In this scenario, although the accounts were moved abroad, they remained denominated in US dollars, converting the larger account to Swiss Francs would seem to give much better protection against US dollar debasement. If that is not the next step there does not seem to be any upside, but again not worth it if they wanted to avoid US Capital Gains.
Hey Trev, good points. This article showed the transfer mechanisms, what my client did with the holdings afterwards is not disclosed. But naturally, after the money move, assets were also diversified.
I'm surprised that the bank checked for scams afterwards. I would think that would be too late. I understand them checking, but don't they have to check before the wire is sent?
Fair question. The upside is safety. When everything sits in one country, one frozen account or one policy change cuts you off from all of it at once. In 2025 alone, US brokerages closed an estimated 340,000 accounts of Americans living abroad. Spread across two or three countries, no single bank or government can lock you out. My main principle that I have (and live by) is: never have a single point of failure.
A question: to transfer funds or equities to a Swiss bank, would it work to go thru a Swiss bank with a US branch like UBS? Transfer to the US (SF or NY) branch and have the assets sent internally to Switzerland.
Good question Rod. This is one of the most common assumptions, but it doesn't work that way. UBS in New York and UBS in Zurich are separate legal entities with separate licenses and separate compliance. There's no internal transfer between them. To hold assets at the Swiss bank you have to be accepted as a client by the Swiss bank, which is what's usually closed to Americans without an introduction. Depending on asset level and structuring, it is however possible to establish a relationship with a Swiss bank directly.
The bank holiday point deserves more attention than it usually gets, and there is a version of it on the immigration side that bites harder.
Your client's CD had a deadline because it anchored a residency application. The documents backing that application have their own clocks, and they are shorter than people expect. Police certificates and medical certificates are often only accepted within three or six months of issue, apostilles take weeks in some countries, and the consulate appointment is frequently the longest lead time of all. So the money can land perfectly on schedule and the file still stalls because a police certificate aged out while the wire was in transit.
The buffer rule you gave her generalises well: whichever step has the longest lead time is the one to start first, and it is almost never the money. Usually it is a document request from a government that has no interest in your timeline.
Good detail on the in-kind transfer too. The "find the one person who has done this before" problem shows up in immigration constantly, at consulates as much as at brokerages.
Good addition. The expiry dates are often underestimated, police and medical certificates aging out while everything else is still moving. Start with whatever the government controls, then work backwards to the money.
In this scenario, although the accounts were moved abroad, they remained denominated in US dollars, converting the larger account to Swiss Francs would seem to give much better protection against US dollar debasement. If that is not the next step there does not seem to be any upside, but again not worth it if they wanted to avoid US Capital Gains.
Hey Trev, good points. This article showed the transfer mechanisms, what my client did with the holdings afterwards is not disclosed. But naturally, after the money move, assets were also diversified.
That makes sense, the Swiss Francs was a tell.
I'm surprised that the bank checked for scams afterwards. I would think that would be too late. I understand them checking, but don't they have to check before the wire is sent?
Good catch Evan, that was phrased poorly. It should have been "after ordering every wire." Fixed in the article.
Makes sense. Great article!
Always good to have vigilant readers ;) And thanks, glad it gave you some value.
I don’t understand why someone would do this. where’s the upside?
Fair question. The upside is safety. When everything sits in one country, one frozen account or one policy change cuts you off from all of it at once. In 2025 alone, US brokerages closed an estimated 340,000 accounts of Americans living abroad. Spread across two or three countries, no single bank or government can lock you out. My main principle that I have (and live by) is: never have a single point of failure.
Yes please. I’ve moved abroad. Now working on that million.
It’s a great goal to work towards to.
Super helpful
I‘m glad! 💪
A question: to transfer funds or equities to a Swiss bank, would it work to go thru a Swiss bank with a US branch like UBS? Transfer to the US (SF or NY) branch and have the assets sent internally to Switzerland.
Good question Rod. This is one of the most common assumptions, but it doesn't work that way. UBS in New York and UBS in Zurich are separate legal entities with separate licenses and separate compliance. There's no internal transfer between them. To hold assets at the Swiss bank you have to be accepted as a client by the Swiss bank, which is what's usually closed to Americans without an introduction. Depending on asset level and structuring, it is however possible to establish a relationship with a Swiss bank directly.
Thanks.
Very welcome Rod!
The bank holiday point deserves more attention than it usually gets, and there is a version of it on the immigration side that bites harder.
Your client's CD had a deadline because it anchored a residency application. The documents backing that application have their own clocks, and they are shorter than people expect. Police certificates and medical certificates are often only accepted within three or six months of issue, apostilles take weeks in some countries, and the consulate appointment is frequently the longest lead time of all. So the money can land perfectly on schedule and the file still stalls because a police certificate aged out while the wire was in transit.
The buffer rule you gave her generalises well: whichever step has the longest lead time is the one to start first, and it is almost never the money. Usually it is a document request from a government that has no interest in your timeline.
Good detail on the in-kind transfer too. The "find the one person who has done this before" problem shows up in immigration constantly, at consulates as much as at brokerages.
Good addition. The expiry dates are often underestimated, police and medical certificates aging out while everything else is still moving. Start with whatever the government controls, then work backwards to the money.
Thanks for the article. I am right in the process on how to organize assets and receive my future pension in latin america from europe.
Very welcome Sab, let me know if there are any open questions you might have.