Tag: Wealth Stewardship

Why So Many Successful Families are Quietly Overpaying to Protect their Wealth

Most people find me for one specific reason: I live in Switzerland, one of the most stable jurisdictions in the world to hold wealth, with a currency that has spent decades earning its reputation for strength. So the request usually starts small. “I’d like to open a Swiss bank account for a portion of my wealth. Can you help?”

That’s the question on the surface. But as I dig into the fuller picture, a different story tends to emerge. A trust structure set up a decade or two ago, built around a family and a set of goals that don’t exist anymore. A business that’s since been sold, without anyone revisiting what that means for the entities built around it. A shift in the family itself: a divorce, a remarriage, a child grown into their own financial life. None of it was ever wrong. It just hasn’t been touched in years, while everything else kept moving.

That’s the real discovery, almost every time: without ever deciding to, these families have built a family office. Not the sleek, coordinated kind, with one team quietly running the whole picture. The accidental kind, assembled one relationship at a time. An estate attorney who set up a trust in 2015. A financial advisor who manages the brokerage account. A CPA who handles taxes but has never spoken to the attorney. A round of December giving to a favorite charity, mostly to soften that year’s tax bill, with no real strategy, thought, or intention behind it.

Each piece made sense when it was built. The problem is that life doesn’t stay still, and neither should a wealth plan. A good plan breathes. It moves with you; it isn’t a set of documents signed once and shelved. When it doesn’t move, the pieces stop talking to each other. That’s where the real cost starts.

The Hidden Cost of a Fragmented System

When your financial life is split across professionals who don’t coordinate, you become the coordinator by default. You’re the one connecting the dots, remembering which advisor knows what, and catching the gaps nobody else can see, because no one else has the full picture.

That role comes with a cost that never shows up on an invoice: time, energy, mental bandwidth. Successful, capable people often spend hours every month just managing their own management. The frustrating part is that this usually isn’t a sign of poor planning. It’s a sign of good planning that was never given the chance to work as one system.

The result is a strange paradox: as wealth grows, so does the complexity required to protect it, and often that complexity grows faster than the value it provides. Costs quietly climb. Redundant structures pile up. The sense of control that wealth is supposed to bring starts to feel like a second job.

Why This Moment Feels Different

For many American families right now, this realization is arriving alongside a bigger question, not just “is my system coordinated?” but “is it resilient?”

Lawsuits, political shifts, currency risk, and tax exposure aren’t hypothetical anymore. They’re the reasons more families are rethinking where, and how, they hold their wealth. A fragmented system doesn’t just cost time; it’s often blind to exactly these risks, because no single advisor is positioned to see the whole picture.

Take the sold business mentioned earlier. While a business is active, the entities and trusts around it get plenty of attention: lawyers are engaged, everyone is watching closely. Once it sells and the check clears, that same structure often goes quiet. Nobody circles back to ask what the sale means for the trust that used to hold shares in it, or whether the liquidity event changes what “diversified” even means for that family now. The structure isn’t wrong. It’s just frozen at a moment in time that’s already passed.

Multiply that by a decade or two, add a family that’s grown, shifted, or restructured itself along the way, and the result is a plan built for a version of the family that no longer exists. This is the moment when families start asking a better question, not “who else do we need to hire?” but “how do we build something lean enough to actually work for who we are now, not who we were?”

What a Wealth Operating System Looks Like

This is what I’d call moving from an accidental structure to an intentional one, and the families we work with are usually solving for a handful of things at once:

• Protection that’s built in, not bolted on. Shielding assets from lawsuits, political instability, volatile currency, and unnecessary taxation, not reactively, but as a feature of how everything is structured, so it holds up under pressure instead of being tested for the first time during a crisis.
• Diversification that’s real, not nominal. Spreading wealth internationally, so no single country, currency, or legal system holds all the risk. Wealth concentrated in one jurisdiction is wealth exposed to that jurisdiction’s problems, whatever those happen to be in a given decade.
• A foundation, not a workaround. Building on stable, well-governed structures designed for long-term security rather than short-term convenience: the kind still standing regardless of what’s in the news that week.
• One picture, not five. Consolidating scattered pieces into a single coordinated system, so the trust, the entities, the advisors, and the giving all reflect the same current reality, and no one is left holding it together alone.
• Alignment with what the family actually values. At some point the goal isn’t protection for its own sake. It’s making sure wealth supports the life and the legacy a family wants, rather than quietly running their life for them.

Done well, this removes and simplifies overlapping structures, closing the gaps fragmentation created, and building something that finally works for the family instead of the other way around. Sometimes that process starts with a simple Swiss bank account request. It rarely ends there, and that’s a good thing.

Wealth Should Serve Your Life

I think about this both professionally and personally. I’m a mother to a three-year-old, a cycling instructor, and a relationship manager, and I’ve come to believe that wealth only means something if it actually serves the life you’re living, not if it becomes one more thing to manage, worry about, or untangle.

Life doesn’t hold still for any of us. Kids grow up. Businesses get built, and sold. Marriages change shape. Currencies rise and fall, and so do governments’ appetites for taxing what’s been built or passed down. A wealth plan that can’t move with all of that isn’t really a plan.

The families who get this right are the ones with the most intentional systems: lean, coordinated, and revisited often enough to still fit the life they’re living.

If any of this sounds familiar, if you suspect your own plan has quietly become an accidental family office, that’s not a failure. It’s just the first thing worth looking at together.

 

---

 

This information is intended for general educational purposes only and should not be construed as legal or investment advice.

After four outstretched years, the Bosnian war ended in 1995. While the international community declared peace, exhaled, and moved on, the locals were left to confront the threatening remnants of the war.

Decades after the ceasefire, more than half a million Bosnians still live in communities ringed by minefields. Bosnia has pledged to clear them by 2027, yet independent assessments say that deadline will be missed as the funds are not there. Beyond Bosnia, landmines and unexploded ordnance still kill or injure thousands of people every year, most of them civilians.

A landmine is not built to win a battle. It is built to paralyze a community. It keeps families off their land, away from water sources, and out of schools and clinics. It has no expiry date, no allegiance, and no memory of the cause that put it there. Bosnia and Herzegovina is one of several countries now described as “massively contaminated” by mines. The pattern repeats in Ukraine, which is now the most heavily contaminated country on earth. The cost of clearing it runs into tens of billions. While agencies debate and fund raise in increments, entire agricultural economies stall season after season.

This is not a failure of knowledge. In 1997, the Ottawa Treaty banned anti-personnel mines. More than 160 nations signed, yet the mines remain in the ground. In some cases, governments have even frozen or withdrawn funding from active clearance programs. Teams that had been working for years have arrived on site to find that the money has simply vanished.

When New Wealth Steps In

Into this gap stepped an unlikely actor: a small group of individuals whose wealth was built in Bitcoin.

They share a recognizable profile. They tend to think in long time horizons. They are skeptical of large institutions and of promises written in currencies they do not trust. Their wealth did not come from inheritance or corporate stock awards, but from holding a volatile asset through cycles that punished hesitation and rewarded conviction. As their financial position changed, so did the questions they asked.

One of them looked at landmines not as a foreign policy problem or an item in an aid budget, but as an engineering and logistics challenge. They did not convene a task force, commission a report, or write a single cheque to an existing charity and step away. Instead, they funded the design and deployment of mine removal technology built for real terrain and real conditions. That equipment is now in the field, in places like Angola and Senegal, finding and clearing mines one by one.

The sums involved are not symbolic. Tens of millions of dollars have gone straight into the physical removal of weapons from the soil, rather than into campaigns, conferences, or general appeals. For people living near those fields, the impact is simple to describe. A farmer who could not safely work his land for decades can plant again. A child who once walked a long detour to school can finally take the direct path. A village that has lived in the shadow of an old war can begin to build on ground that is no longer trying to kill it.

A Different Kind of Battlefield

The pattern repeats in another arena.

Human trafficking today is a criminal industry on the scale of a national economy. Some of its worst expressions are not in fragile states but in wealthy ones. California, one of the richest economies in the world, is also a major hub for sex trafficking.

Control is exercised through debt, threats, stolen documents, addiction, and the slow removal of every other option. Many victims are locked in a life they cannot see a way out of. When they are pulled out, they often emerge into a vacuum. Prosecutions target the traffickers and, at times, the trafficked themselves. Court victories matter, but they do not rebuild a life. Public programs, where they exist, are fragmented, underfunded, and built around compliance measures rather than human recovery.

Again, a wealthy Bitcoin holder chose to act. Rather than trying to fix the entire system, they asked a more focused question: what does a person need to rebuild a life after such exploitation?

The answer was not a single service, but a web of them: long term, trauma informed therapy; safe housing; legal support; clothing and essentials; real job training; relocation far from the networks that exploited them; and, above all, time. On that basis, they funded a dedicated recovery and resource center in California. The goal was a place where survivors could arrive with nothing and leave with genuine options. Tens of millions of dollars have been committed, quietly and without naming rights.

A Quiet Pattern of Intervention

These two stories are the sharp edges of a broader pattern. Clients of this type have bought and protected fragile ecosystems that might otherwise be sold or destroyed, underwriting conservation with their own balance sheets. One is building a veterinary training hospital in London, focused on animals that are abused, neglected, or endangered. Others are preserving cultural antiquities in regions where artifacts are routinely looted and scattered.

What links these choices is not guilt, sentimentality, or a taste for recognition. It is a particular way of relating to time and responsibility. Many of these individuals think more readily in decades than in quarters. They care less about whether a project is noticed this year than whether it will still matter in fifty. They ask what is worth preserving, what is worth building, and what can no longer be left to institutions that have already shown their limits.

From Ownership to Stewardship

This brings us back to Bitcoin, and to stewardship.

Bitcoin has produced a distinctive kind of wealth. It tends to be held by people who chose an unfamiliar asset, endured skepticism and volatility, and were willing to be wrong for a long time. They did not stumble into those gains; they held their way into them. That experience changes how they see capital. At some point, ownership — “this is mine” — gives way to something quieter: “this has been entrusted to me.”

Stewardship is not a line in a values statement. It shows up in what money is asked to do. It is the turn from “How much do I have?” to “What will I build or protect with this?” The psychologist Abraham Maslow argued that human potential is realized not in comfort but in purpose. In the realm of wealth, that shift is visible when people stop treating capital as a tally and begin treating it as a means.

Bitcoin fits that shift. It cannot be inflated away. It is hard to seize without the owner’s cooperation. It rewards patience and conviction. Those who have held it through its wildest swings are already trained to think beyond the next headline. The same instinct that keeps someone holding an asset for a future they cannot yet see is the instinct that can clear a field in Bosnia or fund a recovery center in California.

When people, who have lost faith in large systems, accumulate meaningful wealth, it is not surprising that some begin to step into work those systems have failed to do. They become, in effect, private stewards of public goods. That raises real questions: they are not elected, and they do not answer to voters. But in the cases described here, the alternative was not a more effective public response. It was no response at all.

Changing how you understand money is one act of stewardship. Deciding what that money will mean, and for whom, is another. The work in Bosnia, California, and beyond suggests that private choices, made by people with patience, can quietly bend the course of other people’s lives.

 

---

 

This information is intended for general educational purposes only and should not be construed as legal or investment advice.

A Wealth Operating System is a comprehensive alignment of wealth and meaning. It assesses wealth through four lenses: HOW to own, WHERE to own, and WHAT to own… all governed by WHY: the meaning and purpose behind wealth.

Web Version

Download the Resource

 

Here’s a thought: Aspen trees here in Colorado rarely grow as separate individuals. What looks like a grove is often a single organism, connected through a massive underground root system.

Many of the visible trunks are genetically identical shoots, all drawing strength from the same resilient foundation. The root system can spread for centuries, and after a fire or other disruption, new shoots emerge quickly, allowing the grove to regenerate and thrive.

It’s a system built for endurance, adaptability, and fortified by adversity.

Families work the same way. Preparing the rising generation isn’t just about transferring the visible structure of assets or legal arrangements, it’s about cultivating the deeper ecosystem of values, education, and relationships. These are the shared roots that allow each generation to grow strong, recover from setbacks, and sustain the family’s legacy.

With over $100 trillion set to transfer to the next generation, the rising-gen are asking: How do I grow this wealth with autonomy, purpose, and moral clarity?

And in doing so, they navigate subtler pressures: identity, legacy, and the unspoken expectations that shape how families thrive over time.

An Education Ecosystem

Legacy wealth management no longer fits what today’s families need. That model was built on hierarchy, opacity, and passive succession: “Dad’s lawyer handles it while everyone else listens.”

What families really need now is an inheritor education ecosystem. One that empowers heirs on how to think, not just on how to manage.

Here’s how such a team might look:

• A philanthropic architect who helps families understand how to align mission and impact with deploying capital.
• A cross-border legal educator who can teach complex structures: digital-asset trusts, international regulation, resilient wealth-transfer.
• Specialists in technology, climate, Bitcoin, geopolitics, and others, that helping heirs understand the world they’re inheriting so they can navigate it wisely.

In short: wealth transfer is not just a transaction. It’s human development.

Why Preparing the Next Generation Matters

There is strong evidence that families who invest in heir education, governance, and shared purpose have better long-term outcomes:

• Transparent, Ongoing Communication

  Successful families keep open, age-appropriate conversations about money, legacy, and purpose going, adapting them over time so each generation grows up understanding the values behind the wealth.
• Allowing for Failure and Autonomy

  Encouraging thoughtful risk-taking, entrepreneurship, and even failure helps build resilience. When heirs are allowed to try, fail, and learn, they develop the grit and creativity needed for long-term stewardship.
• Philanthropic Engagement

  Involving younger family members early in charitable or impact-oriented activities fosters social responsibility and a sense of ownership in the family’s broader legacy.
• Stewardship Over Succession

  Many families now emphasize that success is measured not only by preserved financial capital but also by strengthened social capital, shared purpose, and intergenerational alignment.

A Legacy That Breathes

Preserving wealth alone isn’t enough. What endures, like the Aspen system beneath the soil, is the living ecosystem that supports growth across generations.

A system that teaches:

• Why you give, not just how
• How to engage, not just how to own
• Who they are becoming, not just what they inherit

What sits at the heart of what we do at Bespoke is a fundamental value for long-term thinking, not quick exits. And we believe that wealth, at its best, is inseparable from stewardship, purpose, and gratitude.

Consider that legacy isn’t measured by what we leave behind, but by how we prepare those who come after us. It takes shape in the daily practice of noticing, valuing, and expressing gratitude along the way.

 

---

 

This information is intended for general educational purposes only and should not be construed as legal or investment advice.

 

We are in the early innings of the largest intergenerational wealth transfer in modern history. Over $100 trillion in assets is expected to pass from baby boomers and older generations to their heirs in the coming decades, with approximately $60 trillion of that held within the wealthiest 2% of households (Cerulli Associates).

What makes this transition unprecedented is not just the size of the capital, but also the orientation of its recipients. Many of these future inheritors may be first-generation wealth creators in their own right: technologists, private investors, digital entrepreneurs. If they aren’t creators, they inhabit and are influenced by a world that is less bound by tradition, more shaped by systems thinking, and is ultimately volatile, highly networked, and fast-moving. Increasingly, they regard legacy wealth infrastructure as outmoded and optimized for preservation rather than innovation.

The institutional reflexes of legacy firms are coming under scrutiny. A 2023 Capgemini report revealed that 81% of next-generation millionaires intend to switch wealth managers. This is not simply about generational disconnects or service preferences. It represents a strategic repositioning away from the cross-selling product driven mindset of wealth management toward something more dynamic: capital as a platform, not a fortress.

The Need for a Multi-Disciplinary Ecosystem

The traditional model of wealth management was built on singular trust relationships: one advisor who served as gatekeeper, generalist, and confidant. This model was efficient in a pre-digital, slower-moving financial landscape. Today, however, complexity has become the default condition of affluence.

Wealthy families now encounter overlapping spheres of activity: liquidity from venture investments, cross-border regulatory considerations, estate planning layered with philanthropy, and emerging asset classes that resist traditional valuation. The wealth team of the future resembles less a family office and more a modular platform: one that integrates specialists across domains and geographies.

According to UBS, 60% of wealthy millennials already work with multiple advisors, including CFO-style leads, liquidity event specialists, philanthropic consultants, and crypto-savvy allocators. These are not just transactional relationships; they reflect a new ethos of wealth leadership; one grounded in orchestration rather than delegation.

The emerging architecture of a modern wealth team might include:

• An equity strategist with fluency in secondary markets, cap tables, and post-exit planning
• A philanthropic architect who designs legacy through impact vehicles, donor-advised funds, and blended capital models
• Legal counsel adept at cross-border structuring, digital asset custody, and anticipatory estate design
• A lead advisor who operates more like a chief strategist or portfolio architect, aligning capital to a set of interlocking personal, professional, and societal goals
• Specialists across geopolitics, deep-tech, climate, Bitcoin, and other domains whose unique and high-touch insights help inform an innovative and resilient portfolio

This distributed model is not simply a response to complexity. It reflects a broader shift in how the next generation thinks about decision-making itself—decentralized, interdisciplinary, and system-aware.

Real, Human Relationships Powered by Digital Accumen

Digital transformation is not just a service channel upgrade; it represents a mindset shift in how wealth is measured, understood, and governed. Unlike previous generations who may have relied on quarterly reports and annual reviews, younger UHNW clients expect real-time data visibility, scenario modelling, and autonomous oversight tools.

According to Deloitte, over 70% of affluent millennials prefer digital-first financial services. But the real implication lies beyond surface-level preference: these individuals are pattern-recognition natives, trained by algorithmic thinking, agile development, and rapid feedback loops. Firms that see technology as just a way to deliver services, rather than as something that should shape how those services are designed, are falling behind. Today’s clients no longer accept delays or clunky processes in exchange for a high-touch experience. In their view, friction isn’t just inconvenient; it signals risk. It suggests poor alignment, missed opportunities, and a lack of relevance in a fast-moving world.

A worldview shaped by digital systems and a preference for autonomy over intermediation also impacts how emerging asset classes are considered and managed. Bitcoin, for example, is no longer a speculative fringe asset, it is a strategic allocation. Viewed as a hedge against inflation, institutional fragility, and fiat debasement, Bitcoin appeals not just financially but philosophically. For many, holding Bitcoin is as much about conviction as it is about return. Advisors serving this cohort must understand not only its investment case, but also its custody, tax treatment, planning integration, and long-term implications.

It takes a combination of real human relationships and digitally intuitive solution to deliver the right outcomes for the new stewards of generational wealth as they set out to navigate a complex and fast-moving world with geopolitical and technological trends in flux.

Purpose as a Structuring Principle

The intergenerational shift in wealth priorities is perhaps most visible in the rise of values-based investing. But even this framing may be too narrow. For many next-gen wealth holders, capital is a means of self-expression, identity, and agency. ESG is not a strategy overlay; it is often the foundation of their investment thesis.

A 2023 Morgan Stanley survey found that 84% of millennials are interested in ESG investing, compared to just 45% of baby boomers. But the real divergence lies in how these generations define value. Where previous generations might have prioritized wealth preservation and minimal volatility, younger inheritors are increasingly comfortable trading some degree of short-term risk for long-term alignment with personal or societal missions.

More importantly, many are bypassing public ESG funds in favor of direct investments in mission-aligned ventures, co-investments in sustainable infrastructure, and thematic funds focused on climate, diversity, and inclusive innovation.

This shift requires advisors not just to understand ESG scoring methodologies, but to contextualize them within broader geopolitical, demographic, and technological trends. While a portfolio should reflect one’s values, the priority for the next generation of inheritors is whether their investment decisions can drive structural change in the domains that matter to them.

Beyond Succession

Perhaps the most misunderstood aspect of this wealth transfer is the assumption that it is primarily an exercise in succession. In reality, we are witnessing an assertion of strategic inheritance—the act of actively reinterpreting what wealth is for, how it is deployed, and which systems it should influence.

For UHNW individuals who straddle both the first and second generations—those who have built wealth through innovation and are now receiving it as stewards—the boundaries are blurring. Their mandates are not backward-looking (preserve) or purely present-focused (optimize), but fundamentally forward-oriented: what institutional economist Elinor Ostrom once called “long game rationality.”

In this view, wealth is no longer a static store of value. It is a tool for governance, influence, and design. Those advisors and institutions who can engage at this level—not merely managing portfolios, but architecting futures—will become indispensable partners in an era where money alone is no longer the differentiator. The differentiator is resilient and innovative design.

Bespoke Group was founded on the premise that the next generation of wealth demands a fundamentally different advisory model: one that is agile, deeply informed, and purpose aligned.

If you’re exploring how to align your wealth with long-term purpose and strategy, we invite you to connect with us. Whether you’re establishing a family office or rethinking an existing structure, Bespoke offers discreet, high-touch advisory tailored to your needs. Contact us to schedule a confidential consultation—we’re here to help you navigate what’s next with confidence and intention.

---

This information is intended for general educational purposes only and should not be construed as legal or investment advice.

Family offices have historically served as the quiet custodians of wealth: discreet, deliberate, and designed to provide long-term alignment between capital and values. They were built to shield wealth from external interests and maintain continuity across generations. However, the modern context—defined by speed, volatility, and digital transformation—means this legacy model is increasingly out of sync with our current financial landscape.

Globally, more than 12,000 single-family offices now manage an estimated $6 trillion in assets—a number that has surged 10x since 2008, according to EY. Yet even as wealth expands and diversifies, many family offices still operate under outdated assumptions: that wealth is static, locally concentrated, and best preserved through conventional channels. These legacies limit agility, risk appetite, and values alignment at a time when capital itself is being redefined.

A recent report from The Economist Intelligence Unit, in collaboration with DBS, confirms a growing demand for tailored, purpose-driven solutions. The modern family office is being reimagined—not as a static repository of wealth, but as an agile platform for deploying capital in line with long-term aspirations.

The Great Recalibration

In 2023, 68% of next-generation wealth holders said they plan to overhaul their family office structure within the next five years, according to Campden Wealth. Their expectations are clear: greater transparency, more active engagement, and a stronger integration of purpose. Millennials and Gen Z inheritors also bring new lenses, prioritizing impact, technology fluency, and cross-border engagement. Many are digital natives with hybrid identities, navigating multiple jurisdictions, causes, and ecosystems. In this context, cookie-cutter strategies and off-the-shelf products fall flat.

This is forcing a re-evaluation of the underlying architecture. Some families are transitioning to multi-family offices (MFOs) for economies of scale and governance infrastructure. Others are building hybrid structures that blend internal leadership with outsourced execution. Yet many MFOs and traditional wealth managers focus on product distribution rather than customized strategy, missing the deep engagement required to understand a family’s identity and reflect it in a meaningful portfolio. Meanwhile, the conventional family office model remains resource intensive. It’s costly, time-consuming, dependent on human capital, and often vulnerable to generational fragmentation. In any case, structures must reflect the family’s unique values and levels of involvement.

Bespoke’s founder-led model is not a branding tactic, it is a design principle. Leadership remains directly engaged with clients, ensuring continuity, institutional memory, and strategic agility. Relationships evolve in real time, shaped by shifting macroeconomic dynamics and family priorities.

Designing for Intentionality and Agility

Too often, family offices are built around inherited templates rather than lived values. Intentional design means translating family goals into structural decisions—about governance, liquidity, tax posture, and operating cadence. Yet the industry is still dominated by product-first providers. A 2022 BCG report noted that more than 60% of wealth management firms prioritize product distribution over personalized strategy.

This leads to misalignment. Families may aspire to invest in regenerative agriculture or early- stage tech, only to be funnelled into generic fund-of-funds. Or they may want tighter oversight of direct investments but lack the infrastructure or partners to make it feasible.

Firms like Bespoke are responding by rejecting standardization in favor of tailored structuring—backed by high-touch advisory and flexible governance models. Founder-led by design, Bespoke emphasizes continuity, institutional memory, and agility. Strategic relationships are cultivated over time, not handed off.

The Family Office as Expression Engine

At its best, a family office is not a repository of money but a reflection of identity. That includes intergenerational co-investment, operating companies, philanthropic arms, and new ventures seeded by next-gen leaders. It is not about empire-building but meaning-making.

Bespoke integrates values-based investing into the architecture itself—offering families a platform to express purpose through capital. This could mean backing women-led VC funds, building climate-forward real estate portfolios, or structuring donor-advised funds that evolve with generational priorities.

One example: when a crypto-native client approached Bespoke with decentralized assets and a global footprint, existing providers struggled to accommodate the complexity. Bespoke responded by engineering a structure designed for speed, volatility, and borderless capital—merging digital fluency with strategic foresight.

Bespoke doesn’t reject the family office model—it reclaims its original intent: trust, purpose, and strategic clarity, now built for scale and with the flexibility required for navigating a fast changing world.

If you’re exploring how to align your wealth with long-term purpose and strategy, we invite you to connect with us. Whether you’re establishing a family office or rethinking an existing structure, Bespoke offers discreet, high-touch advisory tailored to your needs. Contact us to schedule a confidential consultation—we’re here to help you navigate what’s next with confidence and intention.

---

This information is intended for general educational purposes only and should not be construed as legal or investment advice.

Preparing Heirs for Responsibility, Not Just Access

Many of our clients express concerns about preparing their heirs for what they perceive to be the social responsibility of inheriting wealth. While not all clients share this view, those who do tend to feel particularly strongly about the need to prepare their descendants for this responsibility, which often translates to philanthropy. This article addresses how families with this worldview can prepare younger generations for inheriting wealth in a socially responsible manner.

A Simple Life Lesson

The Lilly Family School of Philanthropy at Indiana University conducts extensive research on philanthropic behaviors across lifespan. This seems intuitive enough, but their studies consistently suggest that early exposure to philanthropic activities can significantly influence one’s propensity to engage in giving and volunteering in adulthood.

Years ago, a colleague described to me the steps she took to educate her young children in social responsibility and philanthropy. In addition to modeling with her own giving, once each of her children attained eight years of age, during the holidays that child would be “given” $50 to donate to charity. My colleague would also teach that child how to use charitynavigator.org and guidestar.org to research the charities that most efficiently address the causes the child wished to support.

In this way, her children not only learned about philanthropy, but they also learned the importance of evaluating charities so they could give more effectively. As her children grew older, my colleague would periodically increase their annual charity allocation until, upon attaining 18, she would give $500 to the child for a donation to his or her favorite charity or charities. This simple lesson provides the framework for how the family can educate younger family members about social responsibility.

The Role of Legal Structures in Teaching Social Responsibility

Private Foundations

Wealthy families typically have at least one legal structure through which socially responsible education can take place. Historically, wealthy families have used private foundations as the cornerstone for this education. With a private foundation, heirs could serve as members of the foundation’s Board of Directors or, alternatively, could serve in a more limited advisory role (e.g., to determine specific grant recipients) to the Board. In this way, young family members can begin learning about philanthropy – and seeing its impact – before reaching their teen years.

However, utilizing a private foundation for this education has limitations. First, members of the Board have a fiduciary duty that is often overlooked. Thus, placing minors in this position is ill advised. Moreover, a role with the family’s private foundation is, at best, limited to that foundation’s charitable activities. If it is a grant-making foundation, the activities are limited to its grants; if it is an operating foundation, the heirs may also be able to experience the “hands on” charitable work being done by that foundation.

Regardless of the type of foundation (operating vs. non-operating), involving heirs in only the foundation has additional limitations. First, the family’s philanthropy is often accomplished through multiple avenues, not just a foundation. For example, the family may have one or more charitable trusts. Thus, the foundation offers only limited transparency into the family’s total philanthropy.

In addition, many wealthy families also utilize impact investing to create a social impact with their non-philanthropic assets. By definition, involvement limited to the family’s foundation can, at best, provide visibility only to the investments of the foundation. Since foundations frequently encompass only a fraction of the family’s wealth, visibility limited to the foundation does not give heirs a complete picture of how the family’s wealth – not just its philanthropic dollars – are impacting society. Ideally the heirs have transparency as to the totality of the family’s impact, with at least some say in the areas impacted.

As an aside, Donor Advised Funds have gained in popularity in recent years due to their simplicity, reduced costs, and lack of compliance headaches as compared to private foundations. In theory, an heir’s participation in the family’s donor advised fund would be substantially similar to their participation as an advisory member of the family’s private foundation’s board.

Private Trust Companies

A relatively recent legal development, the advent of Private Trust Companies, is changing how family’s address philanthropy and thus social responsibility with intergenerational wealth. A Private Trust Company (PTC) is a trust company controlled by the family and established specifically to serve as the trustee of the family’s irrevocable trusts. (PTCs are in response to the perceived conflict, particularly with younger generations far removed from trust creators, between descendants, on the one hand, and trustees, on the other.)

PTCs are currently available by statute in only a limited number of jurisdictions, but most of these jurisdictions not coincidentally are also the top U.S. trust jurisdictions due to their favorable trust laws. Our preferred PTC jurisdictions are Nevada, South Dakota, and Wyoming, but others also have merit.

General PTC management is provided by a Board of Managers, typically comprised of family members and independent outsiders, including an administrator in the selected jurisdiction. Significantly, the family can select which jurisdiction’s laws are most appropriate and advantageous for them, given their assets, goals and objectives, desire for a regulated versus unregulated PTC, etc.

More granular PTC management is provided by a handful of PTC committees, which often include the following:

• Philanthropy Committee
• Investment Committee
• Owner Education and Family Governance Committee
• Discretionary Distribution Committee
• Amendment Committee
• Audit Committee

The first three of the committees listed above may be limited to family members, and the Philanthropy and Investment Committees in particular create the opportunity to give heirs a holistic view of the family’s philanthropy and socially impactful investments; as the heirs age, their participation can increase accordingly, giving them increased visibility in their areas of interest. For younger heirs, sub-committees allow targeted, limited participation in these key areas.

Also relevant here, the Owner Education and Family Governance Committee creates the framework for participation and decision-making going forward. More specifically, this Committee develops the family’s policies and guiding vision and values that regulate family members’ roles, rights, and responsibilities with the family enterprise and with each other. The overall goal of these activities is to prevent the splintering of the family and family enterprise in future generations. Studies show that the potential splintering of the family is far more likely to dissipate intergenerational wealth than loss of capital, particularly as the family moves multiple generations away from the original wealth builder(s).

Conclusion

The legal structure(s) adopted by the family can have a significant impact on younger family members’ understanding of social responsibility and philanthropy. More so than a private foundation, a private trust company can give the family an ideal training ground for teaching social responsibility, and PTCs provide multiple avenues for encouraging areas of interest, including philanthropy and investments via committees and sub-committees. When generational wealth is at play, a PTC can provide a structure that encourages family harmony over generations, reducing the likelihood of wealth dissipation.

PTCs are not a panacea, however, and there are hard costs and administrative burdens the family should consider. But under the right circumstances, a PTC may provide the best structure for family involvement in social responsibility, while also providing a succession vehicle for the family’s intergenerational wealth.

The Bespoke Group provides strategic guidance at every step—helping you design an ideal structure and personalized giving strategy that reflects your values, ideals, and passions. We work closely with you to ensure that both your structure and philanthropy drive meaningful impact in the areas that matter most.

---

If you’re interested in learning more about Bespoke’s approach to private wealth management and how we can help you build a secure financial future, we invite you to reach out to us directly. We’d be happy to set up a confidential consultation at your convenience.

Thank you for considering Bespoke as your partner in wealth management. We look forward to the opportunity to work with you.

This information is intended for general educational purposes only and should not be construed as legal or investment advice.