The four-pillar dialogue: family office, legal, banking and investment advisory

A report on a panel session, part of the 31st Annual International Private Client Tax Conference, titled ‘The four-pillar dialogue: family office, legal, banking and investment advisory. Perspectives on global private client challenges’ held on 2 March 2026

Session Co‑Chairs

Alessia Allegretti  Boies Schiller Flexner, Milan
Megan Worrell  JP Morgan, New York

Panellists

Jochen Vogler  BelleCapital, Zürich
Jeannette Yazedjian  Private Family Office, Los Angeles

Reporter

Shiwei Wu  Kozusko Harris Duncan, New York

Introduction

The session explored how geopolitical uncertainty, global mobility and regulatory change are reshaping the priorities of international families, from the rising demand for alternative residencies to the way sanctions and evolving tax policies influence cross‑border banking. Governance and succession emerged as central themes, with an emphasis on establishing flexible structures that clarify roles across both family and business spheres. The panel also addressed the growing importance of preparing the next generation through tailored education and modern communication methods that align with their expectations. Identifying family objectives was highlighted as an ongoing, collaborative process, informed by observation and structured dialogue rather than a single conversation. Finally, the discussion examined the expanding role of technology and artificial intelligence (AI), noting both the efficiencies these tools can bring and the heightened need for confidentiality and secure data practices.

The session opened by framing the discussion around the increasing complexity of the global private client environment. It was noted that decisions for international families are rarely made within a single discipline, but rather at the intersection of legal, banking, investment and family office perspectives. This multidisciplinary interaction was described as no longer optional but essential to ensure coherent and effective decision‑making across jurisdictions.

Geopolitical risks and global mobility

The subject was introduced by highlighting the high degree of uncertainty that the current geopolitical environment has created for internationally active families, and the discussion considered how this is playing out from different professional perspectives. A shift among wealthy American families was described, with a growing number applying for second residencies, seeking alternative citizenships or relocating altogether. This behaviour, once associated mainly with ultra‑high‑net‑worth families, was noted to have become common across a much wider economic spectrum. Concerns about increasing political polarisation and uncertainty in the United States have prompted families to secure ‘backup options’, with Italy, Switzerland, Portugal, London and Dubai emerging as popular destinations.

From a European banking perspective, it was observed that the movement is not entirely one‑directional. Many entrepreneurs and affluent families from Europe, the Middle East and Asia are simultaneously relocating into the US. These clients include not only billionaires, but also founders who have recently exited businesses or completed liquidity events and who consider the US a superior environment for growth and entrepreneurship.

The panel then examined the impact of geopolitics on banking relationships. A period of client uncertainty triggered by draft tax provisions under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) in the US was described. One proposed measure contemplated a surtax on remittances sent from US accounts to foreign jurisdictions, while another suggested increasing withholding taxes for individuals residing in countries with so‑called ‘unfair tax regimes’, including those that employ digital services taxes. Although these proposals were never enacted, their proposal raised concerns among international families about whether the US might begin using tax policy as a geopolitical instrument.

It was explained that advisers spend a considerable amount of time walking clients through the legislative process and stressing that early‑stage proposals rarely survive in their initial form. Nevertheless, the episode led some families to temporarily move assets out of the US, citing concerns about future unpredictability. Non‑US clients questioned whether their jurisdictions might eventually be targeted. Although these controversial measures were ultimately discarded, the incident illustrated how political developments can quickly influence financial planning decisions.

Differences in sanctions regimes across jurisdictions were also highlighted as a challenge within this context. European banks were described as often applying sanctions more strictly than US institutions, while Swiss banks apply them cautiously but independently. Families from regions subject to heightened geopolitical scrutiny, such as Russia or Venezuela, experience these differences in practical terms, often influencing where they bank or establish residence.

Governance and generational succession

The discussion opened with the observation that, from a legal perspective in Italy and across Europe, governance is increasingly approached as a structured and forward‑looking process rather than a reactive exercise. Families are moving away from informal arrangements and last‑minute decisions, recognising the need to define roles, decision‑making processes and succession pathways in advance. Governance tools, such as family constitutions, decision protocols and structured succession frameworks, were described as most effective when they remain adaptable and capable of evolving alongside the family and its business.

From a family office perspective, governance and succession were described as mechanisms to create clarity around the relevant roles, responsibilities and expectations. while allowing space for evolving relationships and individual development. Founders who have built substantial wealth through decades of hands‑on leadership often find it challenging to step back or adapt to shared decision‑making structures. Meanwhile, younger generations may be unfamiliar with formal governance frameworks and sometimes perceive them as restrictive.

To support families through these transitions, the importance of creating an environment that enables open conversation was emphasised. Advisers frequently facilitate discussions on expectations, authority lines and emergency protocols, clarifying who should step in under various circumstances. Practical tools, such as family constitutions, written decision protocols, values‑mapping exercises and structured succession frameworks were cited as being helpful for families to convert broad principles into usable systems, provided they remain adaptable as circumstances change. It was also observed that advisers should guide rather than prescribe solutions and empower families to shape governance structures that reflect their values.

The discussion then turned to governance from a business perspective. Cases were described in which families assumed the next generation would naturally step into leadership roles, only to find that their interest or capability did not align with these expectations. Many family businesses rely on long‑serving executives with deep institutional knowledge, and sudden leadership changes can disrupt continuity. As a result, families increasingly employ structured evaluation processes, such as successor committees that include external members, defined eligibility criteria and encourage younger family members to gain experience outside the family enterprise. In some cases, families separate management from ownership by appointing non‑family executives to senior roles.

From an investment perspective, it was emphasised that governance frameworks must also support efficient and timely decision‑making. Overly complex approval processes or unclear delegation can impede responses to market events or strategic opportunities. Effective governance models clearly identify who is authorised to make decisions in both ordinary and crisis situations, ensuring operational continuity.

Across the discussion, there was agreement that governance and succession planning must be treated as dynamic processes. As families grow and their businesses evolve, governance structures must adjust accordingly, responding to shifting personal, business and geopolitical circumstances.

The next generation

This part of the discussion shifted the focus from generational change within families to advisory continuity. It was noted that while governance provides the framework for decision‑making, the individuals involved in those decisions are increasingly changing. Younger generations have different priorities, communication styles and expectations, raising questions about how advisory relationships can evolve accordingly.

The discussion then considered a central issue: to what extent advisers who have traditionally supported the parent generation are well positioned to assist the next generation and how this transition is typically managed in practice. This framed a broader conversation about how advisers build trust with younger family members, while maintaining continuity across generations.

An example was shared involving a patriarch with 12 children across three marriages, ranging in age from their early twenties to their fifties, each holding very different expectations about their involvement in the family’s wealth. To bridge these differences, a multigenerational advisory structure was created, pairing younger advisers with younger family members and senior advisers with the patriarch. This approach allowed each generation to engage comfortably and constructively.

From a family office perspective, it was emphasised that maintaining strong relationships with second‑ and third‑generation family members is essential to long‑term effectiveness. Younger family members do not always view the family office as a resource designed for them and may instead perceive it as primarily serving the older generation. To address this, dedicated next‑generation sessions, structured introductions to the role of the family office and direct access to advisers were described as effective strategies. Programmes including financial literacy sessions, introductory investment meetings and governance workshops were cited as valuable tools to prepare younger generations for their future responsibilities.

It was also noted that advisers often find themselves asking next‑generation members questions their parents have never posed, particularly regarding the roles they want to play in family businesses or wealth structures. These conversations frequently reveal mismatches between interest and capability. In some cases, an enthusiastic younger member may lack the experience required, while a highly capable individual may be uninterested in assuming leadership. Such dynamics often require carefully facilitated discussions to establish realistic expectations.

The participants further observed that younger generations expect more modern communication styles. Interactive dashboards, visual summaries and more frequent updates were described as preferable to long, formal memoranda. Younger clients were also noted to want earlier involvement in decision‑making than their parents had, with structured exposure to investment discussions helping them build their confidence and understanding.

Overall, preparing the next generation was described as a gradual, ongoing process requiring consistent engagement, education and exposure to the business, with responsibility transitioning over time rather than at a set date.

This part of the discussion concluded with the observation that maintaining continuity across generations is not simply a matter of preserving the same advisory relationship over time, but of ensuring that the relationship itself can evolve. Diverse advisory teams, combining seniority, experience and younger professionals, were identified as particularly effective in preserving trust and continuity across generations.

Identifying family objectives

During the discussion on identifying family objectives, it was emphasised that families rarely articulate their priorities directly. Objectives instead reveal themselves gradually through ongoing interactions. By observing how family members allocate time, respond to stress and prioritise issues, advisers can gain deeper insight into what matters most. Objectives were also noted as something that evolve as families grow, as new generations take on roles, and as major events, such as company sales or liquidity events, reshape the family’s circumstances.

An example was shared describing a multiday meeting for a large multigenerational business family. During a series of structured conversations, participants expressed individual goals and reflected on how these aligned with the family’s long‑term legacy. Despite differing personal aspirations, shared priorities emerged once the family was given the opportunity to discuss them openly. These conversations enabled the development of clearer collective objectives for the next phase of planning.

The panellists highlighted tools that can be used to assist in identifying family objectives, including values‑mapping exercises, family mission statement workshops and structured goal‑setting sessions. These tools were described as particularly effective in encouraging open dialogue and elevating voices that may not otherwise be heard. Such exercises often reveal areas of alignment, such as a focus on education, philanthropy or entrepreneurial support, which can then inform governance structures, investment policy and succession planning.

It was further observed that when families speak about objectives, they are often ultimately speaking about values, even if they do not initially frame them that way. In Italy and increasingly across Europe, families were described as placing greater emphasis on history, identity and a sense of purpose, and on how these values can be preserved across generations. Advisers and family offices were identified as playing an important role in facilitating this type of reflection and translating it into practical tools, such as family charters or other written frameworks. In some cases, these priorities find expression through cultural projects, including books, museums or similar initiatives that preserve family heritage, while fostering intergenerational dialogue.

Technology and AI

The session concluded with a discussion on technology and AI, focusing on how these tools are reshaping both the delivery of advice and client expectations. It was noted that clients and increasingly younger professionals routinely use AI tools, such as ChatGPT, to verify or interpret advice. While AI‑generated explanations are not always accurate, they often prompt clients to ask more detailed or specific questions, creating opportunities for deeper engagement.

Family office use of secure, private AI systems was discussed, particularly for managing and analysing large volumes of documentation. Family members can query internal records using natural language to retrieve information, such as details about assets held in particular jurisdictions or upcoming distribution obligations. These tools were noted to resonate especially well with younger generations, given their preference for dashboards, visual summaries and interactive formats, rather than lengthy written memoranda.

An example was also shared of a client using an AI model to review an investment portfolio proposal. Although the analysis was not fully accurate, it prompted a productive discussion about the investment strategy and helped deepen the client’s understanding.

It was observed that what has changed most is not the substance of the advice, but the starting point of the conversations being had, which increasingly begin at a more advanced stage. Advisers now spend more time clarifying assumptions and correcting oversimplifications generated by AI tools, sometimes compounded by the fact that clients do not always formulate the relevant prompts effectively.

The discussion also highlighted the growing importance of cybersecurity and confidentiality. Sensitive information should not be uploaded to public AI tools, and family offices must ensure that all staff, advisers and vendors understand the importance of adhering to proper data security practices and the need to use appropriate communication channels.