Better Protection By Going International

Moving money to a foreign country dates back to the days of the Roman emperors and is a widely practiced technique of protecting wealth and placing assets beyond the reach of a domestic legal system. With the explosion of lawsuits that have affected wealthy families across the globe, international Asset Protection has become popular and essential.

International financial centers (IFCs) exist in several countries and offer highly favorable banking, privacy, estate planning and Asset Protection laws that are appealing to wealthy individuals and families because of the following benefits:

• Leading Asset Protection jurisdictions do not recognize or enforce U.S. judgments and jurisdictional immunity is fundamental. No foreign country can ignore every legal order from another country but certain countries do not enforce U.S. civil decrees and are highly favorable for protection from lawsuits.
• Due to the fact that certain protective countries will not enforce an American judgment or civil decree, a creditor must re-litigate their case within that foreign jurisdiction, which is commonly impractical if not impossible. The best international financial centers impose procedural obstacles that effectively block creditors and litigation through complex laws that are predominately debtor-oriented.
• Many Asset Protection jurisdictions have special laws that allow highly protective Asset Protection structures to be formed including international Asset Protection trusts, LLCs, LPs, foundations, insurance companies, international business companies and hybrid companies, to name a few. Each of these structures offers substantially greater protection than offered from a comparable U.S. entity.
• Most Asset Protection jurisdictions are excellent privacy havens.

The primary advantage provided by international protection over domestic protection is that assets fraudulently transferred to a U.S. entity can be easily recovered through the U.S. courts because the U.S. courts have continued jurisdiction over these assets. However, an American court has no jurisdiction over international assets and for this reason international assets are better protected than U.S.-based assets which remain susceptible to creditor challenges and fraudulent transfer claims that can be enforced through the U.S. legal system.

IFC's provide broad debtor protection and very few creditors can overcome the many legal and procedural obstacles of a foreign country, including shortened statutes of limitation and a burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt that an international transfer was fraudulent, which is an extremely difficult standard to prove. Some countries (such as Nevis) require a large cash bond to be posted to cover a defendant's legal fees before a creditor can commence litigation and also require that local legal counsel be retained on a fee (versus contingency) engagement. These economic obstacles frustrate most pursuits of an international entity.

It is important to note that an American creditor with a U.S. judgment must re-litigate their case within any international jurisdiction and win a judgment from the foreign court before a creditor can even attempt to recover a fraudulently transferred asset. Additionally, the laws in the foreign country must be identical to those of the original court and cannot be retried. These complexities render most lawsuits illogical outside of the United States and underscore several of the reasons that one would seek to shield their assets in a foreign entity and why only 3% of judgment creditors attempt to recover international claims and typically settle for pennies on the dollar to close the complaint.

CHOOSE THE RIGHT ASSET PROTECTION ATTORNEY!