Trust Estate
Offshore Trusts And The Drive Towards Transparency

Most trusts are used for legitimate purposes. Those that are not will find it increasingly difficult to invest and operate in jurisdictions such as the UK, argues the author of this article.
The UK recently unveiled a new beneficial ownership disclosure regime (as reported here). For example, the new Register of Overseas Entities is held by Companies House and requires overseas entities that own land or property in the UK to declare their beneficial owners and/or managing officers. Another development is the Register of Persons With Significant Control (PSC). These raise new compliance challenges that wealth advisors must grasp.
To delve into the details of what’s involved is Marilyn
McKeever, partner at law firm BDB Pitmans. We hope
these insights are useful and encourage discussion. Feel free to
enter the debate and contact tom.burroughes@wealthbriefing.com
The usual disclaimers apply to views of outside
contributors.
Trusts and transparency
Transparency includes making information available about the true
ownership of entities, as well as exchanging information between
tax authorities around the world. This is a global initiative
aiming to prevent and expose tax evasion, money laundering and
terrorist financing.
Trusts are within the scope of the transparency regimes, and
rightly so, but they have been squeezed into a framework designed
by civil lawyers for companies and similar entities.
Register of Persons With Significant Control
(PSC)
The PSC Register requires UK companies to disclose their “persons
with significant control”/“beneficial owners” to Companies House.
The register is open to anyone who wants to see it. If the chain
of owners ends in a trust, the PSC of the trust, must be
identified, which includes anyone who in fact exercises
“significant influence or control over the activities of that
trust.”
Many settlors, beneficiaries and protectors will be PSCs. The
register discloses extensive personal information, including
name, date of birth, nationality, address and the nature of the
PSC’s “control.” If a PSC shows that they are at serious
risk of violence or intimidation, access may be restricted to
public authorities e.g. HMRC and the police.
The onus is on the company to find out who its PSCs are, and it
and its officers are subject to criminal sanctions and fines if
they do not make reasonable efforts to do so.
If a PSC fails to provide their information to the company, or
provides inaccurate information, they are also subject to fines
and a prison sentence of up to two years and the company can
impose restrictions which prevent dealings with the shares, the
receipt of dividends and the exercise of voting rights.
Affected trustees will have the tasks of identifying the PSCs,
which can be tricky where de facto influence is the test and
explaining to the settlor or beneficiaries why their personal
details have to be disclosed.
The Trust Register
The Trust Register imposes obligations on the trustees to
register the trust with HMRC. The trustees must provide details
of who they are, their address and country of residence.
Individual trustees must provide additional personal information.
They must also provide personal information about the settlor,
beneficiaries and protectors.
Initially, offshore trusts only had to be registered if they had
a UK tax liability. The regime has been extended to include
non-UK express trusts which have or acquire real estate in the UK
or which have at least one trustee in the UK and a business
relationship with a UK professional. Such trusts should have
registered by 1 September 2022. Government figures show that up
to the end of June, 7,700 offshore trusts had registered.
As well as law enforcement agencies, anyone with a “legitimate
interest” has access. HMRC guidance indicates that this only
applies to individuals and organisations investigating money
laundering or terrorist financing involving the trust. More
worrying for trustees is that anyone can obtain the information
on the register about a trust which controls a non-EEA company or
other legal entity. So, journalists and members of the public are
entitled to see personal details of the settlor and beneficiaries
of any registered trust which owns an offshore investment holding
company.
HMRC will not provide information about “beneficial owners” who
are under 18, lack capacity or would be at risk of blackmail,
kidnapping, violence or intimidation. For some families these are
very real risks.
A trustee who fails to register a trust or registers late, can be
personally liable for a penalty of £5,000 ($5,892) per offence.
The penalty cannot be paid out of the trust fund. HMRC
has indicated that it will take a “softly softly” approach
to a first offence, unless the trustees have defaulted
deliberately.
Trustees also have an obligation to update the information on the
register if it changes, within 90 days of the change. Failure to
do so promptly can again result in £5,000 personal fines.
The Register of Overseas Entities
The final piece of the puzzle (for now) is the Register of
Overseas Entities (ROE) which, from 1 August 2022, requires
“entities,” principally offshore companies, which own UK
land to register with Companies House. The company must provide
information about itself and its “beneficial owners.” The
rules are similar to those for the PSC. Where trustees are the
beneficial owners, their details must be registered as well as
personal information for the beneficiaries, settlors and other
“interested persons.”
The public has access to the information on the ROE, although
trust information is shared only with law enforcement and other
public agencies.
A company which fails to register, and its officers, are subject
to criminal sanctions including fines up to £2,500 for each day
of default and up to five years in jail for the officers. The
company must update the information each year and failure to do
so is also a criminal offence, as is the provision of false
information. In addition, a defaulting company will be unable to
register its property interest at the Land Registry or deal with
it.
Another headache for trustees is that the information about
beneficial owners and the company’s officers must be “verified”
by a UK regulated agent before the entity can be registered. This
is a stringent process going beyond client due diligence. Many
professionals are reluctant to provide the service because the
professional will commit a criminal offence themselves if they
get it wrong.
Conclusion
Most trusts are used for legitimate purposes. Those that are not
will find it increasingly difficult to invest and operate in
jurisdictions, like the UK, which take their international
obligations seriously.
While that is a good thing, the drive for transparency imposes
increasing and extensive compliance burdens on innocent trusts,
erodes the ability of trustees to safeguard the privacy of their
settlors and beneficiaries and puts the trustees, their
underlying companies and their officers at risk of criminal and
financial penalties.
Trustees need good, and timely, advice about their obligations.