Elise Donovan

For much of the post-Cold War era, global finance was shaped by confidence in integration. Markets were expected to become more open, capital was expected to move with increasing freedom, and political risk, while never absent, was often treated as something that could be managed within a broadly rules-based international order. That view was always more comfortable for some parts of the world than others, and it was never the full story.

Across Asia, Latin America, Africa, the Middle East and other regions, families and businesses worldwide have long understood that wealth is exposed not only to market cycles, but also to political and institutional risk. From currency collapses and capital controls to abrupt tax changes and conflict, these pressures have shaped wealth planning for generations. For many global families, the need to hold assets through reliable legal structures was never theoretical; it was a practical response to lived experience.

What has changed is not the existence of geopolitical risk, but its scale, visibility and reach. Risks once perceived as regional are now affecting major economies, reserve currencies, payment systems, sanctions, trade and cross-border transactions. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has warned that geopolitical fragmentation is already reshaping trade, capital flows and investment, with nearly 3,000 trade-restricting measures imposed in 2023, almost three times more than the number recorded in 2019.

The immobilisation of Russian sovereign assets after the invasion of Ukraine was not the beginning of geopolitical risk in finance, but it was a defining reminder that even state-level capital can become subject to coordinated geopolitical action. For private wealth, family offices and global investors, the broader lesson is clear: wealth is exposed not only to market risk, but also to jurisdictional, policy, regulatory and access risk.

What this means for wealth management
This is changing the way wealth is managed. Asset allocation remains important, but it is no longer enough to ask whether a portfolio is diversified. The deeper question is whether the legal and jurisdictional architecture around that wealth is strong enough for a more fragmented world. Where are the assets held? Which law governs the structure? Can capital remain compliant, accessible and properly governed if tax rules, sanctions regimes, exchange controls or political conditions change?

These questions are moving from the margins of wealth planning to the centre of strategy. UBS’s Global Family Office Report 2025 found that a global trade war was the risk worrying family offices most over the next 12 months, followed by major geopolitical conflict. Looking ahead five years, major geopolitical conflict ranked even higher among family office concerns. A similar shift is visible across the wider wealth management industry, with Capgemini’s World Wealth Report 2025 and the Saltus Wealth Index revealing that, for more than a quarter of HNW individuals, geopolitical volatility has risen from their sixth-biggest concern to their fourth-biggest concern.

This points to a deeper evolution in wealth strategy: wealth management is no longer only about performance, diversification and return. It is also about resilience, continuity and control.

That resilience has several dimensions. It includes investment resilience, the ability of a portfolio to absorb volatility; family resilience, which depends on clear governance and succession planning; regulatory resilience, which requires structures to remain compliant across multiple jurisdictions; and jurisdictional resilience, which depends on the quality of the legal system, the reliability of courts, the depth of professional services and the ability of a jurisdiction to support cross-border activity with confidence.

The role of international financial centres
This is where international financial centres (IFCs) play an important role. The strongest IFCs are not alternatives to major onshore markets, nor should they be understood as places outside the international financial system. They are connective infrastructure, helping capital move lawfully and efficiently between jurisdictions with different legal systems, tax rules, regulatory expectations and commercial requirements. IFCs rooted in common law with a long-established track record in complex cross-border business, trade and finance, such as the British Virgin Islands (BVI), are particularly important during times of market volatility. During these periods, they provide clear legal frameworks and neutral platforms that support wealth structuring and cross-border transactions.

That connective function becomes more important, not less, as the world becomes more fragmented. When economies become more protective, regulatory systems diverge, and political risk becomes harder to price, investors need structures that can operate across borders without creating unnecessary duplication, friction or uncertainty. This is not about secrecy, nor is it about avoiding legitimate regulation. The future of wealth structuring will be shaped by transparency, cooperation and sound governance. At the same time, it will require jurisdictions capable of protecting lawful ownership, supporting commercial certainty, facilitating succession and preserving continuity across borders.

Structuring wealth for a fragmented world
This is why the conversation around wealth must evolve. The question is no longer only where capital should be invested, but where it should be held, how it should be governed, how it will move, how it will be transferred and whether the structure will still work if the world changes. In a world where families may have members in multiple countries, operating businesses in one region, investment assets in another, real estate elsewhere and succession issues across generations, the legal structure around wealth can become as important as the wealth itself.

Geopolitical uncertainty is not new, but its reach into global finance is becoming more direct and more consequential. Trade policy, sanctions, tax reform, investment screening, data transparency, digital assets, succession pressures and family mobility are converging into a more complex wealth environment. For investors, family offices and wealth managers, the implication is clear: resilience must be designed, not assumed.

The next era of wealth management will require more than strong portfolios. It will require strong structures, credible jurisdictions and advisors who understand that capital does not exist in a vacuum. It exists within law, policy, politics and institutions.

In a fragmented world, jurisdiction is no longer a footnote in wealth planning; it is a strategy. And for global wealth, that strategy may determine not only how wealth grows, but how it endures.