How to approach a will and estate plan covering UK

Q: How long does a will and estate plan covering assets in the United Kingdom usually take?

The timeline depends on whether a domicile analysis needs to be conducted from scratch, on the complexity of existing trust and holding arrangements, and on the speed of engagement from UK-qualified counsel. A straightforward coordinated-wills exercise for a Hong Kong-resident principal with limited UK property and no existing trust can be completed within two to three months. A full estate reorganisation involving trust review, inheritance-tax modelling and instrument redrafting across two jurisdictions typically runs longer.

Q: What are the main risks in a will and estate plan covering assets in the United Kingdom?

The principal risks are: drafting wills before the domicile position is clear; unintended revocation of an existing will through a new instrument with a broad revocation clause; inheritance-tax exposure that was not modelled in advance; reservation-of-benefit issues in trust structures; and 1975 Act claims by dependants that were not addressed in the planning. Each risk is avoidable with a coordinated, sequenced approach.

Q: What documents are needed for a will and estate plan covering assets in the United Kingdom?

Core documents typically include: evidence of domicile history and intention; a full schedule of UK-situated assets with valuations and title documentation; any existing will instruments in all relevant jurisdictions; trust deeds and supplemental deeds of amendment; letters of wishes; and, where a UK company is involved, its constitutional documents. On the UK tax side, prior inheritance-tax returns or HMRC correspondence should also be provided.

A family with assets in both Hong Kong and the United Kingdom faces a planning problem that neither jurisdiction resolves on its own. The two systems sit in different places on residence, domicile, forced heirship and tax – and a will drawn up with only one jurisdiction in mind can unravel the moment it crosses the border. We see this regularly on our private-wealth desk: a well-drafted Hong Kong will that simply has nothing useful to say about a London flat, a UK-domiciled pension, or shares in a UK-registered company.

A will and estate plan covering assets in the United Kingdom requires a coordinated structure that addresses domicile, governing law, tax exposure and the interaction between any Hong Kong or offshore holding arrangements and English succession rules – all sequenced so that each instrument is valid and enforceable in the jurisdiction where it needs to operate. The key governing instruments on the English side include the Wills Act 1837, the Administration of Estates Act 1925, and the inheritance-tax charging regime under the Inheritance Tax Act 1984; on the Hong Kong side, the Wills Ordinance and the Trustee Ordinance (Cap. 29) are the primary instruments.

This guide walks through the decision, the sequence, the common mistakes, and a closing checklist – in the order a cross-border practitioner would address them.

What decision does the reader actually face?

The starting question is not "do I need a UK will?" It is: "what is the legal map of my estate, and how many systems govern parts of it?" That reframing matters. A principal who is Hong Kong-resident but UK-domiciled at law – a category more common than most families realise – may find English succession rules apply to their entire worldwide estate, not just the London property.

Domicile under English law is a common-law concept, distinct from tax residence and from immigration status. It follows origin and intention, and it is notoriously difficult to shed. A founder who grew up in the United Kingdom, moved to Hong Kong in their thirties, and has not taken deliberate steps to acquire a domicile of choice elsewhere may still carry a UK domicile of origin. That one fact changes the inheritance-tax calculation, the forced-heirship exposure, and the choice of governing law for any trust settled in between.

The decision the reader faces, then, is one of three configurations. First: the principal has clear Hong Kong domicile (or no UK connection beyond real property), in which case separate instruments – a UK situs will for UK assets and a broader Hong Kong will for the rest – can work cleanly if properly coordinated. Second: the principal has ambiguous or unresolved domicile, in which case the sequence must start with a domicile analysis before any drafting takes place. Third: the principal is structuring an estate that involves trusts, holding entities or business interests that span Hong Kong, an offshore centre and the United Kingdom, in which case a trust-and-will coordination exercise is required before either instrument is finalised.

Getting the configuration wrong at this stage produces the most common mistake we see: drafting the will before clarifying domicile. We return to that below.

What does the governing law map look like across Hong Kong and the United Kingdom?

English succession law applies to immovable property situated in England and Wales on the basis of lex situs (the law of the place where the asset is situated) – regardless of where the owner lives or is domiciled. That is a fixed point. A Hong Kong-resident principal who owns a flat in London cannot exclude English succession law from the flat. Any UK will or probate process will need to engage it.

For movable property – financial assets, shares in companies, beneficial interests in trusts – the position is more complex. English law applies its own conflict-of-laws rules to determine which system governs. Domicile is the primary connecting factor for movables. A principal domiciled in England and Wales at the date of death will have their worldwide movables governed by English succession law, including the inheritance-tax regime.

Hong Kong has no forced-heirship regime. The Trustee Ordinance (Cap. 29), substantially reformed with effect from 1 December 2013, strengthened Hong Kong's position as a trust seat in part by protecting Hong Kong-law trusts against foreign forced-heirship claims. That protection is real, but it is not absolute: it operates at the level of the trust instrument and the Hong Kong court's jurisdiction. A UK-domiciled principal settling assets into a Hong Kong trust does not automatically step outside English succession rules on those assets.

The United Kingdom, by contrast, has no general forced-heirship rule for adults, but it does have the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975, which allows certain categories of dependant to apply to an English court for reasonable financial provision from a deceased's estate. This is a different mechanism from civil-law forced heirship, but it creates a similar planning concern: a will or trust structure that looks watertight can still be challenged in an English court if a dependant has been left without provision.

The interaction between these two systems is where cross-border counsel earns its place at the table. In our practice, we map both sets of rules before either instrument is drafted.

How does the step-by-step sequence actually run?

The sequence has five stages, each with a gate that must be passed before the next stage begins. Moving stages out of order is the structural-complexity risk this guide addresses.

Stage 1: Domicile and residence audit. Before any drafting, establish the principal's domicile – English law, Scots law, and Hong Kong law each have their own rules. For an English-law domicile analysis, the question is whether a domicile of origin in the United Kingdom has been displaced by a domicile of choice elsewhere. The audit should produce a written conclusion, because it will determine which system's mandatory rules (including inheritance tax and family-provision rights) apply to the estate. The gate at this stage: a clear, documented domicile position. No drafting begins until the audit is complete.

Stage 2: Asset mapping and situs classification. List every asset in the estate and classify each by situs (immovables by location; movables by the domicile rule or, for company shares, typically by the place of incorporation or the register). The United Kingdom has particular rules for where shares are situated for inheritance-tax purposes. UK real property is always situated in the UK. Hong Kong-held cash in a UK-incorporated company is a different question from Hong Kong cash in a Hong Kong bank. The gate: a situs schedule signed off by counsel in both jurisdictions.

Stage 3: Inheritance-tax exposure modelling. The UK inheritance-tax regime is broad in scope. It applies to the worldwide estate of a UK-domiciled individual and to UK-situated assets of any individual, regardless of domicile. The nil-rate band and any available reliefs – business property relief, agricultural property relief, the residence nil-rate band – need to be modelled against the actual asset map. Hong Kong has no equivalent tax. That asymmetry can be used: structuring UK-situated assets efficiently before death is a legitimate planning exercise, but the rules on potentially exempt transfers (gifts that may fall back into the estate if the donor dies within seven years) and the reservation of benefit rules impose limits that foreign advisers routinely underestimate. The gate: a tax model prepared or reviewed by a UK-qualified tax adviser, shared with the international team.

Stage 4: Instrument design – will coordination and trust review. Most cross-border families with UK and Hong Kong assets end up with at least two wills: one governed by English law for UK-situated assets, and one under Hong Kong or another governing law for the rest. The two wills must be drafted to avoid revoking each other. Revocation clauses are the standard mechanism for disaster: a new Hong Kong will with an unqualified revocation clause revokes the existing UK will. Both instruments should be drafted with sight of each other. If there is a trust in the structure – a Hong Kong discretionary trust, a BVI entity, or an offshore holding arrangement – the trust documentation must be reviewed alongside the wills. The Trustee Ordinance reforms of 1 December 2013 allow a Hong Kong trust to include reserved powers for the settlor without invalidating the trust; that flexibility can be used to retain a degree of control while achieving succession objectives. See our analysis of reserved powers in founder-controlled structures for the mechanics. The gate: both instruments in final form, reviewed by counsel in both jurisdictions, with explicit cross-referencing of scope.

Stage 5: Execution and ongoing maintenance. Both wills must be executed in accordance with the formal requirements of their governing law. Under the English Wills Act 1837, a will must be in writing, signed by the testator in the presence of two witnesses who both attest and sign. Hong Kong has equivalent formal requirements under the Wills Ordinance. Remote execution across jurisdictions requires care: the witnesses must be physically present with the testator at the point of signature. Once executed, the plan is not static. A change in UK residence, a change in the nature of UK assets (for example, converting a UK operating company into a holding structure), or a change in the family's composition can alter the domicile analysis, the tax position, or both. Annual review is not excessive for an estate of this complexity.

What are the common mistakes, and how does a coordinated approach avoid them?

The most frequent error – already noted – is drafting before domicile is resolved. We have encountered situations where a principal has executed three wills, each drafted without reference to the others, because the domicile question was deferred each time. The result is a sequence of instruments of uncertain validity, potential inter-instrument conflicts, and an estate that will cost substantially more to administer than it would have cost to plan.

The second common mistake is treating the UK will as a technical afterthought. Some advisers proceed as if the UK will is simply a matter of covering situs assets, with no inheritance-tax thought and no consideration of the 1975 Act claims. In our cross-border practice, we see this pattern most frequently when the instruction comes originally from a Hong Kong or offshore adviser who is unfamiliar with English family-provision law. A UK dependant with a viable claim under the 1975 Act can apply to an English court even if the deceased was not UK-domiciled, provided assets are administered in England. That risk needs to be assessed and, where appropriate, managed proactively.

The third mistake is structuring around inheritance tax without taking account of the reservation-of-benefit rules. A principal who transfers UK assets into a trust but retains the right to benefit from those assets – directly or indirectly – may find the assets treated as still forming part of the estate for tax purposes. The Hong Kong-law concept of reserved powers under the Trustee Ordinance does not map onto the English reservation-of-benefit rules; they are different instruments in different systems, and conflating them produces a planning failure.

A micro-scenario illustrates the last point. A Hong Kong-resident principal (autumn 2026) had settled UK real property into a Hong Kong discretionary trust some years earlier, with the intention of removing it from the UK inheritance-tax estate. The settlor retained an informal expectation – not a written reserved power, but an expectation understood by the trustee – that they could continue to occupy the property during their lifetime. When the structure came to us for review, the reservation-of-benefit analysis indicated a significant exposure that had not been identified at the time of settlement. The remediation steps were available but required a sequence of steps that would take several years to complete without triggering immediate tax consequences. Early, coordinated advice would have avoided the problem entirely.

For private structures that involve BVI or Cayman entities alongside UK assets, the interaction between offshore holding layers and the UK inheritance-tax situs rules requires separate attention. Our analysis of private trust and family asset structures through BVI addresses the offshore layer in more detail.

A second micro-scenario: a founder (spring 2026) with a UK-incorporated operating company held through a Hong Kong holding entity came to us after a change in UK tax residence. The UK business property relief position – which had been assumed to shelter the UK company shares from inheritance tax – needed to be re-examined in light of changed UK legislation affecting the availability of the relief for AIM-listed securities. The holding structure was reorganised to preserve the relief for qualifying assets while segregating the non-qualifying elements. The cross-border coordination between the UK tax analysis and the Hong Kong holding structure review was the operative part of the exercise.

The sequence above describes the standard position. Your matter turns on the domicile analysis, the specific assets engaged, and the order of steps – and that is precisely where the route is won or lost.

To discuss how this sequence applies to your cross-border position, contact info@lockhartyip.com.

How does the trust and holding structure interact with the UK estate plan?

Many principals approaching this exercise already have a trust in place – often a Hong Kong or BVI discretionary trust settled some years earlier to hold investment assets or a family business. The question is how that existing structure interacts with the UK will and the UK inheritance-tax position.

The first point is situs. Assets held through a trust are not automatically outside the UK inheritance-tax estate. The relevant questions are: what assets does the trust hold, and where are they situated? A trust holding UK real property holds a UK-situated asset; the trust structure does not change the situs for UK tax purposes. A trust holding shares in a UK-incorporated company holds shares that are – for most purposes – situated in the United Kingdom.

The second point is the settlor's domicile. If the settlor was UK-domiciled at the time of settlement, or becomes UK-domiciled subsequently, the trust assets may fall within the relevant property regime for inheritance-tax purposes, with ten-year anniversary charges and exit charges applying. This is a separate concern from the inheritance-tax position on death and requires separate modelling.

The third point is the interaction between the trust and the will. Where a trust exists, the will should be drafted to complement it – not to duplicate it. The will deals with assets outside the trust and with the appointment of executors who understand the trust structure. The trust documentation should be reviewed to confirm that it functions as intended in a scenario where the settlor has died, including the trustee succession provisions and the letter of wishes.

In our practice, we work alongside locally licensed Hong Kong firms on the trust and Ordinance-specific questions, and we coordinate with UK-qualified advisers on the English tax and succession analysis. The international counsel function is to hold the map and ensure that the instruments produced in each jurisdiction are consistent with the overall plan. That coordination role is where cross-border instruction adds the most value.

If an earlier filing, structure or enforcement attempt produced an adverse or stalled result, a second read can identify the strategic issue and the routes still available.

For a structured assessment of your UK estate and cross-border succession position, write to us at info@lockhartyip.com.

Decision checklist: is your UK estate plan cross-border ready?

The following questions identify the gaps most commonly found in existing arrangements. A "no" or "uncertain" answer at any point indicates that the matter needs to be revisited before the next stage can proceed.

Has a formal domicile analysis been completed and documented, with conclusions under both English law and Hong Kong law?
Has every UK-situated asset been identified and classified – real property, company shares, bank accounts, pension interests – with its situs confirmed by counsel in both jurisdictions?
Has the UK inheritance-tax exposure been modelled against the current asset map, including the nil-rate band, the residence nil-rate band, and available reliefs?
Is there a UK will in place that covers UK-situated assets and that does not inadvertently revoke any Hong Kong or other will?
If there is a trust, has the trust been reviewed for situs of its assets, the relevant property regime exposure, and the settlor-domicile point?
Have the reservation-of-benefit implications of any informal benefit retained by the settlor been assessed by UK-qualified counsel?
Is there a letter of wishes or equivalent guidance document for the trustees that reflects the current family position?
Has the 1975 Act claims exposure been considered in light of any dependant who might make a claim against the UK-administered estate?
Is there a scheduled review date for the plan, tied to the principal's tax-residence position and any significant change in UK asset holdings?

Each question in this checklist corresponds to a step in the sequence. A plan that can answer all nine affirmatively is in a materially better position than the typical uncoordinated arrangement. That said, the plan is only as good as the current facts: changes in residence, asset composition, family structure, and applicable law all require a fresh pass through the checklist.

For a full review of your position under this checklist, reach us at info@lockhartyip.com. Our private-wealth practice is described at lockhartyip.com/practices/private-wealth/.

What foreign advisers and in-house counsel often get wrong

Two professional misreadings come up repeatedly in cross-border UK estate matters.

The first is the assumption that a Hong Kong trust holding UK assets is outside the UK inheritance-tax net because the trust instrument is governed by Hong Kong law. Governing law and situs are different concepts. The governing law of a trust instrument determines how the trust operates; the situs of the trust's assets determines the UK tax position. An English court – and HMRC, the UK tax authority – will look through a Hong Kong-law trust to the assets it holds when determining UK inheritance-tax exposure.

The second misreading is treating UK-resident non-domiciliaries as exempt from UK inheritance tax on non-UK assets indefinitely. The UK has rules that can deem a long-term UK resident to be UK-domiciled for inheritance-tax purposes even if they have not acquired a domicile of choice under general law. Those deemed-domicile rules require specific analysis; they cannot be assumed away. A principal who has spent significant time in the United Kingdom over the preceding years may already be inside the deemed-domicile threshold – a position that affects the entire worldwide estate planning exercise.

Neither of these points requires esoteric analysis. Both are well-established positions under English law. The issue is that they sit at the intersection of trust law, tax law and conflict of laws – three disciplines that are rarely handled by a single adviser – and cross-border instruction is the mechanism that brings them together.

Related practices

Private Wealth – succession, trust structuring and asset protection across jurisdictions
Holding Structures – offshore and Hong Kong holding arrangements for family and business assets

Frequently asked questions

How long does a will and estate plan covering assets in the United Kingdom usually take?

The timeline depends heavily on whether a domicile analysis needs to be conducted from scratch, on the complexity of existing trust and holding arrangements, and on the speed of engagement from UK-qualified tax and succession counsel. A straightforward coordinated-wills exercise for a Hong Kong-resident principal with limited UK property and no existing trust can be completed within two to three months. A full estate reorganisation involving trust review, inheritance-tax modelling and instrument redrafting across two jurisdictions typically runs longer, and principals should expect the domicile and tax-modelling stages alone to take several weeks before drafting begins.

What are the main risks in a will and estate plan covering assets in the United Kingdom?

The principal risks are: (1) drafting wills before the domicile position is clear, resulting in instruments that may not achieve their intended effect; (2) unintended revocation of an existing will through a new instrument with a broad revocation clause; (3) inheritance-tax exposure on UK-situated assets or – for UK-domiciled principals – worldwide assets, that was not modelled in advance; (4) reservation-of-benefit issues in trust structures where the settlor retained informal use of trust assets; and (5) 1975 Act claims by dependants that were not addressed in the planning. Each risk is avoidable with a coordinated, sequenced approach.

What documents are needed for a will and estate plan covering assets in the United Kingdom?

The core documents vary by stage but typically include: evidence of domicile history and intention (personal correspondence, prior legal advice, immigration records); a full schedule of UK-situated assets with valuations and title documentation; any existing will instruments in all relevant jurisdictions; trust deeds and any supplemental deeds of amendment; letters of wishes; and, where a UK company is involved, the constitutional documents of that company. On the UK tax side, prior inheritance-tax returns or correspondence with HMRC should also be provided. The international counsel will request a document list tailored to the specific fact pattern at the outset of the matter.

Speak with Lockhart & Yip

For a scoped view of your matter, contact info@lockhartyip.com. Discuss your matter →

This publication is general information and does not constitute legal advice. For advice on your situation, contact info@lockhartyip.com.

How to approach a will and estate plan covering assets in the United Kingdom