Own Nothing, but Control Everything – A Concept That Can Change Your Life
- Thread starter JohnLocke
- Start date
- Status
FYI
Elon musk also using Revocable trust to buy stake in twitter.
You can google search for more information.
Elon musk also using Revocable trust to buy stake in twitter.
You can google search for more information.
okay, if I read the below right from the links above, this is all about EU and EU only, means, countries like Switzerland, UK, Andorra, Lichtenstein and the rest of the 19 countries at the moment are excluded from all this crap.
What's your thought's in regards to establish yourself including a company and trust in such non EU countries, are we back on track again in regards what the above article is all about - own nothing, but control everything! ?
What's your thought's in regards to establish yourself including a company and trust in such non EU countries, are we back on track again in regards what the above article is all about - own nothing, but control everything! ?
I wouldn't rely on the Seychelles for anything anymore. Ever since they just handover files to the first the best that asks nicely they lost the privilege of being a proper offshore jurisdiction. The handing over of records happened already in 2016-2017.
All in all I completely agree with the theory behind the concept.
In reality however it doesn't always work like this anymore. Also not when looking at the jurisdictions which are considered good. Mainly this comes from treating every setup transparent. For as long as governments started to implement this the structures used for most people with wealth below 5M didn't︀ work how they were intended anymore.
To setup something bulletproof (for the next 5-10 years︁ after which its likely time to revise some if not all elements) you need and︂ the assets and the knowledgeable trust company / lawyer etc. Most of these parties (un)fortunately︃ can only be found via personal introductions.
All in all I completely agree with the theory behind the concept.
In reality however it doesn't always work like this anymore. Also not when looking at the jurisdictions which are considered good. Mainly this comes from treating every setup transparent. For as long as governments started to implement this the structures used for most people with wealth below 5M didn't︀ work how they were intended anymore.
To setup something bulletproof (for the next 5-10 years︁ after which its likely time to revise some if not all elements) you need and︂ the assets and the knowledgeable trust company / lawyer etc. Most of these parties (un)fortunately︃ can only be found via personal introductions.
So messed up. Soon you will have to register EVERYTHING inside an EU-wide database... Literally︅ nothing will be private anymore, your house passed through generations etc. everything in the eyes︆ of the EU.... Literally impossible to be off the grid soon..
Exactly. Registering all your assets just makes it easy for a government to confiscate/freeze them. History has taught us governments cannot always be trusted sadly.
well if history returns... will there be a Switzerland this time too? smi(&%
for the ones not knowing what I am talking about...
https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/twenty...nks-settled-with-holocaust-survivors/44315844
for the ones not knowing what I am talking about...
https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/twenty...nks-settled-with-holocaust-survivors/44315844
Although the article is quite informative it sort of idolizes the trust and makes it sound very easy. That is not the case. There are indeed a lot of trusts being set up out there but only a︀ few have been challenged. Looking deep into case law ( mostly US, little UK and︁ Indian case law exists) immediately you understand that the great majority of the trusts out︂ would not stand a potential challenge as they would have been easily pierced and considered︃ as sham trusts ending in disregarding them by courts for the benefit of a potential︄ claimant. The original intention of the trust and its current manipulative forms that have appeared︅ in the offshore industry have a major gap.
As a basic metric of the robustness︆ of a trust you should look at the "reliquishment of control". Once a trust is︇ set up and finalized the less effective control the settlor maintains over the trust assets︈ and how they are treated the more robust the trust becomes against potential challenges.
Which jurisdiction one would choose to set up the trust is a relative question. This is︉ a common law concept and as mentioned there is rather limited case law on which︊ to rely. Each jurisdiction applies some little differences as to the rules for setting up︋ the trust which usually affect taxation or some countries can be more suitable than others︌ because of inherent difficulties in filing for a claim over a dismissal of a trust︍ or registering and enforcing another jurisdiction's court decision. Other variables ( non exhaustive) which play︎ an important role is whether a jurisdiction recognizes the concept of trusts; civil law jurisdictions️ do not recognize or understand the concept. This may be a two edge sword as a civil law court may disregard the trust arrangement altogether and look at the " owner " of the trust ( the settlor) or they may disregard the arrangement and its beneficiaries and look only to the legal title holder of the trust property ( the trustee(s) ) and render it unable to look any further. Additionally the situs (location ) of the trust assets is also important as they may under a local court be freezed on a limited scope of application of local laws. Disrespecting foreing laws may︀ be more easy to do if the jurisdiction where the trust was set up has︁ a weak judiciary system while an EU country or a country with strong international presense︂ as a place of set up would stand more effective. Finally, complex trust set ups︃ with two many variables create management difficulties for trustees , protectors and other involved persons︄ which can result into internal disputes on trustee's duties and decisions made. It appears therefore︅ better to keep a trust as simple and concise as possible while at the same︆ time to be coherent and encompassing giving little room for misinterpetation or missapplication. Balancing all︇ the above is not the easiest of tasks and personal circumstances of settlors and beneficiaries︈ add a lot to that.
So next time someone tries to sell you a trust︉ as if its "candy", please know that what you are buying is probably merely "candy".︊
As a basic metric of the robustness︆ of a trust you should look at the "reliquishment of control". Once a trust is︇ set up and finalized the less effective control the settlor maintains over the trust assets︈ and how they are treated the more robust the trust becomes against potential challenges.
Which jurisdiction one would choose to set up the trust is a relative question. This is︉ a common law concept and as mentioned there is rather limited case law on which︊ to rely. Each jurisdiction applies some little differences as to the rules for setting up︋ the trust which usually affect taxation or some countries can be more suitable than others︌ because of inherent difficulties in filing for a claim over a dismissal of a trust︍ or registering and enforcing another jurisdiction's court decision. Other variables ( non exhaustive) which play︎ an important role is whether a jurisdiction recognizes the concept of trusts; civil law jurisdictions️ do not recognize or understand the concept. This may be a two edge sword as a civil law court may disregard the trust arrangement altogether and look at the " owner " of the trust ( the settlor) or they may disregard the arrangement and its beneficiaries and look only to the legal title holder of the trust property ( the trustee(s) ) and render it unable to look any further. Additionally the situs (location ) of the trust assets is also important as they may under a local court be freezed on a limited scope of application of local laws. Disrespecting foreing laws may︀ be more easy to do if the jurisdiction where the trust was set up has︁ a weak judiciary system while an EU country or a country with strong international presense︂ as a place of set up would stand more effective. Finally, complex trust set ups︃ with two many variables create management difficulties for trustees , protectors and other involved persons︄ which can result into internal disputes on trustee's duties and decisions made. It appears therefore︅ better to keep a trust as simple and concise as possible while at the same︆ time to be coherent and encompassing giving little room for misinterpetation or missapplication. Balancing all︇ the above is not the easiest of tasks and personal circumstances of settlors and beneficiaries︈ add a lot to that.
So next time someone tries to sell you a trust︉ as if its "candy", please know that what you are buying is probably merely "candy".︊
What do︇ you think about Nevis and Cook Island trusts? I hear a lot about them in︈ Asset Protection where the trust owns an LLC and that LLC holds all of the︉ money/assets etc, and the UBO is appointed as a manager and if the assets need︊ to be protected, the law firm steps in and takes control and becomes the manager︋ until the situation is settled. I've heard that it's tried and tested, but I'm still︌ kind of skeptical. I'd definitely like to set up some trusts in the future, as︍ I do think they have value as instruments, but I'm not so sure as to︎ how "bulletproof" they really are..
I haven't heard︁ of this arrangement before but it seems the settlor still maintains control. Obviously the overall︂ set up should be looked at but from what you describe its like the settlor︃ hides behinds his own finger. Do you have some link I can look into in︄ more detail?
Thanks. I ve looked into it. Basically what they are proposing by having the settlor as manager of the LLC and maintaining control, signatory powers etc. ( it says it clearly in the article), is exactly opposite to what a trust should be. The text of the trust document should be looked at of course to identify what are the powers reserved by the settlor as well as what powers he maintains on the company level. But in general this is not a solid trust structure by itself.
Haowever, they seem to rely its effectivness on what they present as a fact that︀ a foreign judgment cannot be enforced on the local trustees. This is something that obviously︁ needs to be confirmed before going ahead as well as whether maybe a claim could︂ be filed directly locally or whether any mechanism exists allowing for a foreign judgments to︃ first be registered locally and then enforced ( there are international bilateral and multilateral agreements︄ allowing for this, as well as local laws in some countries - I do not︅ know rhe extent to which the Cook Islands abides to any of this )
So this arrangement may provide some protection , not so on the basis of being a︆ robust trust , but rather on the basis of it being difficult to enforce a︇ claim against it based on restrictive local laws. So it might work in some instances︈ especially if the bank account or situs of the trust asset is in the same︉ country, but it could also end up being quite problematic in other circumstances. Make sure︊ to check things thoroughly before going ahead with such arrangements.
Haowever, they seem to rely its effectivness on what they present as a fact that︀ a foreign judgment cannot be enforced on the local trustees. This is something that obviously︁ needs to be confirmed before going ahead as well as whether maybe a claim could︂ be filed directly locally or whether any mechanism exists allowing for a foreign judgments to︃ first be registered locally and then enforced ( there are international bilateral and multilateral agreements︄ allowing for this, as well as local laws in some countries - I do not︅ know rhe extent to which the Cook Islands abides to any of this )
So this arrangement may provide some protection , not so on the basis of being a︆ robust trust , but rather on the basis of it being difficult to enforce a︇ claim against it based on restrictive local laws. So it might work in some instances︈ especially if the bank account or situs of the trust asset is in the same︉ country, but it could also end up being quite problematic in other circumstances. Make sure︊ to check things thoroughly before going ahead with such arrangements.
Yeah, it︋ seems like it could be good if you hold all assets offshore, but I wouldn't︌ count on having domestic real estate etc. being protected in the same degree. Pretty interesting︍ though. I did email them once and the prices were quite steep, I think it︎ was around 22,000$ for the trust and 5,000$ for the LLC and transferring it to️ the Trust and bank account opening.
Thanks for the feedback. If you ever consider a trust set up, I ll be glad to help, I am actually getting excited with these things 🙂))
- Status