财富观 | 富豪“防线”为何失灵？许家印案揭开“资产保护术”真相

Core Insights - The discussion surrounding the "piercing of trusts" has shifted from sensationalism to a more rational examination of wealth governance issues, particularly in the context of the recent case involving Xu Jiayin [3][12][15] - The Hong Kong High Court's ruling on September 16 was a procedural measure aimed at ensuring asset disclosure, not a declaration of the trust's invalidity, highlighting the importance of governance over mere asset concealment [4][13][19] Trust Governance - Trusts are not merely secret structures but governance tools; effective asset protection relies on good management rather than deep concealment [19][20] - The value of the trust system lies in establishing order and accountability within families, rather than serving as a firewall against risks [17][19] Misconceptions in Asset Protection - Misconception 1: Transferring assets to family members or companies can effectively mitigate risks, but such actions can be legally challenged if deemed to harm creditors [6][19] - Misconception 2: Offshore jurisdictions are perceived as stronger protective measures, yet practical examples of their effectiveness are lacking [7][9] - Misconception 3: Complex structures are assumed to be safer, but under information exchange regulations, each layer can become a risk point [10][19] Future of Trusts - The global trust industry is transitioning from being viewed as a risk-avoidance tool to a governance system, emphasizing the need for clarity and accountability [20] - For high-net-worth families in China, the focus should shift from where to establish trusts to how to govern them effectively [21]