What is a Hungarian Trust and how can it help you protect your assets from lawsuits? Few knows that Hungary introduced the structure of trust in its legal system in 2008 to provide a solution in helping long-term family wealth protection and estate planning. The Hungarian trust has many similarities with the Anglo-Saxon concept given that this legal instrument was drawn up based on the English trust model. Both legal structures provide the same level of protection for the beneficiaries. The difference between the two types of trust lies in the means of providing this protection.
A Hungarian trust is a contractual agreement between the settlor and the trustee, with its validity strongly bound to a written contract or statement, whereas the Anglo-Saxon trust relies on the law of equity. Additionally, while trusts are only a set of obligations and rights in common law countries, in civil law countries they are rather treated as if they were entities with all of the advantages of such treatment.
Since the first draft of the trust rules in 2008, the Hungarian legal and business community has actively been dealing with the trust and its application in Hungary. As a result of such a professional interest shown, international organizations like STEP, the global professional association for practitioners who specialize in family inheritance and succession planning also could take a firm stand in Hungary.
1. HUNGARIAN TRUST FOR ASSET PROTECTION AND ESTATE PLANNING
1.2
Hybrid trust – the new Hungarian asset management foundation
In 2019 the Hungarian legislator provided another solution for wealth planning over generations and five years after the implementation of the trust into the Hungarian Civil Code (“Civil Code”) in 2014, introduced the asset management foundation (“AMF”), for both public and private purposes.
The AMF is a unique hybrid vehicle mixing the trust’s and the foundation’s concept, meaning that the AMF is a special form of foundation that may perform asset management including trust relationship as its main activity. This hybrid trust is able to provide an even greater flexibility compared to the traditional trust relationship.
- The AMF act exempts the trust relationship performed by the AMF from the general rule of the Civil Code limiting the maximum duration of the trust relationship in 50 years. Therefore, the trust relationship performed by an AMF may be without any time limit.
- The Civil Code excludes the settlor’s and the beneficiaries’ power to give instruction to the trustee and renders any different arrangement null and void. However, the AMF act allows the parties to derogate from this prohibition if the trust relationship is provided by an AMF. Therefore, a founder transferring assets to an AMF for trust relationship may reserve the right to give instruction to the board of foundation, even in the scope of desired distributions to persons or entities to be defined by him later.
- The trustees operating in the frame of a traditional trust are subject to professional confidentiality required by the Civil Code, however, they are exempted from confidentiality in the case of public authorities’ inquires. If the trust relationship is performed by an AMF (hybrid trust), it remains subject to the strict confidentiality requirement provided by the Civil Code without such exemptions.
The establishment of the AMF is completely accepted and supported by the Government of Hungary. The Hungarian State itself has already established 8 AMFs for the purpose of managing few of its prestigious universities with significant amount (billions of Euro) of assets.
2. WHY HUNGARIAN TRUST?
No dual ownership concept
Under an Anglo-Saxon type of trust the trustee holds the legal title in the form of legal ownership over the trust assets, while the beneficiary holds the beneficial title in the form of equitable ownership over the trust assets creating a dual ownership structure.
The Hungarian legal regime does not recognize the dual ownership concept and it creates competitive advantage for the Hungarian trust as ultimate asset protection vehicle. In Hungary, there cannot be two different – legal and beneficial – owners of one asset, the ownership is absolute and cannot be split. Under the Hungarian regulation only the trustee obtains ownership over the trust assets. The lack of the dual ownership structure radically limits the circumstances whereby a creditor of the settlor may lay claim on the trust assets.
One of the main goals of the trust relationship is to structure the ownership of the settlor’s assets in such a way as to protect them from any prospective claims. This can be best achieved by turning the assets the settlors own into assets that they do not own, while at the same time ensuring that the settlor still has the appropriate level of control over the assets.
2.1
Hungarian trust asset protection
There are three layers of the asset protection in Hungary: (a) domestic, (b) federal (EU) and (c) international investment treaty protection.
A) Domestic asset protection:
Narrow opportunity on laying claim against the trust assets
It is extremely burdensome for a creditor to lay claim on the trust assets with the present regulation of the Hungarian trust. The trust assets are highly secured against all sorts of claims against the settlor, the trustee or the beneficiary.
· Claims against the settlor in relation to the trust assets
According to the Civil Code, for a creditor of the settlor to successfully submit a claim against the trust assets, the creditor must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the asset transfer was a fraudulent one by which the basis for satisfying a third person’s claim has been deprived entirely or in part. This is not easily established given that there are several further requirements which need to be met at the same time:
-it must be established that the creditor already had a valid claim against the settlor at the time of entering into the contact,
-it must also be proven that other assets of the settlor are insufficient to satisfy the claim of the creditor,
-the creditor must also prove that the trustee acted in bad faith or had a gratuitous advantage originating from the contract,
-all of the above must be done in Hungary and in Hungarian language.
No creditor of the settlor may have any claim successfully enforceable against the trust assets other than a fraudulent transfer claim. This is also valid if the creditor is a state authority or agency.
· Claims against the trustee in relation to the trust assets
The trust assets are separated from the personal assets of the trustee and may not be mixed with other trust assets managed by the trustee. The trustee’s spouse or domestic partner, personal creditors and creditors of other trust assets managed by the trustee are not entitled to lay claim to any part of the trust assets.
· Claims against the beneficiary in relation to the trust assets
Creditors of the beneficiary may only submit a claim against the trust assets from the point in time when the trust assets are due to be distributed to the beneficiary in accordance with the provisions of the trust deed. What provides further protection is that the timing of the distribution can be exactly specified by the settlor or may depend on the discretion of the trustee or the protector or both who are obliged to act for the utmost benefit of the beneficiary.
B) Federal layer of asset protection:
The trust assets are under the protective shelter of the EU law
Since Hungary is member of the EU, applying Hungarian trust solutions means not only stability provided by the Hungarian domestic law, but also an additional layer of protection offered by the EU law applicable in Hungary as well.
· The four fundamental freedoms under the EU Treaty also protects the trust assets. According to the EU Law free movement of goods, services, labour and capital are guaranteed by the EU Treaty equally in every Member States of the Union. Whenever a law of a Member State could be deemed to jeopardize the basic EU principles, the European Court of Justice has the competence to immediately strike down such law automatically.
· The trust assets therefore benefit from the protection offered by the EU Law and the immediate enforceability of EU regulations related to free movement of goods, services, labour and capital. The four fundamental freedoms of the EU Treaty are enforced over and against national laws and authorities. So, if an authority of a Member State or if a national law jeopardizes any of these fundamental freedoms, the national authority’s decision and the relevant law could be struck down by the European Court of Justice.
· No other offshore or onshore trust jurisdiction is able to compete with the sophisticated level of rights and protection offered by the EU regulation. The trust assets, therefore, receive triple defense, being protected firstly by the Hungarian Civil law, secondly being protected by the law of the European Union and thirdly being protected by the international investment treaties.
C) International Investment Treaty Protection:
Hungary is also a member of many international treaties providing additional protection to the assets within its jurisdiction. Below we summarize the applicable international treaties which offer an additional layer of protection for international investors.
· International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) – the Washington Convention
Established in 1966, the ICSID is an institution under the auspices of the World Bank which is designed to facilitate the settlement of investment disputes between Governments and foreign private investors, thereby helping to promote increased flows of international investment.
The ICSID is the leading global arbitration institution devoted to international investment disputes. Today, ICSID is considered to be the leading international arbitration institution in the world devoted to investor-State dispute settlement, with a more than 50-year institutional track record and a wealth of precedents, ICSID has developed a leading position in the sphere of international arbitration between States and foreign investors. Hungary signed this convention in 1986 which covers any investment from or to an ICSID member state.
Consequently, if a Hungarian party (including Hungarian trust) transfers an asset to an ICSID member country (like USA) and vice versa, the protection of the ICSID convention will be automatically afforded to the whole investment and the parties will have all the benefits of such protection.
· United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL)
Hungary is also a member of UNCITRAL, the core legal body of the United Nations system in the field of international trade law. UNCITRAL’s mandate is to further the progressive harmonization and modernization of the law of international trade by preparing and promoting the use and adoption of legislative and non-legislative instruments in a number of key areas of commercial law. Those areas include international commercial dispute settlement, electronic commerce, insolvency, international payments, international sale of goods, international transport of goods, procurement and infrastructure development and security interests. Member States of UNCITRAL can rely on its arbitration procedures in case of any international trade law related disputes.
· Convention of Abolishing the Requirement of Legalization for Foreign Public Documents (Apostille Treaty)
The Convention of Abolishing the Requirement of Legalization for Foreign Public Documents – more commonly known as the Apostille Treaty – was signed in the Hague in October 1961 and came into force in 1965. It is currently in force in over 100 countries around the world, amongst them Hungary. The treaty aims to simplify the use of public documents by substituting the formality of certification (legalization) by the issue of a single Apostille certificate by a designated Authority. The Apostille is appended to the public document issued and certifies the capacity of the signatory.
· Hungary is an OECD member since 1996
The objective of the OECD is to promote policies that will improve the economic and social well-being of people around the world. The OECD provides a forum in which governments can work together to share experiences and seek solutions to common problems. They work with governments to understand what drives economic, social and environmental change.
OECD also sets international standards on a wide range of subjects, from agriculture and tax to the safety of chemicals. Member countries additionally review and compare data to try to predict future trends and analyze and identify policies that work. The EU is directly involved in the OECD as well.
2.2
European jurisdiction
Since Hungary is member of the EU, the Hungarian trust is subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of Hungary and no other sovereign country has jurisdiction over it, except those of the EU. It derives many benefits from being situated in the centre of one of the most competitive, stable and sophisticated financial area of the world, namely the EU. The European Union is the largest trade block in the world and second largest economy behind the United States of America.
Located in Central Europe (the EU geographically covers the central part of Europe), Hungary enjoys well established European financial and banking services. Traditional offshore trust centers do not enjoy the protective umbrella of the EU nor the EU’s worldwide prestige (guaranteed by the strongest democratic and professional background that any sovereign state could possibly have) and all the financial and investment opportunities that the EU countries offer.
Being a relatively new EU Member State, Hungary is benefiting from the fast catch-up program with the rest of the EU Member States and such a move-up is providing extremely promising investment opportunities. Additionally, the Hungarian trust is always within an OECD compliant jurisdiction thus, an US investor or US person who takes advantage of the Hungarian trust solution will not be exposed to the risk of investing in non-OECD country.
2.3
White-list jurisdiction
The Hungarian trust operates in a white-list jurisdiction. Hungary is subject to the competent international supervision of OECD and all the rules of EU Law. Hungary has no reputation to protect tax avoidance, money laundering or terrorism financing. Traditional offshore trust jurisdictions lack of this reputation.
· It is not a surprise that Hungary was not blacklisted by EU and was also not in the EU tax haven list from the beginning. While other EU Member States like Malta is in trouble due to the Maltese “golden passport” and by issuing the passports in a seemingly random manner has upset its EU partners. In 2017, Malta secured another visa-free travel deal for Maltese passport holders, adding 23 countries, like USA and Canada to the mix, demonstrating how powerful Maltese “golden passport” scheme is. Switzerland also having deep trouble with the tax haven label.
· It is also well worth to notice that Hungary takes considerable efforts to maintain its strong reputation in fighting against tax avoidance, money laundering and terrorism financing as it signed and ratified the Multilateral Convention to Implement Tax Treaty Related Measures to Prevent Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (MLI). The MLI is a new, multilateral tax treaty designed to ensure that MLI signatories can swiftly implement the minimum standards under the Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) tax avoidance project into their existing tax treaties.
The MLI together with the information about the signatories and their positions, and the matching database can be found here: http://www.oecd.org/tax/treaties/multilateral-convention-toimplement-tax-treaty-related-measures-to-prevent-beps.htm.
2.4
General socio-economic and geo-political environment of Hungary
- Hungary is one of the most stable, politically and economically member states in the EU.
- Very well diversified economy with a long-term triple layer of asset protection and legal shelter that no other offshore or onshore trust jurisdiction could offer with the same level of quality.
- There is no political will or external pressure for Hungary to negatively change its trust legislation.
- The AMF solution for the Hungarian trust was specifically designed to tackle the country’s long- and well-established challenges with wealth management and estate planning.
- Double Tax Treaties are in force with 82 countries. The newest tax treaties were signed during the last couple of years with Serbia, Bulgaria, Croatia, Egypt, Pakistan, Kazakhstan, Hong Kong, Singapore, etc., indicating an ongoing treaty policy.
- The major international accounting, consultancy and law firms established their subsidiaries in the country.
- English is the second official language in terms of general usage, therefore professional level legal, consultancy, administrative and banking services are easily available in English.
- The time zone (GMT + 1 and GMT + 2 in the summer) of Hungary allows for a comfortable cooperation with time zones of US (East and West Coast), Middle-East, Africa and Far-East Asia during European day time.
- Good infrastructure: Budapest can be reached within 2-3 hours flight from almost anywhere in Europe; one-hour distance only from Vienna International Airport (one of the major hubs between Europe and Asia and the Middle-East).
- Budapest is also known as one of the European financial centres; the Budapest Stock Exchange (BSE) was established in 1864 and since then is one of the oldest stock exchanges in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) region and is the leading stock exchange in the CEE as well. The BSE is 52.08% owned by the Austrian Wiener Börse Group and 42.49% owned by the Hungarian National Bank.
- International Financial Reporting Standards are mandatory for all financial institutions operating in Hungary.
- General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is fully implemented in Hungary to ensure the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data.
- Hungary is also committed to transparency in public affairs; the right to access data of public interest is a fundamental right in the Hungarian Constitution and its scope is precisely set forth in a legislation. Accordingly, the Hungarian state and its organs must operate in the most transparent manner.
- English Common Law and some elements of the US concept of “Trusts” and “Foundations” are used by Hungarian legal community ever since these types of legal constructs were introduced in Hungary. The Hungarian system of trust was copied from its English counterpart and therefore, UK and US citizens would find working with it relatively straightforward. For example, the regulation in the Civil Code related to trust is actually the Hungarian version of the English trust legislation and it can be easily found both on internet or in the English written version of the Civil Code itself.
3. HUNGARIAN TRUST COST OF ESTABLISHMENT AND MAINTENANCE
3.1
Cost estimates of a Hungarian trust
The pricing of the Hungarian trust service is very competitive. The AMF (foundation) carries out trust services on for-profit basis in line with international market practice. For reference, the Hungarian trust’s establishment and monthly maintenance cost can be less than the establishment or the monthly maintenance cost of a traditional offshore trust.
Apart from the trust service fees, the professional trustee is carrying out the trust services based on the same level of standards that are common in any trust jurisdictions, therefore, in addition to the trust related fees, the capital invested also comes with some management fee the pricing of which is dependent on many individual factors such as the volume of the investment and the individual needs of the client.
As a general rule, it may be said that the professional trustee will do all administration tasks, keep and supervise all the records, all other documentation, look after the reporting and invoicing to the banks and to the institutions of the capital markets.
The trustee also maintains the basic reporting concerning all the assets and maintains the communication interface with the client but the daily investment decisions in case of capital investment are taken by professional investment brokers.
In case of any investment needs, all the major banks and investment brokers are available for client service and provide their usual investment services including the maintenance of the investment portfolio or individual deals and transactions on behalf of the trust. The pricing policy of such investment service providers differ, depending on many individual circumstances.
4. WHY SHOULD YOU AVOID OFFSHORE TRUST JURISDICTIONS?
4.1
What do the traditional offshore trust jurisdictions offer?
The traditional offshore trust jurisdictions like Cook Islands, Nevis, Cayman Islands, Jersey, Guernsey, Isle of Man are often considered to be tax havens which is reinforced by the fact that they often figure in the Panama Papers or Paradise Papers leaks.
These traditional offshore jurisdictions may carry many disadvantages including but not exclusively a black-listing risk, money laundering and terrorism financing issues. After the Mossack Fonseca scandal and the Bermuda-Appleby scandal, the traditional offshore trust jurisdictions have become sensitive hot topics which has never been a challenge for those states before.
Furthermore, there can be additional challenges as well, such as the lack of protection offered by the shelter of a strong federal law, lack of international standing and prestige, the non-availability of financial services offered in modern European banking and investment service environment, the lack of professional and flexible service providers (only locals are usually around), language barrier issues, extreme travel distance, lack of accessibility and huge time zone differences as well.
Many people dealing with offshore trust jurisdictions also noted concerning “customer service” mentality within offshore banks and service providers, as if your business with them would be taken for granted.
4.2
What do the traditional onshore trust jurisdictions offer?
The well-known onshore trust jurisdictions like England, Jersey, Guernsey, Isle of Man, Switzerland, United States of America, (Alaska, Delaware, Nevada, South Dakota, Wyoming, etc.) have their own issues as well.
For example, in the USA, there is a growing tendency among juries to overrule the trust provisions in the favor of the creditor. The typical arrangement where a settlor is also a trustee, a beneficiary or a protector can jeopardize the trust assets in case of a civil or any other legal proceedings brought against the settlor and can result in what is called in the USA as a “charging order”.
A growing number of court decisions show the willingness of US juries to overrule trust provisions for the benefit of the creditor as courts strive to balance the interests of the parties in the litigation. Furthermore, US is not well known about discretion and privacy offered for the trusts and the US is also not known for sophisticated professional trust services since trusts are still not widely used by the US residents. US domestic trusts were introduced relatively recently as a reactionary measure to deal with the spread of international offshore trusts. These US domestic trusts though, do not have the level of support, case law, legislative predictability of the offshore or even European based trust jurisdictions, nor in the level of privacy.
With regards to the UK, Brexit brought significant political and economic uncertainty regarding the future of trust industry since the whole Brexit was a chaotic upheaval. Also, it is well known that in English law, a jury can declare and overrule the provisions of a trust in favor of the creditor. The same can be said about Jersey, Guernsey and Isle of Man where the UK common law is applicable as well.
The only other option in EU is the Luxembourg trust which remained under the shadow of Luxembourg government’s questionable tax deals and recent scandals with well-known international banks. Switzerland in similar bad reputation is dealing with its declining financial and banking sector. Many banks closed or liquidated and other banks are heavily pressured from inside and outside EU. The reputation of the Swiss banking industry is heavily damaged.
· The collapse of Switzerland’ traditional banking model was clearly visible after the Credit Suisse (CS) experienced an exit of nearly $123 billion in deposits and other liabilities in the first quarter of 2019, as wealthy clients fled amid concern about its future, before the bank was taken over by rival UBS in an emergency deal. The Swiss financial watchdog, FINMA had to publicly announce that the CS showed “serious breaches” in anti- money-laundering rules and had a “clear lack of risk awareness”. The Swiss government and banking authority failed to prevent the complete collapse of CS, even after many years of negative press and scandals.
As a result of the “rescue deal”, UBS agreed to acquire CS in a CHF 3 billion (USD 3.2 billion) all-stock deal brokered by Swiss government. Shareholders of CS received 1 share of UBS for every 22.48 shares of CS. Bloomberg later reported that UBS secured an additional USD 100 billion liquidity facility from the Swiss National Bank, and the government guaranteed potential losses of up to CHF 9 billion (USD 9.6 billion). 16 billion CHF of Additional Tier 1 bonds of CS were wiped out. The Financial Times has observed that this ended Switzerland’s reputation as a banking safe haven (https://www.ft.com/content/d6acd781-2388-4f1cb6c0-2e86d32cfaa2).
4.3
How the reputation of the traditional offshore trust jurisdictions were damaged?
Banks and offshore trust service providers’ scandals in brief
Here are some selected examples which recently surfaced illustrating how offshore trust services were tarnished and their trust providers compromised.
· One of the leading Swiss bank’s CEO carried out insider trading transactions through deposit accounts held in his wife’s name at other banks, unlawfully generating a profit of USD 752 000 through the repeated and systematic violation of the bank’s internal directives and supervisory laws. (Insider trading January 2020) (
· Credit Suisse’ lack of professionalism showed when personal differences were included in an internal employment related matter, a story of spying, scandal and suicide in Switzerland, where professional discretion and restraint should be a key element. The leader of Switzerland’s second-biggest bank ordered surveillance over Iqbal Khan, a 43-year-old Swiss and Pakistani banker and successful former wealth manager of Credit Suisse when he joined rival UBS.
The board of directors acknowledged that the two-week spying was “wrong and disproportionate and has resulted in severe reputational damage to the bank”. Unfortunately, as many experts noted at the time the case has rocked the Swiss banking world in a much deeper level than it was expected. (Credit Suisse – corporate espionage – October 2019) ( Https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/01/business/dealbook/creditsuisse-spy-scandal.html)
· Zurich based BSI, an almost 150-year-old bank, one of the oldest in Switzerland and the sixth largest was taken over by private banking group Zurich-based EFG International, on the condition that the BSI group would be dissolved within the next 12 months as a result of the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA) proceedings against the BSI group for failing to prevent suspected money laundering and bribery in its dealings with 1MDB. 1MDB was a Malaysian state-run development fund from where money was funneled out via a close friend of the PM, Nijab Razak.
The US Department of Justice also filed civil forfeiture complaints in 2016 and 2017 seeking to recover about US$1.7 billion tied to 1MDB – the largest action brought under the US Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Initiative. The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) announced in July that it had withdrawn BSI’s status as a merchant bank. Even Singapore banking heavyweight DBS entered into various transactions that link it to 1MDB’s shenanigans.
Other financial institutions involved are Standard Chartered Bank’s Singapore branch, UBS of Switzerland and Falcon PBS, another Swiss bank. (1MDB – corruption – August 2018) (https://asiatimes.com/2020/05/swiss-bank-folds-under-1mdb-corruption-cloud/,https://theconversation.com/how-a-swiss-bank-was-toppled-by-afinancial-scandal-in-malaysia-and-what-can-be-learned-from-it-100130, https://sbr.com.sg/source/zuu-online/heres-how-singapore-banks-are-involved-in-1mdb-scandal)
· A £1.3bn fraud claim has been filed by 371 investors against HSBC UK Bank for losses caused as a result of their Eclipse Partnerships film investment scheme, which they said they were induced to invest in on “false promises”. (https://www.investmentweek.co.uk/news/4016801/gbp-3bn-fraudclaim-filed-hsbc-uk-bank-sham-investment-scheme)
5. END OF THE LONG-LASTING BANK SECRECY ERA
Contrary to popular belief, the long-lasting era of Swiss banking secrecy with its intact reputation has come to an end partly because of increasing international pressures to make banking information more transparent but partly due to the many leaks affecting their high-profile clients.
·The first domino in the collapse of bank secrecy was the Bradley Birkenfeld case, a US whistle-blower helping US authorities prosecute Swiss banks for tax fraud in exchange of a USD 104 million record award from the IRS whistleblower program.
· Many more followed Birkenfeld, like Herve Falciani former software engineer of HSBC private bank Geneva who allegedly stole data from his employer, containing the names of customers from several countries and attempted to sell them to several governments. In January 2009 the police raided the French home of Falciani and found computer files on 130,000 potential tax evaders and began investigating them. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-hsbc-taxspain-falciani/hsbc-whistleblower-defends-tax-leak-as-he-fightsextradition-idUSKCN1LR0GL)
· Few years later, NRW’s finance ministry paid €2.5 million (CHF2.7 million) for CDs containing tax details of Credit Suisse clients and Lichtenstein state- owned LGT bank’ clients. (https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/long-legal-battle_swiss-awardedstolen-tax-cd-payment/43177376)
After these incidents, many more followed resulting in Switzerland’s reputation regarding its outstanding banking secrecy regulation and policies being severely damaged.
6. STATE OF THE HUNGARIAN FINANCIAL SECTOR AND FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS’ SECRECY
- Healthy and solid financial system which fulfilled the latest stress test of the European Banking Association with flying colors, with no supervisory intervention, nor additional capital needed.
- The professional trust providers are financial institutions and do not share client data with the banks.
- In the case of a hybrid Hungarian trust, the only UBO is the trustee (board of the foundation), neither the settlor nor the beneficiary are classified as UBO.
- The trustee of the hybrid trust is subject to full confidentiality, ensuring the absolute privacy.
7. HUNGARIAN TRUST SUMMARY
All things considered, it may be said that although many times it is easy to follow the old and tested path, in relation to wealth management it is worth to start thinking out of the box.
The Hungarian trust legislation’s liberal approach which gives the parties the opportunity to deviate from the rules to a great extent, as well as the government’s supportive attitude towards the wealth management vehicles and their privacy needs allows Hungary to provide a unique solution taking into account the personal needs and circumstances of the individuals involved and providing all this in a jurisdiction with exceptional stability, sophistication and professionalism.
Want to set up a Hungarian Trust?
Fill out a free strategy session form on this page or call the number above.
