Skip to main content
WUHLD
← Back to insights

Managing Complex Cross-Border Estate Cases: Professional Insights and Technical Frameworks

· 22 min

Executive Summary

Cross-border estate administration has entered a materially more complex phase following the Finance Act 2025, which replaced the domicile-based inheritance tax regime with a long-term UK residence test from 6 April 2025. Private client practitioners must now navigate the interaction between this residence-based tax framework, the UK's continued non-participation in the EU Succession Regulation (Brussels IV), and a double taxation convention network covering only ten jurisdictions. English private international law's distinction between movable and immovable property, the doctrine of renvoi, and civil law forced heirship regimes compound these challenges. The Law Commission's May 2025 Modernising Wills report has left cross-border recognition of electronic wills as an unresolved question. This article provides an integrated technical framework addressing conflict of laws analysis, tax exposure mapping, multi-jurisdictional probate procedures, and the structured coordination that effective cross-border estate administration demands.

1. The New Tax Landscape: Finance Act 2025 and Cross-Border Estates

The Finance Act 2025 represents the most significant structural change to UK cross-border estate taxation in a generation. Sections 44 to 46 and Schedule 13 of the Act abolished the domicile-based IHT system and replaced it with a long-term UK residence (LTR) test, effective from 6 April 2025.1 The former deemed domicile provisions under section 267 of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 have been repealed for events occurring from that date, though they remain relevant for pre-April 2025 charges and transitional cases.

1.1 The Long-Term UK Residence Test

Under the LTR test, an individual is a long-term UK resident if they have been UK resident for at least 10 of the previous 20 tax years. Residence is determined by the Statutory Residence Test (SRT) for tax years from 2013-14 onwards, and by pre-SRT rules for earlier years.2 A critical technical detail is that split-year treatment counts as a full year of UK residence for IHT purposes, a provision that practitioners must factor into residence history calculations. For individuals under 20, the threshold is modified: LTR status applies if they have been resident for at least 50 per cent of tax years since birth.2

Long-term UK residents are subject to IHT on their worldwide assets, mirroring the former deemed domicile position but with a different qualifying period and connecting factor. The practical consequence for cross-border estates is that the gateway to worldwide IHT exposure is now determined by a quantifiable residence count rather than the more subjective assessment of domicile, which traditionally required analysis of permanent home, intention, and the weight of connecting factors.

1.2 The IHT Tail: Continuing Exposure After Departure

The most significant cross-border complication introduced by the LTR test is the "IHT tail" -- the period after departure from the UK during which worldwide assets remain within UK IHT scope.3 The tail is graduated according to prior residence duration: an individual resident for 10 to 13 of the previous 20 years faces a minimum tail of 3 years, while an individual resident for the full 20 years faces the maximum tail of 10 years. An individual resets only after 10 consecutive years of non-UK residence.3

This mechanism creates a new category of cross-border risk. A departing long-term resident who dies in a jurisdiction with its own succession tax during the tail period faces potential double taxation on foreign-sited assets -- taxable in the jurisdiction of situs and simultaneously within UK IHT scope. The tail period operates regardless of the individual's connections to the UK at the point of death, making it a structural feature of the LTR regime rather than a discretionary assessment.

1.3 Transitional Provisions

HMRC's guidance at IHTM47021 addresses transitional cases. For individuals who are non-UK resident in 2025-26 and were not UK domiciled on 30 October 2024, the pre-April 2025 deemed domicile test (15 of previous 20 tax years) applies transitionally.4 The new 10/20 year LTR test takes effect if they subsequently return to the UK. Practitioners advising internationally mobile clients must therefore maintain dual-track analyses during the transitional period.

1.4 Trust Implications: Dynamic IHT Status

A further departure from the prior regime concerns the IHT treatment of non-UK assets held in trusts. Before 6 April 2025, the IHT status of settled property was fixed at the date of settlement by reference to the settlor's domicile. Under the new regime, the IHT status of non-UK assets in trusts depends on whether the settlor is a long-term UK resident at the date of the IHT charge.5 This shift from a static to a dynamic determination means that the IHT status of trust property can change during the settlor's lifetime -- a fundamental reorientation that requires periodic reassessment of cross-border trust structures.

1.5 Updated Reporting Requirements

The revised IHT417 form, applicable to deaths on or after 6 April 2025, reflects the transition from domicile to residence as the connecting factor.6 Executors must now provide the deceased's residence history via the IHT401 and the new IHT401a schedules. The IHT401a is required where the deceased was not a long-term UK resident and UK assets exceed GBP 150,000, replacing the former domicile-based reporting framework.6

2. Conflict of Laws: Determining the Applicable Succession Law

The Finance Act 2025 altered the tax landscape, but it did not change the private international law rules that determine which jurisdiction's succession law governs the distribution of a deceased person's estate. Practitioners must maintain a clear distinction between three separate questions: (a) what falls within UK IHT scope (answered by the LTR test), (b) which law governs the succession to each category of asset (answered by PIL rules), and (c) which court has jurisdiction to grant probate or its equivalent (answered by procedural rules). The same estate may produce different answers to each question.

2.1 English PIL: The Scission Principle

Under English conflict of laws rules, succession is governed by a dual-track system.7 Succession to movable property -- including bank accounts, investments, and personal chattels -- is governed by the law of the deceased's domicile at death. Succession to immovable property -- principally land and buildings -- is governed by the law of the situs (lex situs), the jurisdiction where the property is located. This "scission" between categories of assets is a foundational feature of English PIL and contrasts with the unitary approach adopted by Brussels IV and many civil law jurisdictions.

The practical consequence is that a single cross-border estate may be subject to multiple succession laws simultaneously. An English-domiciled individual who owns immovable property in France, Spain, and the UK will have French law governing succession to the French property, Spanish law governing succession to the Spanish property, and English law governing succession to the movable estate and the UK property. Each of these succession laws may impose different rules regarding intestacy shares, testamentary freedom, and forced heirship.

2.2 The Renvoi Problem

English courts apply the doctrine of "double" or "total" renvoi in succession cases.8 When English PIL refers to a foreign law -- for example, directing that French law governs succession to French immovable property -- that reference includes the foreign country's own private international law rules. The English court then applies whatever law the foreign court would apply, including any further references. This creates the possibility of circular or unpredictable outcomes, particularly where the foreign jurisdiction's connecting factor (nationality, habitual residence) differs from England's (domicile).

The doctrine has been described as producing outcomes that "may be determined by the accidental sequence in which questions are answered."9 Practitioners advising on cross-border estates where renvoi may apply should obtain expert evidence on the foreign jurisdiction's PIL rules, as English courts require such evidence to determine what result the foreign court would reach.8 The unpredictability is compounded where the foreign jurisdiction has itself adopted Brussels IV, as the Regulation's PIL rules may refer back to English law, potentially completing the circle.

2.3 Brussels IV: Universal Application and Its Indirect Impact

The EU Succession Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 (Brussels IV), in force since 17 August 2015, provides that succession is governed by the law of the deceased's habitual residence at death, with an option to elect the law of nationality.10 The UK never opted into this Regulation -- a position that pre-dates Brexit and remains unchanged.10 Ireland and Denmark are the other non-participating EU Member States.

Despite the UK's non-participation, Brussels IV has universal application within participating Member States: it applies regardless of whether the applicable law identified is that of a participating state.10 A UK national habitually resident in Germany can elect English law under Article 22 to govern succession to their entire estate, including German immovable property.11 This is a powerful planning tool, as it can override the forced heirship rules of the habitual residence jurisdiction. However, its effectiveness is subject to important qualifications.

2.4 Forced Heirship: The Limits of Choice of Law

Most civil law jurisdictions impose forced heirship rules reserving fixed shares of the estate for specified family members. Brussels IV's choice-of-law election can, in principle, allow UK nationals to override such rules by electing English law, which preserves broad testamentary freedom subject only to the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975.12

However, France's 2021 amendment to Article 913 of the Civil Code introduced a significant limitation: reserved heirs may seek financial compensation where the application of a foreign succession law deprives them of their reserved share in the French estate.12 This "clawback" mechanism operates as a corrective against the practical effect of a Brussels IV election and demonstrates that testamentary freedom under English law does not automatically translate to unrestricted disposal of assets situated in civil law jurisdictions. Practitioners should advise that an Article 22 election is a necessary but potentially insufficient safeguard.

2.5 The 1961 Hague Convention and Formal Validity

The Hague Convention of 5 October 1961 on the Form of Testamentary Dispositions, to which the UK is party, facilitates cross-border recognition of wills by providing that a testamentary disposition is formally valid if it complies with the form requirements of any of several designated laws: habitual residence, nationality, domicile, or situs of immovable property.13 This Convention applies exclusively to formal validity -- the physical execution requirements of the will -- and does not determine which succession law governs the substance of the disposition. Practitioners drafting cross-border wills should ensure compliance with the form requirements of the situs jurisdiction in addition to English formalities, reducing the risk of foreign courts refusing to recognise the instrument.

2.6 Decision Framework: Determining the Applicable Law

A structured approach to determining the law governing each category of asset in a cross-border estate requires the following sequential analysis:

  • Step 1: Classify each asset as movable or immovable under English PIL rules and under the rules of the situs jurisdiction.
  • Step 2: Identify the connecting factor -- domicile for movables (English PIL) or situs for immovables.
  • Step 3: Consider renvoi -- obtain expert evidence on whether the situs jurisdiction's PIL rules refer back to English law or to a third jurisdiction.
  • Step 4: Check for Brussels IV application -- if the asset is located in a participating EU Member State, determine whether the deceased made an Article 22 election and whether the situs jurisdiction has forced heirship limitations that may qualify the election's effect.
  • Step 5: Verify formal validity -- confirm the will satisfies the form requirements of the 1961 Hague Convention for each relevant jurisdiction.

3. Double Taxation Risk and Mitigation

3.1 The Limited Convention Network

The UK has IHT double taxation conventions with only ten countries: the Republic of Ireland, the United States, South Africa, the Netherlands, Sweden, and Switzerland under post-1975 conventions, and France, Italy, India, and Pakistan under pre-1975 estate duty era agreements.14 Given the geographic distribution of UK nationals' foreign assets, this coverage leaves significant gaps. Spain, Portugal, Australia, the UAE, and most of Asia, Africa, and South America are uncovered -- jurisdictions where substantial numbers of UK nationals hold property, business interests, or retirement assets.

3.2 Post-1975 and Pre-1975 Conventions

The distinction between post-1975 and pre-1975 conventions is technically material. The six post-1975 conventions were negotiated under the IHT regime and reference "domicile" as a connecting factor. Following the Finance Act 2025 abolition of domicile for IHT purposes, HMRC guidance at IHTM47071 confirms that the UK treats long-term UK residence as the equivalent connecting factor where a treaty refers to "fiscal domicile" or "domicile."15

The four pre-1975 conventions (France, Italy, India, Pakistan) were concluded under the estate duty regime and have not been updated.16 They do not include provision for deemed domicile, and their interaction with the LTR test requires case-by-case analysis. HMRC acknowledges at IHTM47072 that no standardised interpretive approach applies to these older agreements.16 Practitioners dealing with estates spanning these jurisdictions should obtain specialist tax treaty advice and consider obtaining advance clearance from HMRC where material IHT sums are at stake.

3.3 Unilateral Relief

Where no IHT double taxation convention exists, unilateral relief under section 159 of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 may be available.17 This provision gives credit against UK IHT for tax charged by another country on assets sited in that country, with UK law determining the location of the asset. Unilateral relief is narrower than treaty relief: it applies only to tax on assets in the foreign jurisdiction, not to tax on worldwide assets, and the foreign tax must be "similar in character" to IHT.

For estates with assets in non-treaty jurisdictions, unilateral relief is often the only mechanism to mitigate double taxation. Its practical effectiveness depends on the interaction between the UK's situs rules (which determine asset location) and the foreign jurisdiction's own situs rules (which determine whether it levies tax on the asset). Where the two sets of rules produce different classifications, double taxation may persist despite the availability of relief in principle.

3.4 The IHT Tail and Double Taxation Exposure

The IHT tail introduced by the LTR test creates a specific category of enhanced double taxation risk. An individual who has been UK resident for 15 of the previous 20 years and then relocates to Spain, for example, faces a 5-year tail during which worldwide assets remain within UK IHT scope.3 If that individual dies during the tail period, Spanish succession tax applies to Spanish-sited assets, and UK IHT also applies to those same assets as part of the worldwide estate. Spain is not covered by an IHT double taxation convention, meaning relief depends entirely on unilateral provisions under section 159.14 Practitioners should map the potential double taxation exposure at the point of departure, identifying which assets are at risk and quantifying the potential liability in each jurisdiction.

4. Multi-Jurisdictional Probate Procedures

4.1 Grants for Foreign-Domiciled Individuals

The Non-Contentious Probate Rules 1987, Rule 30, establishes special procedures for grants where the deceased died domiciled outside England and Wales.18 Critically, these applications must be made on paper; the MyHMCTS online portal does not accommodate foreign-domiciled applications. This procedural requirement introduces delays into the administration process, particularly given the current probate registry processing times. Practitioners should factor additional time into the administration timeline for foreign-domiciled estates and ensure that paper applications are accompanied by complete supporting documentation, including certified translations of foreign death certificates and authenticated copies of foreign wills.

Where the estate of a foreign-domiciled individual consists entirely or predominantly of immovable property in England and Wales, further procedural requirements apply under Rule 30, including the potential need for a grant limited to the English immovable property only. This limited grant does not extend to movable property, which may require separate administration in the jurisdiction of domicile.

4.2 Resealing Under the Colonial Probates Act 1892

The Administration of Estates Act 1971 provides for the resealing of grants from certain Commonwealth jurisdictions under the Colonial Probates Act 1892.19 Resealing is an efficient mechanism that avoids the need for a fresh grant in England and Wales, but its scope is limited to specified Commonwealth jurisdictions. Estates with assets in non-Commonwealth countries require a standalone grant from the English probate registry, necessitating full paper application under Rule 30.

The practical utility of the resealing mechanism has diminished as international asset holdings have diversified beyond the Commonwealth. Practitioners should not assume that a foreign grant from a common law jurisdiction will be eligible for resealing; the list of qualifying jurisdictions is finite and has not been materially expanded in recent decades.

4.3 The European Certificate of Succession Gap

The European Certificate of Succession (ECS), created by Article 62 of Regulation 650/2012, provides a unified document recognised across EU Member States for cross-border estate administration.20 The UK cannot issue an ECS and is not bound to recognise one. This gap is a persistent practical impediment for estates spanning UK and EU jurisdictions.

The recommended workaround is a solicitor's certificate of English law -- a formal statement of the position under English succession law, typically addressing the identity of the personal representative, the validity of the will, and the deceased's entitlement to the estate. While such certificates carry no automatic cross-border recognition equivalent to the ECS, they are accepted in practice by many EU Member State registries and financial institutions, particularly when accompanied by a certified translation and Hague Apostille.20 Practitioners should establish relationships with correspondent firms in the relevant EU jurisdictions to facilitate acceptance of English law certificates.

4.4 Multiple Wills: Drafting Safeguards

Estates spanning multiple jurisdictions frequently require multiple wills, each governing assets in a particular jurisdiction. The primary drafting risk is inadvertent revocation: under English law, a later will revokes all prior testamentary instruments unless it expressly provides otherwise. Jurisdictional scope clauses must be drafted with precision, clearly limiting each will to specified assets or categories of property within the relevant jurisdiction.

Practitioners should also coordinate execution formalities across jurisdictions, ensuring that each will satisfies both the formal requirements of the situs jurisdiction and the 1961 Hague Convention standards.13 A register of testamentary instruments, maintained centrally and shared with all coordinating advisers, reduces the risk of gaps or overlapping dispositions.

5. Forward-Looking Considerations

5.1 Electronic Wills and Cross-Border Recognition

The Law Commission's May 2025 Modernising Wills report proposed the introduction of electronic wills executed via a "reliable system" approved by the Lord Chancellor, with provision for remote witnessing.21 However, the report did not address how electronic wills would be recognised across borders -- a significant omission for cross-border estate planning. The 1961 Hague Convention on the Form of Testamentary Dispositions was drafted for paper instruments, and its application to electronic wills remains untested. Jurisdictions requiring original physical documents may refuse to recognise an electronic will regardless of its validity under English law.

The Government welcomed the Law Commission's recommendations in May 2025 but has not confirmed a legislative timetable as of January 2026.22 The Law Society has urged action, noting that six months after publication no progress had been made.22 Until the cross-border recognition question is resolved, practitioners drafting wills for clients with international assets should maintain paper-based execution as the default, reserving electronic wills for purely domestic estates where the legal position is clearer.

5.2 Finance Bill 2025-26: Corrective Amendments

The Finance (No. 2) Bill 2025-26, published on 2 December 2025, includes corrective amendments to the residence-based IHT regime introduced by the Finance Act 2025.23 The Bill passed Second Reading on 16 December 2025 and completed the Committee of Whole House stage on 13 January 2026; a Public Bill Committee was appointed to conclude proceedings by 26 February 2026. Key IHT provisions include Clause 71, which caps relevant property trust charges for pre-30 October 2024 excluded property trusts at GBP 5 million per 10-year cycle, and Clause 73, which makes minor corrective amendments to ensure the broader residence-based regime operates as originally intended.23 Practitioners should monitor the passage of this legislation through its remaining parliamentary stages, as the amendments may alter the IHT treatment of cross-border trust structures established under the former domicile-based regime.

5.3 The 1975 Act Domicile Requirement

The Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 retains domicile as its jurisdictional gateway: only persons domiciled in England and Wales at death may have their estate subjected to a 1975 Act claim.24 The Law Commission's Modernising Wills report did not address this anomaly, which creates a gap in protection for dependants of individuals who are long-term UK residents (and thus within IHT scope on worldwide assets) but domiciled abroad. This misalignment between the tax and family provision frameworks is likely to generate litigation as the LTR regime matures.

5.4 Professional Standards and Specialist Capability

STEP's Cross-Border Estates Global Special Interest Group provides a forum for practitioners to examine the interaction between divergent succession systems.25 The STEP Advanced Certificate in Cross-Border Estates offers structured professional development covering civil law, common law, and Sharia law succession systems.26 As cross-border estate work increases in volume and complexity, investment in specialist qualifications and inter-jurisdictional professional networks becomes an operational necessity rather than a professional development option.

Conclusion

Cross-border estate administration demands a multi-dimensional analytical framework that integrates tax exposure analysis under the Finance Act 2025 LTR test, conflict of laws determination under English PIL and Brussels IV, double taxation risk assessment against the limited convention network, and coordinated multi-jurisdictional probate procedures. The shift from domicile to long-term UK residence as the IHT connecting factor has not simplified cross-border cases; it has introduced new categories of complexity, including the IHT tail for departing residents and the dynamic IHT status of trust property, while the pre-existing PIL framework of scission, renvoi, and forced heirship remains unchanged.

Practitioners who develop a structured methodology -- classifying assets, mapping applicable succession laws, quantifying double taxation exposure, and coordinating multi-jurisdictional probate applications -- will be positioned to manage these cases effectively and to advise an increasingly internationally mobile client base. The forward-looking challenges of electronic wills recognition, corrective tax legislation, and the 1975 Act domicile anomaly underscore the need for frameworks that accommodate regulatory change rather than merely reflecting the current position.

CPD Declaration

Estimated Reading Time: 20 minutes Technical Level: Advanced Practice Areas: Private client, international succession, trust and estate administration, cross-border taxation

Learning Objectives

Upon completing this article, practitioners will be able to:

  1. Apply the Finance Act 2025 long-term UK residence test to determine worldwide IHT exposure for cross-border estates, including calculation of the IHT tail period for departing residents
  2. Distinguish between the English PIL scission principle and the Brussels IV unitary approach when determining the law applicable to succession in multi-jurisdictional estates
  3. Evaluate the effectiveness of IHT double taxation conventions and unilateral relief under IHTA 1984 s.159 for estates with assets in treaty and non-treaty jurisdictions
  4. Analyse the procedural requirements for obtaining grants of probate for foreign-domiciled individuals under NCPR 1987 Rule 30 and the limitations of Colonial Probates Act resealing

SRA Competency Mapping

  • SRA Competence Statement A2: Maintain the level of competence and legal knowledge needed to practise effectively
  • SRA Competence Statement B6: Identify, assess, and manage the risks of pursuing particular options

Reflective Questions

  1. How would the introduction of the IHT tail affect the advice provided to internationally mobile clients departing the UK, and what additional due diligence steps should be incorporated into the departure planning process?
  2. What practical safeguards could be implemented when drafting multiple wills across jurisdictions to mitigate the risk of inadvertent revocation and ensure coordination between UK and overseas advisers?
  3. How might the unresolved cross-border recognition of electronic wills affect current will drafting practices for clients with assets in both common law and civil law jurisdictions?

Professional Disclaimer

The information presented reflects the regulatory and legislative position as of 2026-01-28. Regulations, tax rules, and professional guidance are subject to change. Readers should independently verify all information before acting and seek advice from appropriately qualified solicitors, financial advisors, or other professionals for their specific circumstances.

Neither WUHLD nor the author accepts liability for any actions taken or decisions made based on the content of this article. Professional readers are reminded of their own regulatory obligations and duty of care to their clients.

Footnotes

Footnotes

  1. Finance Act 2025, Part 2, Chapter 4 -- Inheritance Tax (Sections 44-46 and Schedule 13) (2025). https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2025/8/part/2/chapter/4 ↩

  2. HMRC Guidance: Inheritance Tax if You Are a Long-Term UK Resident (2025). https://www.gov.uk/guidance/inheritance-tax-if-youre-a-long-term-uk-resident ↩ ↩2

  3. HMRC Internal Manual IHTM47020 -- Long-Term UK Residence Test (2025). https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/inheritance-tax-manual/ihtm47020 ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  4. HMRC Internal Manual IHTM47021 -- Transitional Provisions (2025). https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/inheritance-tax-manual/ihtm47021 ↩

  5. Finance Act 2025, Schedule 13 -- Inheritance Tax: Settled Property and Long-Term UK Residence (2025). https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2025/8/part/2/chapter/4 ↩

  6. HMRC Form IHT417 -- Foreign Assets (Updated for Deaths on or After 6 April 2025) (2025). https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/inheritance-tax-foreign-assets-iht417 ↩ ↩2

  7. Payne Hicks Beach, Probate Special Part 4: Cross-Border Issues (2024). https://www.phb.co.uk/article/probate-special-part-4-cross-border-issues/ ↩

  8. Russell Cooke, Renvoi: A Dying Doctrine? (STEP Journal, February 2015). https://www.russell-cooke.co.uk/media/hftd0y3d/renvoi-a-dying-doctrine-step-february-2015.pdf ↩ ↩2

  9. Rooks Rider Solicitors, Renvoi (2024). https://rooksrider.co.uk/renvoi/ ↩

  10. Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 (Brussels IV). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:201:0107:0134:EN:PDF ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  11. Birketts, The EU Succession Regulation: A UK Perspective (2024). https://www.birketts.co.uk/legal-update/the-eu-succession-regulation-a-uk-perspective/ ↩

  12. Law Society Private Client Section, Cross Purposes (February 2023). https://communities.lawsociety.org.uk/february-2023/cross-purposes/6002566.article ↩ ↩2

  13. Hague Conference on Private International Law, Convention of 5 October 1961 on the Form of Testamentary Dispositions. https://www.hcch.net/en/instruments/conventions/specialised-sections/form-of-wills ↩ ↩2

  14. HMRC Guidance: Inheritance Tax Double Taxation Relief (2025). https://www.gov.uk/guidance/inheritance-tax-double-taxation-relief ↩ ↩2

  15. HMRC Internal Manual IHTM47071 -- Long-Term UK Residence Test: Post-1975 Double Taxation Conventions (2025). https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/inheritance-tax-manual/ihtm47071 ↩

  16. HMRC Internal Manual IHTM47072 -- Long-Term UK Residence Test: Pre-1975 Double Taxation Conventions (2025). https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/inheritance-tax-manual/ihtm47072 ↩ ↩2

  17. HMRC Internal Manual IHTM27181 -- Foreign Property: Unilateral Relief (2025). https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/inheritance-tax-manual/ihtm27181 ↩

  18. Non-Contentious Probate Rules 1987, SI 1987/2024, Rule 30 (as amended). https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1987/2024/made ↩

  19. Administration of Estates Act 1971, Section 1. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1971/25/section/1 ↩

  20. EU e-Justice Portal, European Certificate of Succession (2024). https://e-justice.europa.eu/478/EN/european_certificate_of_succession ↩ ↩2

  21. Law Commission, Modernising Wills Law -- Final Report, HC 861 (May 2025). https://lawcom.gov.uk/project/wills/ ↩

  22. Law Society, No Will to Act on Wills Reform (November 2025). https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/contact-or-visit-us/press-office/press-releases/no-will-to-act-on-wills-reform ↩ ↩2

  23. Budget 2025 -- Overview of Tax Legislation and Rates (OOTLAR): Residence-Based Tax Regime Technical Amendments (November 2025); CIOT, Finance Bill 2025-26 Published (December 2025). https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/budget-2025-overview-of-tax-legislation-and-rates-ootlar/budget-2025-overview-of-tax-legislation-and-rates-ootlar; https://www.tax.org.uk/finance-bill-2025-26-published ↩ ↩2

  24. Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975, Section 1. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1975/63/section/1 ↩

  25. STEP Cross-Border Estates Global Special Interest Group (2025). https://www.step.org/special-interest-groups/cross-border-estates-global-special-interest-group ↩

  26. STEP Advanced Certificate in Cross-Border Estates (2025). https://www.step.org/advanced-certificates/step-advanced-certificate-cross-border-estates ↩