"Family Office 2.0": What Hong Kong’s Next Phase of Policy Support Means for UHNW Families

Hong Kong has quietly moved from talking about family offices to competing hard for them. The government hit its original target of attracting 200 family offices by end‑2025 ahead of schedule, helped by a dedicated policy statement in 2023 and a very public courtship of UHNW families. Rather than declaring victory, policymakers are now in “Family Office 2.0” mode: deepen the ecosystem, upgrade the tools, and make Hong Kong a default base for regional and global wealth.

What does that mean in practice? First, tax and regulatory certainty. The 2023 Tax Concessions Ordinance gives qualifying family‑owned investment holding vehicles, managed from Hong Kong, a 0% profits tax rate on eligible transactions. There is no capital gains or inheritance tax, and no transfer tax (beyond stamp duty on HK property and stock), which is increasingly attractive as Asian families become entangled with higher‑tax jurisdictions abroad. The government has also re‑introduced and enhanced the Capital Investment Entrant Scheme (CIES) to make it easier for investors and their families to anchor themselves in Hong Kong, and linked it explicitly to eligible single family offices.

Second, there is a push to build infrastructure around the office: the Network of Family Office Service Providers, the Hong Kong Academy for Wealth Legacy for education and succession, and promotional efforts with private banks, law firms and trustees to package a “one‑stop” proposition. For families, the opportunity is to ride this wave early—locking in favourable tax treatment, access to regional deal flow and succession tools—while the city is still in the “build and court” phase rather than the “tighten and regulate harder” phase that often follows success.

The strategic takeaway: Family Office 2.0 is not just about attracting more offices; it is about encouraging more sophisticated, professionally governed structures. Families who treat Hong Kong as a long‑term operating base, not just a booking centre, are likely to get the most from this new policy era.

Hong Kong vs. Singapore: Why Many Families Now Choose Both Hubs Instead of One

The old question—“Hong Kong or Singapore?”—is quietly being replaced by a more pragmatic one: “What does each hub do best for our family?” Hong Kong has doubled down on its role as gateway to mainland China and the Greater Bay Area (GBA), with a deep capital market, long‑standing banking relationships and a clear commitment to grow the family‑office segment. With a world-leading capital market, Hong Kong is well prepared to thrive with China’s recovery trajectory. Singapore, by contrast, has leaned into political stability, lifestyle, and a very polished family‑office regulatory regime. The result: many sizeable Asian and Middle Eastern families are now running parallel structures in both cities.

On the Hong Kong side, the value proposition is quite specific. The city offers zero capital gains and inheritance tax, attractive 0% profits tax concessions for qualifying family‑owned investment holding vehicles, and the ability to hold global assets through Hong Kong while accessing world‑class banks and managers. Policy support is not just rhetorical: beyond the 200‑office milestone, another 150 offices are reportedly preparing to establish or expand in Hong Kong, indicating sustained interest. Add to this the revamped CIES, which now allows investments made through a private company managed by an eligible single family office to count towards residency‑linked investment thresholds, and Hong Kong starts to look like a very deliberate base for both capital and people.

Why, then, do families still keep a foot in Singapore? Diversification of jurisdictions, currencies and political exposure. Singapore structures are often used for Southeast Asia investments and as a perceived “neutral” booking centre; Hong Kong structures are deployed for China, North Asia and global public markets. Larger families use this dual‑hub model to:

Spread regulatory and geopolitical risk across two systems. Access different networks, deal flows and talent pools. Optimise tax and substance across multiple vehicles. For Hong Kong‑anchored families, the key is not to frame it as a binary choice. A well‑designed structure might see a Hong Kong family office as the “control tower” for strategy, governance and China‑plus‑Asia allocation, with a Singapore outpost for selected mandates, lifestyle and diversification. The winning mindset is complementarity, not rivalry.

Making Sense of Hong Kong’s Tax Concessions for Single Family Offices

Hong Kong’s family‑office tax regime looks simple at first glance—no capital gains or inheritance tax, a territorial system, and now a 0% profits tax rate on qualifying family‑office vehicles—but the details matter. Getting them right can be the difference between a powerful planning tool and an expensive missed opportunity.

The 2023 Tax Concessions Ordinance is the centrepiece. It allows eligible family‑owned investment holding vehicles (FIHVs) and family‑owned special purpose entities to enjoy 0% profits tax on qualifying transactions, if they are managed by an “eligible single family office” in Hong Kong. Broadly, the key conditions include:

The vehicle must be 95% owned by a single family (including multiple generations), with up to 25% allowed for a charitable entity. It must be an investment holding vehicle, not an operating business. Assets under management must exceed HKD 240 million (around USD 30.8 million). The family office must employ at least two qualified staff in Hong Kong and have adequate operating expenditure locally. Because Hong Kong taxes on a territorial basis, many families already benefited from low effective rates. The concession goes further by providing formal, unambiguous clarity and comfort that investment gains in the FIHV are outside Hong Kong profits tax altogether, even when the vehicle holds global portfolios. The concession offers a clear distinguishment between trading profits and capital gains, which has always been a point of argument between the IRD and the taxpayer. This is also particularly attractive for families whose members live or invest in higher‑tax jurisdictions; Hong Kong can become the “clean, tax‑efficient holding layer” in a multi‑jurisdictional structure.

Practically, advisers often pair the FIHV with a family trust (sometimes governed by Hong Kong law), to combine tax efficiency with confidentiality and succession planning. Trust and company law reforms in 2013, and the maturing of local trustee and legal expertise, mean complex structures—family council, investment committee, philanthropy committee—can all sit around a Hong Kong‑based office.

Where is there room for improvement?

• Families need to pay closer attention to substance: ensuring real decision‑making, staff and expenditure are in Hong Kong, not just brass plates.

• There is scope to use the regime more creatively for cross‑border planning—for example, coordinating Hong Kong vehicles with onshore structures in the UK, EU or US to manage exposure to foreign income, estate and wealth taxes.

• Finally, many smaller families (just at or below the HKD 240m threshold) under‑utilise the regime, even though, with some consolidation of assets, they could qualify and anchor a more professionalised investment platform.

• 
  

In short, Hong Kong’s tax concessions are not just a “nice‑to‑have”; they are the core economic engine that makes it rational to base a sophisticated, multi‑generational family office in the city—provided the structure is designed and operated with care.

Disclaimer: All views expressed and facts given in this article reflect those of the writers, and/ or Crescent Legacy. They are neither endorsed nor verified by Asia First Consulting Services Ltd or Global Media Solutions Ltd.