
STRUCTURING
Jurisdiction selection is a strategic decision, not a tax decision. How families with interests across multiple countries should think about structuring for resilience — not just efficiency.
9 MIN
STRUCTURING · REGULATORY
The MAS incentive schemes that attracted 1,400+ structures are now filtering for substance over scale — and the families that benefit are those who understood this from the start.

Perspectives
Commentary on the matters, markets, and jurisdictions where we advise - direct to your inbox.
Twice weekly. No noise.
Singapore's family office sector has grown to over 1,400 structures — but the MAS substance requirements introduced since 2022 have fundamentally changed who qualifies for the 13O and 13U incentive schemes. Families with genuine operational presence and local investment mandates retain full eligibility. Those using Singapore as an address of record face an accelerating compliance problem.
The headline figure — more than 1,400 single family offices in Singapore as of 2024 — is accurate. What it obscures is the bifurcation happening beneath it.
Growth in registered structures does not mean growth in compliant structures. The MAS tightening in 2022 introduced local business spending requirements, minimum headcount thresholds, and mandatory local investment allocations. Structures established before those changes face a choice: retrofit genuine substance or lose incentive eligibility.
The families navigating this best are not the ones scrambling to meet the new requirements. They are the ones who built for them from the start.
Singapore's family office incentive regime was designed to attract genuine wealth management activity to the city-state — not to provide a low-cost offshore holding structure with a Singaporean address. The 2022 revisions reflected a growing recognition that too many structures were doing the latter while claiming the former.
The practical effect is significant. A family with SGD 50M in assets held through a Singapore VCC that employs no local staff, makes no local investments, and conducts all investment decision-making from another jurisdiction does not qualify for the 13O exemption under current MAS guidance. The structure remains legal — but the tax benefit that made it attractive is no longer available.
This is not an academic distinction. For a structure managing SGD 50M, the difference between qualifying and not qualifying for the exemption represents a material annual tax liability on investment returns.
The standard framing — Singapore versus Hong Kong for Asian family office domicile — tends to focus on tax rates and political stability. These matter. But they are not where families make their most consequential structuring mistakes.
| Factor | Singapore (13O) | Singapore (13U) | Hong Kong |
|---|---|---|---|
| Minimum AUM | SGD 10M | SGD 200M | No minimum (registration-based) |
| Local investment requirement | 10% of AUM or SGD 10M | 10% of AUM or SGD 10M | None mandated |
| Minimum local headcount | 1 investment professional | 2 investment professionals | 2 professionals (SFO registration) |
| Annual business spend | SGD 200K+ | SGD 500K+ | Not prescribed |
| Regulatory body | MAS | MAS | SFC / HKMA |
| Tax on investment returns | Exempt (if qualifying) | Exempt (if qualifying) | No capital gains tax |
Source: MAS Circular on Family Office Tax Incentives (2022); SFC Family Office Registration Framework (2023)
What the comparison table does not capture is the qualitative dimension. Singapore's legal system, its treaty network, and the depth of its professional services ecosystem — private banking, legal, accounting — make it structurally different from Hong Kong in ways that matter for families with complex cross-border arrangements.
Hong Kong's advantage is its proximity to Greater China capital and its common law framework for trust and succession matters. For families with significant mainland Chinese business interests, this proximity is not incidental — it is the primary consideration.
The MAS application process is sequential and cannot be shortcut. Families who attempt to establish substance after the fact — rather than building it in from the start — consistently encounter delays and eligibility complications.
The MAS application process for 13O incentive eligibility requires genuine operational substance established before the application is submitted — not after approval.
Incorporate a Singapore private limited company or Variable Capital Company (VCC) sub-fund. The VCC structure is generally preferred for multi-mandate or future-proofing purposes. Engage a licensed MAS fund administrator at this stage — they are required for the application.
At least one investment professional must be a Singapore resident employed by the family office before the MAS application is submitted. This is not a post-approval requirement — MAS will verify employment status at the time of application. The professional must have relevant qualifications and demonstrable investment experience.
The 13O scheme requires at least 10% of AUM or SGD 10M (whichever is lower) to be invested in qualifying Singapore assets. Define this mandate clearly in the investment policy statement before application. Qualifying assets include Singapore-listed equities, Singapore-focused funds, and certain private credit instruments.
MAS operates a preliminary enquiry process before formal application. Submit details of the proposed structure, AUM, investment strategy, and substance arrangements. MAS will indicate whether the structure is likely to qualify before the full application is lodged — this step saves significant time and cost.
Following MAS approval, the family office must file annual declarations confirming continued compliance with AUM thresholds, headcount requirements, local business spending, and local investment mandates. Non-compliance results in clawback of the tax exemption for the relevant year — not prospective loss only.
Note: The process described reflects MAS requirements as of April 2026. MAS guidance is subject to revision. Individual circumstances vary significantly by family structure, asset composition, and domicile. Professional advice should be sought before proceeding.
The families we see navigate Singapore's regulatory environment well share one characteristic: they asked the substance questions before the structure questions. Not which entity type is most tax-efficient, but whether they genuinely intend to have a Singapore operation — staff, investment activity, decision-making presence — or whether they are looking for a label.
MAS has made the answer to the second question increasingly expensive.
Yes. The 13O scheme does not require the principal family to be Singapore-resident. What it requires is that the family office entity itself — the management company — is Singapore-incorporated, employs qualifying local staff, and meets the AUM and local investment thresholds. Non-resident families commonly establish Singapore family offices as part of a broader multi-jurisdictional structure.
MAS requires annual declaration of continued eligibility. If AUM falls below the minimum threshold, the family office must notify MAS and the tax exemption is suspended for the year in which the threshold is breached. The structure does not automatically lose its approved status — but the exemption is unavailable until the threshold is restored and declared in the subsequent annual filing.
A VCC is an investment fund vehicle — it holds assets, not management operations. The family office management company is typically a separate Singapore private limited company that manages the VCC sub-fund. The two entities are distinct: the VCC sub-fund holds the assets and claims the tax exemption; the management company employs the investment professionals and conducts the operational activity that satisfies MAS substance requirements.
Singapore's treaty network and rule of law make it genuinely competitive for families with global rather than Asia-specific asset bases. The local investment requirement — 10% of AUM in Singapore-focused assets — is the primary constraint for families without existing Asia Pacific exposure. For families where that allocation makes strategic sense regardless of domicile, Singapore remains highly competitive. For families where it does not, the comparison shifts toward Switzerland, Dubai, or the Cayman Islands depending on the family's specific profile.
The substance requirements that were supposed to dampen Singapore's family office growth have instead raised the floor. The structures that remain are, on balance, more genuine than the ones that left. For families with real operational intent, that is a feature, not a problem.
DISCUSS A MATTER
If you have a transaction, a capital requirement, a structuring question, or a matter that requires coordination across multiple jurisdictions - we should speak.
All enquiries are reviewed by the principal.
ADVISORY NETWORK
For advisers whose clients
have matters that need resolution.
Accountants, lawyers, private bankers, and other professional advisers can introduce clients through a confidential referral channel. The introduction is protected. The adviser's relationship is preserved.
Written by
Fletcher Ladd
Founder and Principal, Principal
Fletcher Ladd is the Founder and Principal of Ladd & Co., a private advisory firm representing ultra-high-net-worth families, principals, and private institutions across mergers and acquisitions, capital placement, international structuring, and related mandates. The firm operates across nine offices globally — New York, Palm Beach, George Town, London, Zürich, Dubai, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Sydney. Fletcher advises clients on transactions and matters that span multiple jurisdictions, asset classes, and professional disciplines, with a particular focus on cross-border structuring, capital placement, and the coordination of complex private affairs.
View profileReviewed by Ladd & Co.
Disclosure
This material is provided by Ladd & Co. for informational purposes only and reflects considerations that may arise in cross-border and multi-jurisdictional matters. It does not constitute legal, tax, regulatory, or investment advice in any jurisdiction. Laws, regulations, and tax treatment vary between jurisdictions and are subject to change. The information contained herein should not be relied upon without independent professional advice appropriate to the reader's specific circumstances and jurisdictions of interest.

STRUCTURING
Jurisdiction selection is a strategic decision, not a tax decision. How families with interests across multiple countries should think about structuring for resilience — not just efficiency.
STRUCTURING · REGULATORY
The OECD's Side-by-Side agreement has rewritten Pillar Two for US-connected structures. The implications for family offices are not what most advisers are saying.