Over the past months, I’ve been increasingly vocal about the fact that what we are seeing in global markets is not just normal volatility. The behaviour of gold and silver, the growing reliance on emergency liquidity measures, and the widening gap between paper markets and physical reality all point to something deeper: visible cracks in a financial system that has been stretched for a very long time.
These developments don’t mean an immediate collapse, and I’m not suggesting panic. But they do signal fragility. Systems that rely heavily on leverage and trust tend to look stable right up until the moment they aren’t, and history shows us that significant policy changes almost never occur in calm, orderly conditions. They occur during periods of stress, uncertainty, and crisis, because that is when resistance is lowest and public acceptance is highest.
This is where my long-held concern about the future introduction of an inheritance or death tax in Australia becomes relevant. I have been warning for some time that, in my opinion, Australia is highly likely to introduce some form of inheritance or death tax, potentially at rates that could be as high as 40 per cent of a person’s assets. This is not an unusual concept globally, even though it would feel new and confronting for Australians. Governments under fiscal pressure tend to look for large, concentrated pools of accumulated wealth, and taxing assets at the point of transfer is historically one of the most politically convenient ways to do so.
My view has been that this type of tax would most likely be introduced through a Federal Budget process, and the upcoming May Budget has long been, in my mind, a realistic window. However, history also shows that crises accelerate timelines. If financial stress deepens or confidence deteriorates more quickly than expected, policy responses that were planned for “later” can arrive much sooner.
The current escalation in silver prices is not the cause of systemic stress, but it is one of the signals that stress exists. When physical assets begin to challenge paper pricing, when liquidity requires repeated intervention, and when markets stop behaving as expected, governments start preparing contingency measures. In many cases, those measures involve changes to how wealth is taxed, particularly when it moves between generations.
This is why structure matters, and why timing matters even more. Once a new tax is announced, the opportunity to restructure assets in a meaningful way is often already gone. Anti-avoidance rules are typically applied from the date of announcement, not from the date of implementation, which means that planning done after the fact is frequently ineffective. In practical terms, this means that waiting for certainty usually means missing the window entirely.
For this reason, I believe it is more important than ever that our clients at Freedom Financial Solutions take asset structuring seriously and act proactively. Properly established trusts, clear separation of ownership and control, and thoughtful long-term planning are not about hiding wealth or doing anything improper. They are about lawful, prudent structuring done in advance, while choices still exist.
I want to be very clear that this commentary is not financial advice. It reflects my professional opinion, formed over decades of working within the financial system, observing policy behaviour, and recognising patterns that tend to repeat. This information is shared for Freedom Financial Solutions clients only, as part of broader education around asset protection, financial sovereignty, and long-term resilience. Every client’s circumstances are different, and no single strategy is right for everyone.
What I do feel strongly about is this: assuming that tomorrow will look like yesterday is no longer a safe default position. Policy changes rarely come with generous warning, and once the rules change, they rarely change back. Those who plan early generally retain options and flexibility. Those who wait for clarity often find that clarity arrives at the same time as restriction.
Cracks in financial systems rarely announce themselves loudly. They show up quietly, in distortions, in emergency measures, and in “temporary” policies that have a habit of becoming permanent. Understanding that, and responding thoughtfully rather than reactively, is the foundation of genuine financial protection.
As a final note, I will be reopening for client appointments from 5 January. I am already extremely busy working with existing clients on trust structures and asset-protection strategies, and demand is increasing rather than slowing down.
For that reason, I do want to be upfront: capacity is limited. Once my diary is full, I will need to temporarily close my books to new work so that I can continue to serve existing clients properly. If you have been meaning to review your structure, move assets into appropriate trusts, or have a serious conversation about long-term protection, now is the time to act — not when policy changes are announced.
If you would like to secure an appointment before availability tightens further, please book as soon as possible using the link below.
👉 Click here to book your appointment (Select Trusts Wills & Estate Planning)
As always, my aim is not to rush decisions, but to ensure clients have options while options still exist.