Disclosure: This article contains affiliate links. We may earn a commission when you use our links at no additional cost to you. Read our full disclosure policy →
Building a Family Office in 2026: Structure, Jurisdiction, and First-Year Costs
At what net worth does a family office make sense? How do you structure it? Which jurisdiction? A frank guide from practitioners.
The £50M Question
The family office threshold debate has a standard answer in wealth management literature: $100M in investable assets. The reality is more nuanced.
At $100M, a Single Family Office (SFO) — with its own staff, legal structure, and comprehensive service delivery — is economically rational. The fully-loaded annual cost of an SFO (CIO, compliance officer, tax specialist, administrator) runs $1-3M depending on service scope. Against $100M in assets, this is 1-3% — comparable to an active management fee, but with dramatically superior service, alignment, and privacy.
At $50-100M, the Multi-Family Office (MFO) model typically delivers better value: you share the fixed cost infrastructure with other families while maintaining more service quality than private banking alone.
Below $50M: sophisticated private banking relationships (Bessemer Trust, Northern Trust, J.P. Morgan Private Bank) deliver effectively equivalent outcomes at lower cost.
Jurisdiction: The Four Options
Cayman Islands
Pros: Zero corporate tax, sophisticated legal infrastructure, FATCA-compliant with US reporting frameworks.
Cons: No substance requirements under BEPS mean increased scrutiny. Less favourable for European clients post-AEOI.
Singapore
Pros: Territorial tax system (offshore income not taxed), strong rule of law, English-language legal system, excellent double tax treaty network.
Cons: Increasing MAS regulatory requirements for family offices (minimum $10M AUM, local investment commitment).
Best for: Asian-Pacific families, internationally mobile ultra-HNW.
Switzerland (Geneva or Zurich)
Pros: World-class banking infrastructure adjacent, stable political environment, sophisticated legal and tax advisory ecosystem.
Cons: Corporate tax (effective 15-18%), significant establishment costs for genuine substance.
Best for: European families with significant investment management activity.
United Kingdom (London)
Pros: English common law (the global investment standard), deep talent pool, proximity to European deal flow.
Cons: Non-dom tax reform 2025 has fundamentally changed the calculus for non-UK resident principals.
Best for: Active investment families with primarily UK/European assets.
The SFO Structure: First-Year Blueprint
Month 1-3: Governance
Month 3-6: Infrastructure
Month 6-12: Operations
First-Year Cost Estimate (€50M SFO, Switzerland)
Against €50M assets: 1.75-2.8%. Borderline economic at this level; justified if the family also benefits from consolidated decision-making and estate planning that is difficult to achieve through third-party relationships.
The Hybrid Model
The optimal structure for most families at the $50-200M range: a lean SFO (1-2 FTE, family office-qualified CEO rather than full CIO) supported by MFO relationships for specific expertise and a private bank for the core liquid portfolio.
This captures the alignment benefits of the SFO (your CEO works for you) while accessing institutional quality investment management without the full cost structure.
Bessemer Trust and Northern Trust are the premier examples of MFO operators who provide genuinely sophisticated multi-generational planning within a shared infrastructure model.
Charlotte Renfield leads the Family Office Advisory practice at KPMG's London office, having structured over 40 family offices across 12 jurisdictions.