top of page
Assets confidential . Guaranteed owner cannot be physically traced. Legally not reportable by CRS/FATCA/CARF
A resident of Svalbard, Akrotiri, or Falklands as trustee of a UK non-resident trust categorised as a Custodial Institution.
WhatsApp or Signal me for consultation
+41 76 212 2024
Setup cost of your SPV custodial institution trust is CHF 2,500 and takes a morning to have the deed signatures notarised and apostille.
Incorporation cost of underlying investment entity company is done by yourself in any jurisdiction in the world. E.g. UK incorporation is about GBP 300 including the company's representative office in the UK and director (you the client an bank signatory) address on companies house. This takes a few days on average, depending on the ID verification software.
The vast majority of clients find their own bank for the underlying investment entity.
Custody fee is 1.0% - 2.0% p.a, negotiable
How I work with intermediary professionals, commissions, MDR, etc
A revolutionary financial structure significantly enhances wealth planning. UK non-resident trusts as a special purpose vehicle, with trustees based in Svalbard or British Overseas Territories like Falkland Islands or Akrotiri. Traditional financial planners often rely on tax havens for confidentiality, tax efficiency, and asset protection. Mark Morris's onshore structures offer better advantages without OECD regulatory burdens like economic substance, reporting requirements, or global minimum tax. They bypass double tax agreements and Inter Government Agreements with the USA, providing superior asset protection compared to places like Cook Islands or Nevis. Note that the structure supports bank accounts in any jurisdiction in the world, including the US. The bank account is NOT in the British Overseas Territory. This website will describe the Polar bear trust (Svalbard), Penguin Trust (Falklands) and Lionheart Trusts (Akrotiri).
Mark Morris
Article I - Unrivalled incomparable confidentiality
Article II - Arrangement not subject to Common Reporting Standard
Trust planning with Svalbard and the Falkland Islands and Akrotiri, Cyprus
Traditional asset protection jurisdictions such as Cook Islands are archaic
Article III - Arrangement not subject to Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act
Article IV - Arrangement not subject to Crypto Asset Reporting Framework
Article V - Decant to any trust, maintaining confidentiality of settlor
Analysis of Svalbard structure not in scope of CRS
The Economist - Looking to stash a few million? Try UK militray base.
Analysis of Svalbard structure not in scope of FATCA
Why Almost Anyone Can Move To Svalbard
Whether a trust can be considered part of an EAG for FATCA
Updated CRS text May 2025
The Economist - Will America go from the hunter to the hunted
The Economist - The Holdout: Bahamas
The Economist - The weak link
A Polar Bear, Napoleon, Military or Penguin Custodial Institution trust avoids
CRS/FATCA & Exchange on Demand
Stocks, bonds, derivatives, cash, insurance policies, crypto, etc.
This structure legally avoids CRS, FATCA & CARF as the Custodial Institution is located in a non-participating jurisdiction, as its trustee is an individual in a non-participating jurisdiction.
The Trust is located in Svalbard, New Zealnd, or Akrotori, or Falklands) as it has the trustee, located in these territories. The trust is categorized as a Custodial Institution whose sole function is to hold the shares of an underlying entity. It does not have a bank account or other assets, nor earns any income from its subsidiary.
The company owned by your SPV Custodial Institution trust, which is a Financial Institution, is a non-reportable Investment Entity holding your financial asset investments
You establish your own SPV Custodial Institution located in either in Svalbard (Polar Bear trust) or ,Akritori (Lionheart trust) or Falklands (Penguin trust) using a UK-non resident trust which owns an investment entity holding company shares such as a UK, Singapore or Hong Kong company.
The underlying investment entity does not report for CRS or FATCA because it's owned by a Custodial Institution.
There is no exchange upon request/demand because every tax treaty and income agreement with Norway explicitly excludes Svalbard, St. Helena, Falklands or Akrotiri have no tax treaties.
As an option, this Custodial Institution trust can be resettled/decanted into any trust in the world with any corporate trustee.
The settlor of the new trust is the UK trust with Svalbard, St Helena, Akrotiri, or Falklands trustee, which are a non-participating CRS Custodial Institution.
The settlor of the new trust is not reportable as it's a financial institution, viz. a Custodial Institution.
The beneficiaries of the new trust are reportable, unless the beneficiaries are an unnamed class, such as future children.
How to avoid CRS
Exchange on Request important to OECD Global Transparency Forum
A Polar Bear, Napoleon, Penguin or Military Custodian avoids Crypto Asset Reporting Framework
CARF is different to CRS and FATCA as a professionally managed Investment Entity is NOT an excluded non reportable person.
However, CARF/CRS/FATCA has a rule that if an account holder is a non-Financial Institution nominee/agent then the account holder is not the nominee/agent, but rather is deemed to be for whom the assets are being held for, i.e. the custodial institution.
How to avoid the Crypto Asset Reporting Framework.
For crypto assets, your underlying entity will be a non-FI nominee holding assets for the Custodial Institution, which is not a reportable person.
The Custodial Institution does not report for CARF because Svalbard, Akrotiri, St. Helena or Falklands are a non-participating territory of CARF.
A Polar Bear, Penguin or Lionheart Custodian avoids FATCA
The US-NORWAY Intergovernmental Agreements (IGA-1 & IGA2) explicitly excludes Svalbard, Norway.
The underlying company files a "nil" or "no reportable persons" report for FATCA because its equity interest (owner) is a Custodial Institution located in Svalbard, which is a non-reportable account holder.
This nil reporting is legal compared to the "Shell Bank Loophole" identified by the US Senate Finance Comittee as a major FATCA flaw, when the investment entity owner outright lies on his FATCA filing that there are no reportable persons.
The Custodial Institution located in Svalbard does not report for FATCA because there is no IGA between the IRS/treasuy and Svalbard. The IGA between US and Norway, explicitly excludes Svalbard.
There is no 30% FATCA withholding penalty imposed on the Custodial Institution as there never is a payment made by the underlying entity to the Custodial Institution.
There is recalcitrant report filed on the on the Custodial Institution as there never is a payment made by the underlying entity to the Custodial Institution.
How to avoid FATCA using a nonparticpating Custodial Institution.
My unusual financial industry experience: Pitcairn, Isle of Man cells, China ODI, Bahamas MCAA, German Bundestag, UK SPV Svalbard Custodial Institution, etc...
I testified to the German Parliament in Berlin that the Swiss proposal for anonymous wittholding of tax on interest for the EU Savings Tax Directive was full of loopholes. Germany subsequently told the Swiss where they could get off the bus....
See me at 02:06:00 for ten minutes critisizing the Swiss proposal regarding anonymous withholding tax to be paid to Germany.
How can US Persons maintain their privacy
by avoiding FATCA, but self declare FBAR-8938? Is this legal or is it a don't
drop the soap action?
1925 Spitsbergen Treaty giving sovereignty of Svalbard to Norway
OECD CRS-Related FAQ
Norway has no tax agreement with any country nor does it exchange information on financial accounts... well partially true
Custody fees can be paid to unrelated 3rd parties
How I discovered Svalbard is not part of AEOI
HMRC can issue information request to non UK residents. if unresponsive, HMRC can rely on mutual assistance agreements for exchange on demand if such treaty exists. Penalties can be applied on assets held in the UK.
HMRC cannot request info on tax status to Svalbard trustee
OECD - Territorial application - MCAA Article 29 allows any signatory to exclude some of its territory
A deep legal dive into a legitimate non-
reportable structure for Crypto users
held by CASPs, VASPs, CESPs, CASSprs,
Digital asset exchanges and CTPs.
Exchange upon demand, based on tax treaties and MCAA is equally important as automatic exchange..
Best solution for CARF since sliced bread was invented
Why settlor re-settle (UK) or decant (US) an irrevocable trust? Settlor is a Non Participating Custodial Institution. Why settlor is non-reportable?
HMRC: Persons of significant Control: If your company is controlled by a trust or firm without ‘legal personality’
If a trust meets any nature of control, you’ll need to record all trustees as PSCs of your company at Companies House.
Appoint Protector with fiduciary powers. Will Protector's excess powers
invalidate a trust? No, unless they are
a"substituted settlor
Swiss State Secretariat international Finance misinterpret CRS, oblige trusts look-through FIs, central banks, regularly traded corporations, international organisations and governmnet entities
As regards Norway the Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters does not apply to Svalbard, Jan Mayen or the Norwegian dependencies ("biland")
Norwegian AML Oct 2024 does not require registration of trustees of foreign trusts if owns no property and no Norwegian bank account.
MCAA - Territorial application - Norway excludes Svalbard from the OECD MCAA
OECD Commentaries on the Common Reporting Standard
Dec 2024 - Norway signs MDR MCAA. The OECD EU Mandatory Disclosure Rules do not apply to Svalbard.
The OECD/EU Mandatory Disclore Rules do not apply to Svalbard as it is excluded from MCAA.
The OECD MDR-MCAA only applies to territories in the MCAA for CRS. Thus excludes Svalbard .
Which is the best offshore asset protection trust? Cooks, Nevis, or Norway?
Which is the best offshore asset protection trust? Cooks, Nevis, or Norway?
Which is the best offshore asset protection trust? Cooks, Nevis, or Norway?
To schmucks opining FIs such as Custodial Institutions, need to be
supervised by a country's domestic financial regulations to qualify as a FI for CRS
Which is the best offshore asset protection trust? Cooks, Nevis, or Norway?
Trustee admin or custodial fees can be
paid to unrelated 3rd parties, despite
erroneous nexus requirements by some
countries' CRS/FATCA legislation.
Which is the best offshore asset protection trust? Cooks, Nevis, or Norway?
Must a trust owning a subsidiary entity register as part of an EAG for FATCA?
Which is the best offshore asset protection trust? Cooks, Nevis, or Norway?
The Exceptional Case of Akrotiri and Dhekelia, the two British Military Bases on Cyprus
bottom of page