Can an estate be taxed in a country the deceased never lived in?
Yes, and that is the point of the term. Some estate taxes attach to the location of the asset rather than the residence of the owner, so a holding sitting in a country can fall within that country charge although the deceased never lived there, never filed there, and may never have visited. The consequence is that an estate has to be listed asset by asset with the location of each one tested, not summarised by where the deceased was resident. Residence still matters, but for a different question: which country taxes the estate on everything.
Where are shares located for estate tax purposes?
It depends on whose rule you are applying, which is the difficulty. One system may look to the place of incorporation, another to where the share register is kept, another to where the certificate physically sits, and a system may answer differently for a listed holding, a private company and an interest held through a nominee or a broker. So the question cannot be answered for a portfolio as a whole. Each holding is tested under the rules of each country that might have a claim, and the answer is recorded with the reason for it.
Do foreign bank accounts count as assets located in that country?
They are often treated differently from securities held in the same place, which surprises people who think of a deposit account and a brokerage account as the same kind of thing. Deposits, securities, real property, tangible movable property and debts owed by a local person can each fall into a different category under the same system rules. The practical approach is to take the statement for every account, identify what is actually held inside it rather than where the institution has its address, and test each class separately.
Can two countries both claim the same asset in an estate?
They can, where one taxes on the basis of the residence of the deceased and the other on the location of the asset, or where their location rules give different answers for the same holding. Double exposure is not resolved automatically. Relief depends on whether a treaty covers estates or inheritances at all, which is much less common than for income tax, and otherwise on whatever credit each country domestic law allows. That is why the position is worth establishing while it can still be changed rather than after death.
Why is the executor refusing to distribute before clearance?
Because a personal representative who distributes an estate before the tax position is settled can be personally liable for tax that later turns out to be due, with the assets already gone. That risk sits with the individual rather than with the estate, so an executor holding a distribution back is protecting themselves and, in the end, the beneficiaries from a claw-back. Beneficiaries who understand this argue about the delay less. Where a partial distribution is wanted, the question to work through is how much has to be retained to cover the range of possible outcomes.
Does moving an asset to another country change its situs?
It can, and that is why the timing and the reason for a move are examined closely. A transfer that changes the location of an asset shortly before death, or that leaves the owner with the same economic benefit through a different holding, tends to attract attention, and some systems have provisions that look through it. The step also has consequences of its own: a disposal, a withholding obligation, a change in the law governing succession. It is a decision to take on advice well in advance, not a late repair.
What is cross-border tax?
Cross-border tax is what applies when income, assets or people touch more than one tax system at once — someone living in one country and earning in another, a company selling or hiring abroad, a family holding property in a second country. The work is rarely one country's rules applied harder; it is reconciling two sets of rules and claiming the relief that stops the same income being taxed twice at full rates. See what we do.
How does the treaty tie-breaker work when both countries say I am resident?
As a sequence, stopping at the first test that gives an answer: where you have a permanent home available; if in both or neither, where your centre of vital interests is; then habitual abode; then nationality; and if all of those tie, the two tax authorities decide by agreement. It is evidential rather than elective — you do not choose your treaty residence, you demonstrate it, which makes the record of homes, family and time the substance of the claim. See tie-breaking dual residency.
