remove forced heirship rights, separate Wills dealing with assets in specific jurisdictions can help ensure that succession arrangements are structured as effectively as possible within the applicable legal framework.
  • Care is needed to ensure that multiple Wills operate together and do not inadvertently revoke one another.

Conclusion

Forced heirship rules can override the terms of a Will, alter the intended distribution of assets, and create unforeseen tax and administrative complications. For those with international connections, understanding how these rules may apply is an essential part of effective succession planning. Failing to consider the impact of forced heirship will invariably lead to uncertainty during the administration of a cross-border estate, thereby increasing costs, including tax. Tailored advice can help identify potential issues and ensure that an estate plan works as intended across all relevant jurisdictions.

Making your Wills speak the same language

Formal validity

Will the Will be accepted as a validly executed document in the country in question? 

Many assume that an English form Will with two witnesses is always enough to cover assets in England and Wales. Whilst it is often true, it is not always the case, particularly if the person making the Will is non-UK resident and a non-UK national.  Solutions are available, but this is one point to watch out for.

Material validity

Will another country’s law give a person a claim to overturn the Will? Different countries can apply different rules in respect of the rights of family members who have been excluded from a Will.

Ownership of assets

Will your Will actually control how the assets are directed, or will that be covered by the way in which you own the assets?  This is often easier to miss with assets outside the UK, where joint ownership arrangements may be in place, such as matrimonial property regimes.

Trusts

Trusts, which are relatively common in English Wills, are taxed harshly in many other countries.  Consideration should be given to those inadvertent tax charges before including trusts in Wills with foreign elements.

Number of Wills

One Will per country in which you hold assets is often helpful in that it allows probate processes to run at the same time in different countries. 

However, many other factors can play into this decision, such as protecting against the risk of one Will inadvertently covering the same ground as another which may in some circumstances accidentally revoke the earlier will.

Key terms

Are you clear on the legal meaning of important terms in the Will? For example, does the word “children” include step-children or adopted children?  Does the term “spouse” include same-sex spouses?  Which country’s law applies to these issues, if the testator is not originally from the UK?

A well-drafted Will can resolve these questions.

Tax

Will drafting can have tax implications. 

For example, choosing English succession law to apply to all assets covered by your Will can bring additional assets within the scope of UK Inheritance Tax where some of the UK’s double tax treaties are in point.

How we can help

The above is not an exhaustive list and other factors should be considered.  Taking specialist advice can help avoid these traps.

Where assets, family members, residence or nationality connect you to multiple countries, careful planning can help avoid unintended consequences, delays and unnecessary tax exposure. If you would like to discuss your estate planning arrangements, or review whether your existing Wills remain appropriate given your international connections, we would be pleased to help. Please contact Andrew MacIntyre, Clare Armitage or your usual Wedlake Bell adviser.

International pre-nuptial agreements: tips and traps for the internationally mobile

Why international pre-nups matter more than ever

Today’s landscape of family life for many families is increasingly international. Cross-border relationships, global careers, and multi-jurisdictional asset portfolios are now commonplace among our clients. As a result, international pre-nuptial and post-nuptial agreements have become essential planning tools – not just to manage expectations in the event of divorce, but to provide clarity and protection across multiple legal systems.  However, a common misconception persists that a pre-nuptial agreement valid in one country will automatically be effective everywhere. In fact, the reality is far more complex and failing to appreciate this can have costly consequences.

International couples face unique challenges

Different countries adopt radically different approaches to the recognition and enforcement of marital agreements. For example, while English law now affords significant weight to agreements that are freely entered into with a full appreciation of their implications (following the watershed Supreme Court decision in Radmacher v Granatino), other jurisdictions may treat such agreements as binding contracts, may disregard them entirely, or apply them only to property situated within their borders. Furthermore, where and how divorce proceedings are commenced – often decided by domicile, habitual residence, or nationality – can have a decisive impact on whether a pre-nuptial agreement will be upheld and which law will be applied.

English courts have repeatedly emphasised that even if a pre-nuptial agreement is valid and commonplace in the country where it was signed, the English court will still scrutinise issues such as whether the agreement was entered into freely, with full understanding, and without undue pressure or significant imbalance between the parties. And the outcome must be fair.

English law assesses fairness in the circumstances existing when the court is asked to give effect to the agreement, rather than solely by reference to the position when it was signed. The court will consider the statutory factors and the parties’ needs, compensation and sharing claims, and will not give effect to terms that leave one party in a predicament of real need while the other enjoys a substantial surplus. Not every other legal jurisdiction follows the same approach and care must be taken to understand how foreign courts, which may be asked to hear a divorce case, will regard any nuptial agreement prepared elsewhere.

The Family Team at Wedlake Bell regularly advise on prenuptial agreements for UK-based and international families. We have compiled some tips for individuals making plans for a marriage.

Tips for international pre-nups

    • Early and specialist legal advice: both parties should obtain independent legal advice in all relevant jurisdictions. The absence of advice is not always fatal as the law currently stands but can reduce the weight the court gives to an agreement, especially if a party did not fully appreciate its implications. If, as seems likely, parliament reforms the law on pre-nuptial agreements, however, this requirement could well become mandatory and agreements reached without legal advice could be ignored by the court.
    • Full and frank financial disclosure: comprehensive disclosure ensures both parties understand the financial landscape and reduces scope for subsequent challenge. Whilst this requirement is also not currently mandatory, it seems likely to become so if the government’s contemplated legal reforms are placed on the statute book.
    • Clarity of intent: record the parties’ intentions – including the choice of law and preferred divorce jurisdiction – clearly in the agreement. Specify which country’s courts should resolve disputes and which law should apply. Couples signing nuptial agreements often place significant importance on predictability of outcome. Identifying the legal framework against which the agreement has been drafted enables advisers in each relevant country to coordinate its terms and help reduce later arguments about the parties’ intentions. A preferred-jurisdiction clause can discourage tactical forum disputes and support consistent planning for assets held across multiple jurisdictions, although it cannot by itself confer jurisdiction or prevent a court that is otherwise competent from hearing the case.
    • Meet needs generously: agreements directed at English courts should not leave a party in real need or fail to provide for children. English courts will not uphold agreements that are manifestly unfair or fail to meet needs. Nuptial agreements can be manifestly generous and still secure a significant outcome advantage compared to marrying without a pre-nuptial agreement – the two concepts are not mutually exclusive. 
    • Anticipate mobility: consider the likelihood of future moves, changes in domicile or habitual residence, and the possibility that proceedings could be issued in multiple forums.  Plans can change during marriage. Obtaining advice on the strength of your nuptial agreement should be part of the advice suite of any family contemplating a move to another country.
    • Never ignore children’s needs: any agreement that fails to make adequate provision for children’s needs is likely to be overridden by English courts. Parents would do well to consider at an early stage in the marriage how they plan to bring up their children and a well drafted pre-nuptial agreement can help with this by setting and managing expectations on a whole range of issues from hiring outside help to schooling.

Final Words

Nuptial agreements are powerful planning tools for internationally mobile families with global lives and assets. Proper planning, specialist advice, and careful drafting are essential to maximise enforceability and managing the risks of moving between different legal systems.

If you require advice in this area, please contact Alex Davies or another member of our family team.

Managing overseas assets: the reach and limits of a Lasting Power of Attorney

Making a Lasting Power of Attorney under the law of England and Wales (an “LPA“) – appointing someone to manage your affairs in England and Wales in the event of you lacking mental capacity to do so yourself – is an important part of your estate planning in respect of assets held here.

Why an English LPA may not be enough

If you have assets outside England and Wales, it should not be assumed that your LPA can deal with those assets.  The legal position can vary significantly from one country to another, and even from one state to another where countries are divided into states, such as the USA. You should seek legal advice in the country (or state) where the assets are located as to whether an English LPA would be accepted there or if there is an equivalent document that can be put in place in that country that will ensure your assets can be managed in the event of your incapacity. Putting in place local documents is often simpler than trying to enforce an LPA in a foreign jurisdiction, which might involve Court proceedings. 

Recognition of LPAs in overseas jurisdictions

Some countries will recognise an LPA, however, even once past that hurdle, you would need to find out if the institution holding the assets, for example a bank, in that country (or state) would accept the LPA. It can take some time and extensive steps to convince an institution that a foreign power of attorney is valid.  For an LPA to be accepted abroad, it can often be the case (as a bare minimum) that a certified copy of it, attested by a notary public with an apostille attached by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, together with a translated and certified version of the LPA in the local language, will be required. In addition to this, a legal opinion on the validity of the LPA in England and Wales would often be needed along with legal advice in the relevant country. Some countries may not, however, recognise an English LPA by any means.  All of this has cost implications, not to mention delays when it may be the case that the LPA needs to be used urgently. 

Coordinating multiple powers across jurisdictions

It is for these reasons that individuals who have assets in more than one country should consider putting in place a foreign power of attorney or  equivalent in each country from the beginning.

If making a foreign power, care must be taken to ensure that it does not inadvertently revoke or contradict an existing LPA and vice versa.

Considerations for other interests

Interests held in company or partnership structures might require separate documentation to ensure their continuing management in the event of incapacity.  The governing documents of those entities may contain their own provisions regarding decision-making and incapacity, and these should be reviewed alongside any powers of attorney to ensure appropriate planning and protections are in place.

Looking ahead

While putting in place multiple powers of attorney may involve additional upfront planning and expense, doing so can greatly reduce complexity, cost and delay in the future, ensuring that trusted individuals can manage assets efficiently across different jurisdictions at a time when support is needed most.

Please contact your usual Wedlake Bell adviser, or Victoria Mahon, for further information.

Globally Speaking – June 2026

Not a day goes by without some shift in the UK economic landscape. Against a backdrop of continual tax reform, evolving regulation, and an ever-present political undercurrent, stability can often feel elusive. As we look ahead to the remainder of 2026 — whilst awaiting the appointment of a seventh Prime Minister in just ten years followed by a newly formed cabinet — the question of certainty looms larger than ever.

For internationally mobile, high-net-worth individuals, this raises a critical consideration: what will the UK offer next? Beyond its historic appeal, how will any incoming government seek to attract individuals to live, work and spend time here — and in doing so, support the businesses, cultural institutions and heritage sectors that thrive when the economy is strong?
 
In this edition of Globally Speaking, we navigate around the political landscape and focus on practical insight, as our Private Client team shares what we are seeing across our international practice.

In this issue

  • International mobility and UK tax: planning for two critical milestones — for internationally mobile individuals, the UK’s new tax landscape is defined by timing. The end of the foreign income and gains regime and the onset of long-term residence for inheritance tax purposes can reshape tax exposure overnight. We explore how careful, forward-looking planning can make a material difference.
  • Potential changes to the taxation of Limited Liability Companies in the UK — proposed reforms to the UK tax treatment of US Limited Liability Companies could address long-standing double taxation issues, potentially making the UK a more attractive destination for internationally mobile investors.
  • Goodbye cards, hello codes: the shift to UK eVisas explained — cards and stamps are giving way to digital records as the UK moves to eVisas. The new system offers a more streamlined approach to proving immigration status, but requires individuals to actively manage and demonstrate their rights online
  • Wide or narrow: what role does the protector play in an offshore trust? — the recent Privy Council decision in A and others v C and others has brought welcome clarity to a much-debated question in trust law: what role does a protector play when trustee decisions require their consent, but the trust deed is silent on how that consent power should be exercised? The ruling is likely to have significant implications for offshore trust practice and highlights the importance of carefully drafted protector provisions.  
  • Update on the UK’s Trust Registration Service and Register of Overseas Entities — recent reforms and proposed changes will significantly expand disclosure obligations for offshore structures with UK connections, creating greater transparency. Trustees and advisers should act now to understand the shifting landscape and prepare for increased scrutiny.

Jurisdiction Focus: Switzerland

Switzerland continues to be a very popular relocation destination for internationally mobile UHNW families. Long associated with discretion, privacy, safety and stability, it offers a highly attractive proposition for UHNW individuals and families who are looking to relocate for lifestyle and/or tax reasons.

A key driver of inbound interest is Switzerland’s highly competitive tax framework for UHNW individuals. This includes the following: 

  • The lump-sum taxation (forfait) regime whereby eligible foreign nationals who do not undertake any professional activity in Switzerland are levied tax on deemed income that derives from their annual living expenses or a multiple of the annual rental costs.
  • Switzerland operates a cantonal tax system, with cantons having their own rates and approaches to lump-sum taxation, which can materially affect overall exposure to Swiss tax.
  • The annual lump sum tax is negotiated with the relevant cantonal authorities on a case by case basis which, when concluded, offers the taxpayer certainty and efficiency.
  • Advance tax clearances can be obtained to confirm the Swiss tax treatment of existing trust and other asset holding structures that a taxpayer may have as part of their Swiss pre-arrival planning.
  • Other Swiss taxes such as wealth tax and gift and inheritance taxes are also relevant considerations when choosing an appropriate Swiss canton.

We regularly advise clients based in the UK and who wish to relocate to Switzerland, making sure that their Swiss pre-arrival planning is fully co-ordinated with their departure from the UK.

We are also advising international clients who wish to establish asset holding structures with Swiss fiduciary providers or move existing structures to such providers, and often working alongside the clients’ long-standing network of financial intermediaries in the country.

We maintain strong, on-the-ground relationships in Switzerland with lawyers, fiduciaries and private banks to ensure that we are well placed to provide the tax, estate planning and structuring advice that our clients need on a cross-border basis in a fully comprehensive, collaborative and seamless manner.

In the press

  • Camilla Wallace was quoted in the Financial Times on global wealth trends. New research shows a slowdown in high-net-worth individuals changing tax residence, as earlier political and tax-driven moves begin to settle. Camilla notes that much of the initial relocation activity following the abolition of the UK’s non-dom regime has already taken place. Read more here.
  • George Merrylees has authored an article for FT Adviser, examining why the temporary repatriation facility (TRF) has seen limited uptake since its introduction. The article considers how, despite being a generous and simplified mechanism designed to encourage the use of offshore funds in the UK, wider economic and political uncertainty has meant many taxpayers have either delayed decisions or left the UK altogether. Read more here.
  • Petra Warrington and Sanjvee Shah are quoted by thewealthnet in their article on how some family offices are increasing investment diversification into luxury assets as next generation priorities reshape investment decisions. Read more here.

International mobility and UK tax: planning for two critical milestones

For internationally mobile individuals, the UK’s post-6 April 2025 tax landscape requires careful forward planning. Two milestones will often be particularly significant:

  • the end of the four-year period under the foreign income and gains (FIG) regime for recent arrivers; and
  • the point at which an individual has been UK resident for 10 out of the previous 20 UK tax years and becomes “long-term resident” (LTR) for inheritance tax (IHT) purposes.

Each of these junctures has the potential to materially widen an individual’s exposure to UK taxation.

Understanding the FIG regime

The FIG regime was introduced from 6 April 2025 as part of the UK’s move away from the remittance basis of taxation and towards a residence system for taxing foreign income and gains. Broadly, an eligible individual may claim relief on qualifying foreign income and gains arising in their first four tax years of UK residence provided they were non-UK tax resident for at least the previous 10 consecutive UK tax years (“a qualifying new resident”).

For many individuals who have recently arrived in the UK, the period during which a FIG claim is available is a narrow one. Once FIG relief ceases to apply, foreign income and gains arising will generally be taxed in the UK on the arising basis, subject to any available credit for foreign tax and to the terms of any applicable double tax treaty. That change can have significant consequences, particularly where the individual has substantial offshore investments, non-UK business interests or has an interest in a self-settled trust.

Making use of the remaining FIG window

For individuals who claim under the FIG regime, the final FIG years may represent a meaningful planning opportunity. Where a substantial gain is expected on the disposal of a foreign asset, or where material distributions or income realisations are anticipated from an overseas portfolio or structure, it may be sensible to consider whether those events can take place during the remaining FIG period rather than after it has ended. Timing may now directly affect whether proceeds fall outside the UK tax net altogether or are fully taxed as they arise.

This issue is especially acute in cases involving offshore structures. The 2025 tax reforms fundamentally altered the treatment of FIG within settlor-interested trust structures. In particular, the former protection for FIG arising within such structures is no longer available and the UK tax consequences can be significant. FIG that is treated as arising to a settlor can qualify for relief under the FIG regime; however, only if the settlor is a qualifying new resident and the FIG arises within their first four years of UK residence.

When long-term residence triggers IHT exposure

While the end of the FIG period is principally an income tax and capital gains tax issue, the 10-year milestone is often even more significant because of its implications for IHT.

From 6 April 2025, an individual’s exposure to IHT is no longer determined by domicile but by a residence system. Broadly, an individual becomes a LTR for IHT purposes once they have been UK resident for at least 10 of the previous 20 UK tax years. At that point, an individual’s worldwide asset base may come within the scope of UK IHT on lifetime transfers and on death.

Importantly, LTR status can continue after an individual leaves the UK for a “tail” period between three and ten tax years, depending on how many years an individual has been UK tax resident.

Trusts remain one of the most sensitive areas under the new rules. Overseas assets in a trust an individual has set up or added to can be within the IHT regime when that individual is LTR, even if the assets were settled when the individual was not yet LTR. That represents a significant departure from the previous position that the IHT status of a trust was fixed by reference to the settlor’s domicile position when the trust was created.

Cross-border family arrangements also require attention. Where one spouse or civil partner has become LTR and the other has not, the availability of the spouse exemption for IHT may be more limited than many couples expect. Although an election may in some circumstances be available, that is not a step to be taken lightly, since it can widen the recipient spouse’s own exposure to IHT.

Reviewing structures

Against this background, it is important for individuals to undertake a thorough review of their affairs before either milestone is reached.

Before the FIG period ends, individuals should carefully identify which income and gains fall within the FIG regime and consider whether material transactions ought to be accelerated while relief remains available. In some cases, where a taxpayer had previous claimed the remittance basis, consideration can also be given to the availability of the “temporary repatriation facility” to bring amounts derived from previously untaxed and unremitted FIG into the UK at a lower flat rate of tax (further details of which are outlined in this article).

Before the 10-year IHT threshold is reached, the exercise is usually broader. It will often involve a review of an individual’s worldwide asset base, existing trust structures, succession plans and any family arrangements that may have IHT consequences under the new residence-based IHT regime once the 10-year point has passed.

Conclusion

For internationally mobile individuals, the expiry of the period to qualify for the FIG regime and becoming LTR for IHT purposes can significantly increase their exposure to UK taxation. A timely review of FIG, offshore structures, trust arrangements and succession planning can make a material difference to the options available. Given the complexity of the new rules, advice should be taken well in advance of either milestone being reached.

Update on the UK’s Trust Registration Service and Register of Overseas Entities

Trust Registration Service

Under the current framework, a non UK trust is generally required to register on the TRS only in limited circumstances. These include where the trust directly acquires UK land on or after 6 October 2020, incurs a UK tax liability, or (where a UK resident trustee is involved) enters into an ongoing business relationship with a UK “relevant person” (for example, a solicitor, accountant, bank, estate agent or other person to whom the UK’s money laundering legislation applies).

Regulations made on 9 June 2026 introduce a significant extension to the TRS regime. In particular, non‑UK trusts that acquired an interest in UK land before 6 October 2020, and continue to hold that interest when the new rules come into force on 30 June 2026, will be brought within scope. We previously published an article on this subject in Globally Speaking October 2025. Since this article was published, we now know that affected trusts will benefit from a transitional period in which to gather the required information, with a registration deadline of 1 September 2027.

The policy emphasis on transparency is further reinforced by the TRS data‑sharing rules. Although the TRS register is not publicly searchable, information may be disclosed to those who can demonstrate a “legitimate interest”, typically linked to the investigation of financial crime; however, there is currently no data-sharing in respect of non-UK trusts holding UK land provided the trust has no UK trustees. The regulations extend the data-sharing rules so that this category of trust will be within scope for data requests going forwards. This is a material widening of transparency for offshore structures. Importantly, the data-sharing requirement is different where a trust holds a controlling interest in a “third country entity” (broadly, a non‑UK entity which is not subject to national legislation equivalent to the EU’s rules on transparency of beneficial owners). In such cases, information regarding the trust’s beneficial owners may be disclosed without the need to satisfy the “legitimate interest” test. Currently, this rule does not apply to non-UK trusts holding UK land where there are no UK trustees, but this will change when the regulations come into force at the end of this month. Therefore, while safeguards remain, the reality is that trust structures holding UK land are becoming more visible, which may raise privacy and governance concerns, particularly for high-profile families.

The compliance burden should not be underestimated. Registration requires detailed disclosure of the trust’s beneficial owners (including settlors, trustees and beneficiaries). Thereafter, trustees must ensure that the TRS record is actively kept up to date. Failures to comply may give rise to penalties.

Register of Overseas Entities

Where UK land is held through an overseas entity, trustees within the ownership chain must already engage with the ROE regime. ROE requires overseas entities to provide Companies House with details of their registrable beneficial owners as a condition of acquiring or holding UK land.

Since 31 August 2025, members of the public have been able to apply to Companies House for access to trust information recorded on the ROE in certain circumstances. We previously published articles on this subject in Globally Speaking March 2025 and October 2025.

The latest draft regulations published on 1 June 2026 go further in terms of information becoming more freely available to the public. In particular, the proposed reforms remove the requirement for an applicant to identify a trust by name when requesting disclosure. Instead, the name and identification number of the overseas entity (both publicly available via Companies House) will be sufficient; thereby removing a practical barrier to obtaining trust-related information.

The draft regulations also adopt a less restricted approach to disclosure where trusts involve minor beneficiaries. While information relating directly to minors will continue to be withheld unless a “legitimate interest” is established, other associated trust information may be disclosed without meeting that threshold. This reflects an easing of the current position, under which broader trust information would typically be withheld in such cases.

The ROE protection regime remains available, enabling applications to Companies House to withhold certain information from public disclosure. However, protection will continue to be granted only in limited circumstances. A welcome development is the streamlining of the process for removing an individual’s residential address from the public register, as evidence of actual occupation will no longer be required. In most cases, however, a replacement service address will still need to be provided.

The draft regulations are currently making their way through Parliament and will come into force on the day after they are made.

For many non-UK trusts, these reforms mark a clear transition towards a more visible and regulated environment. Early engagement with advisers will be essential to ensure compliance, consider whether any protective applications may be appropriate and to manage wider reputational and governance risks.

For further information, please contact the Wedlake Bell Private Client team or your usual adviser.

Wide or narrow: what role does the protector play in an offshore trust?

Earlier this year, the Privy Council issued an important decision in the case of A and others v C and others [2026] UKPC 11. The decision provides helpful clarity on a long standing practical question: what role does a protector play where their consent is required for trustee decisions, but the trust deed does not explain how that consent power should be exercised?

Although the case arose in Bermuda, the decision is expected to influence trust practice across offshore jurisdictions.

What is a protector?

A protector is a person or company appointed under a trust deed to hold specific powers, including rights to approve or veto important trustee decisions.

Protectors are often used to provide comfort to the settlor and beneficiaries, act as a link between the family and the trustees and be an additional layer of oversight and accountability.

The “wide role” and the “narrow role”

Historically, there has been uncertainty about how a protector should approach their role when asked to give consent. Two competing views had developed.

  • Under the “narrow role”, the protector’s function is supervisory: the protector asks whether the trustee’s decision is one that a reasonable and properly informed trustee could make and, if it is, the protector would ordinarily be expected to provide consent.
  • Under the “wide role”, the protector must exercise their own independent fiduciary discretion and reach their decision as to whether consent should be given, taking into account relevant considerations and disregarding irrelevant ones.

Facts of the case

The case of A and others v C and others concerned the “X Trusts”, a group of discretionary trusts governed by English law, Bermudian law and Jersey law, and which had at least one Bermuda resident trust corporation as trustee. The trusts benefited two family branches and certain important trustee decisions required prior written protector consent, including capital appointments and dealings with specified securities. In 2017, the trustees proposed a significant restructuring which would have resulted in an unequal division of assets between the two branches. Protector consent was required for the trustee to proceed in the proposed manner. The protectors indicated that they were unlikely to approve the proposals on the basis that they were entitled to exercise the “wide role”. The Bermudian courts disagreed and held that the protectors had the “narrow role”. That decision was then appealed to the Privy Council.

The Privy Council’s decision

The Privy Council concluded that, on the wording of the trust deeds, the protectors had the “wide role”. However, this was not a general statement that applies to all protectors: the Privy Council emphasised that the protector’s role depends on the wording of the trust deed. Where a trust deed grants a protector a veto or consent power, but it does not stipulate how that power is to be exercised, the court should not assume that the protector’s role is purely supervisory. Instead, consideration needs to be given to whether the trust deed and/or general law impose any constraints on the exercise of such power.

In this case, the Privy Council held that there were provisions in the trust deeds supporting the wider role for the protectors, including:

  • the ability of the protectors to release or waive their powers which would be unusual if the protectors had a narrow role of purely checking legality of trustee decisions;
  • the ability of the trustees to act without obtaining the unanimous consent of any joint protectors;
  • the fact that protector consent was only required for certain specified trustee decisions.

Conclusions

Scope of the decision – the decision is binding in Bermuda, but it is likely to be highly persuasive in other trust jurisdictions. In Jersey, it is broadly consistent with Re Piedmont and Riviera Trusts [2021] JRC 248, which had already adopted the wide view.

Reviewing existing trust deeds – trustees should review existing trust deeds with protector provisions to ensure that they, the settlor and protector all understand the nature and extent of the protector’s powers.
Drafting new trust deeds clearly – if the protector is intended to act only as a limited supervisory “watchdog”, or alternatively to exercise independent discretion, this should be stated expressly.

Appointment of the protector – if the protector is expected to have a more active role, due consideration should be given as to who is appointed, to ensure that the chosen protector has the required level of independence and skills.

Trustees should involve the protector at an early stage – where the protector has a wide role, the trustees should engage with them as early as possible on decisions requiring consent and maintain open communication to avoid delays or disagreements.

For further information, please contact Sanjvee Shah, Caroline Russell or your usual Wedlake Bell adviser.

Goodbye cards, hello codes: the shift to UK eVisas explained

The UK has completed a significant shift in its immigration system, replacing physical residence permits and passport endorsements with a fully digital model centred on electronic visa records, known as eVisas. Overseas nationals living in the UK or applying for long-term visas will no longer routinely receive biometric residence permits or immigration stamps. Instead, their immigration status is recorded and accessed online through a UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI) account.

This change represents a fundamental transformation in how individuals evidence their lawful status in the UK. The ability to prove immigration status remains critical across a wide range of everyday activities, including international travel, commencing employment, renting property, accessing healthcare or public benefits, and opening bank accounts. Under the new system, individuals demonstrate their status digitally, typically by generating a share code for employers or landlords, or through automated checks conducted by government departments and carriers such as airlines.

Importantly, expired biometric residence permits and cards are no longer valid for travel to the UK. Individuals who have not registered for or accessed their eVisa risk being denied boarding by carriers, even where they hold valid underlying immigration permission.

While many individuals already have an eVisa in place, including EU nationals granted status under the EU Settlement Scheme, a significant cohort of UK residents must take proactive steps to ensure they can access their digital record. This includes new visa holders, individuals with indefinite leave to remain who rely on historic physical documents, and those with expired biometric cards.

A significant number of long-term residents continue to hold indefinite leave to remain evidenced by passport stamps or vignettes. Although these remain valid for the time being, the Home Office encourages conversion to an eVisa through a “No Time Limit” application.   

Failure to secure access to an eVisa carries practical and potential legal consequences. While holders of expired biometric cards may continue to use them for limited in-country purposes for a transitional period, they face risks of non-compliance and disruption, particularly when travelling. Those relying on legacy documents may continue to do so for now, but this position is subject to future policy change.

Overall, the UK’s transition to eVisas reflects a clear policy direction towards a digital-first immigration system. While the Home Office considers eVisas to be more secure, as they cannot be lost, stolen or damaged, individuals must ensure they are able to access and demonstrate their status effectively to avoid disruption.

If you or your organisation encounter any difficulties accessing, evidencing or converting immigration status under the new eVisa system, our team would be pleased to provide tailored advice and practical support to ensure ongoing compliance and minimise disruption.

For further information please contact Julia Jackson or your usual Wedlake Bell adviser.