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]

Core Insights - The discussion surrounding the "breach of trust" in the case of Xu Jiayin has shifted from sensationalism to a focus on wealth governance issues [1][2][3] - The term "breach of trust" is misleading; the Hong Kong High Court's ruling was a receivership order aimed at ensuring asset disclosure, not a declaration of the trust's invalidity [4] - The value of the trust system lies in governance rather than concealment, emphasizing the importance of proper management and accountability [4][12] Asset Protection Illusions - Illusion 1: Transferring assets to family members or companies to mitigate risk is high-risk, as such transfers can be reversed if deemed harmful to creditors [5] - Illusion 2: Offshore jurisdictions are not necessarily safer; established jurisdictions like Cayman and Hong Kong offer more stable legal protections despite stricter disclosure requirements [6][7][8] - Illusion 3: Complex structures do not guarantee safety; modern governance has shifted from "firewall thinking" to "governance thinking" due to increased scrutiny from information exchange regulations [9][10] Global Trust Industry Focus - The recent receivership order has garnered attention in the international trust community, with a focus on how Hong Kong balances transparency and protection [11] - Key questions include the impact of China's wealth rise on the global trust landscape and how cross-border trust governance can find common ground amid legal and cultural differences [11] Future Logic of Trusts - The core function of trusts is governance, establishing order and responsibility within families rather than merely serving as risk isolation tools [12][13] - The principles reflected in the Hong Kong court's ruling provide guidance for wealth governance in Asia, highlighting that trusts should be seen as governance tools rather than secretive structures [13][14] Reflections Post-Discussion - The conversation around Xu Jiayin's case has evolved, indicating a transition from viewing trusts as risk-avoidance tools to understanding them as governance systems [14] - For high-net-worth families in China, the focus should shift from where to establish trusts to how to manage them effectively [14]