Thank you kindly for all the work that you've done on my and my wife's behalf. A big pressure has been taken off our chests

M. Elliot
  1. Article
  2. Related Articles
  3. Related Practice Areas

Is it the beginning of the end for discretionary trusts and one-man companies?

Date: September 01, 2010

Authors: Michael Pickering B.A., LL.B. (Hons.), LL.M., M. A.

The traditional usefulness of discretionary trusts arises from the puzzling position they hold in the law.   Property transferred to these entities is effectively ownerless until discretionary trustees determine to appoint the property to discretionary beneficiaries. Traditionally, trusts were regarded as operating upon the basis that the subject of the trust (beneficiaries) had an immediate proprietary interest in the object of the trust (the capital or income of the trust). The discretionary trust reverses this assumption.  

In Australia, the discretionary trust has enabled a number of civil liabilities to be avoided such as bankruptcy, a range of taxes, and in the context of family law and in social security. 

A number of important legal decisions in England and in Australia have confirmed the discretionary trust’s obligation – avoiding characteristics over the last century.

A good example was a United Kingdom tax case decided by the House of Lords in Gartside v. Commissioners of Inland Revenue [1968] AC 553.   For the specific purposes of the U.K. tax legislation, the House of Lords in Gartside determined that when a discretionary trust beneficiary died, only a valueless expectancy ceased to exist and not an interest in the trust fund.   Such an expectancy had no definable extent which could be the subject of taxation for death duty purposes, according to the House of Lords.

This judicial recognition of the capabilities of discretionary trusts fuelled the explosion of such trusts as vehicles for Australian businesses and investments, particularly in the second half of the 20th century. Statistically, there are fewer discretionary trusts in the United Kingdom than in Australia notwithstanding that the United Kingdom’s population (62,970,211) is approximately three times that of Australia.   Likewise, there are fewer discretionary trusts in the United States than in Australia notwithstanding that the U.S. population (308,400,408) is approximately140 times that of Australia. In other words, the discretionary trust is a particularly Australian phenomenon and has been used extensively by businesses both for protection of assets and to lawfully minimize the incidents of a range of taxes and duties.  

However, the usefulness of the discretionary trust arises from its ability to avoid statutory obligations.   The immunity enjoyed by discretionary trusts (and hence their popularity) ultimately depends upon how those different statutes that create the obligations are interpreted by Australian courts.

Contact us now for Fast, Accurate and Timely legal advice

Phone LAC Lawyers on NSW 1300 799 888 or VIC 1300 734 638 or send us an email 

  1. Article
  2. Related Articles
  3. Related Practice Areas