LESSONS FROM THE GOLF COURSE – THINGS CAN GO WRONG VERY EASILY
By Andro Griessel
04/04/2026
In a few days, the Masters golf tournament at Augusta National will take place for the 90th time. It therefore feels appropriate to begin this article with an anecdote from the Masters of 30 years ago (1996). That year was exceptional for all the wrong reasons: Greg Norman had the questionable “privilege” of producing the biggest final-day collapse in Masters history. He started the day with a commanding six-shot lead—only to eventually lose to Nick Faldo, who beat him by five shots. Many commentators at the time attributed this to a simple (but costly) move: Norman played too tentatively and mainly tried to protect his lead.
In the world of wealth management, I often see the same pattern—especially among affluent families. Many entrepreneurs build fantastic businesses over decades. In the process, large parts of life are sometimes neglected—health, time with family, and a great deal of stress that comes with financial risk. Then, after selling the business or retiring from their high-profile careers, decisions are made that feel safe… but which later undo much of those sacrifices. Let me illustrate this with an example.
Greg (not the same one who squandered a six-shot lead) sold his business on 31 March 2016 for a net payout of R20 million. Over the years, he had already made sufficient provision for his retirement and his family’s care and could therefore invest this money with a simpler goal: “One day I’ll leave it to the children.”
Greg no longer had a spouse, but he did have two children to whom he wanted to leave his wealth. And now comes the part where things can easily go wrong: he must decide how to structure the investment, and where (and in what) to invest.
For completeness, I outline a few paths Greg could have taken and where each would have led him over the past 10 years. There are a few key points to highlight:
A direct investment in offshore equities (Scenario 2) would, on paper, have performed best—if you only look at the end value. But unfortunately, that only tells half of the story.
If Greg had withdrawn the funds in his personal name (for whatever reason), the investment would, upon his death, be subject to estate duty and quite possibly also capital gains tax (CGT) (there are exceptions, depending on product choice).
What does this mean in practice? Based on the assumptions provided, capital gains tax and estate duty of around R6.4 million would be payable on R12.3 million (after the applicable CGT exclusion and assuming the 25% estate duty bracket is reached).
This would reduce the net investment available to the children to approximately R37.1 million.
As if that were not bad enough: if the portfolio were a personal share portfolio consisting mainly of “safe” US-listed shares such as Apple, Berkshire Hathaway, Facebook and the like, situs tax could also come into play. On the amounts above, this could mean an additional $1.2 million (approximately R20.3 million) in US taxes.
It is therefore not far-fetched to have a situation where Greg’s initial investment, after 10 years—due to a combination of taxes—deteriorates into an inheritance of “only” R16.8 million. Incidentally, an amount of R31.2 million would be required just to preserve his capital in real terms against inflation.
A second common “mistake” we see in practice is where entrepreneurs (who are comfortable with risk as entrepreneurs) suddenly take the opposite stance as investors—in other words, they become overly risk-averse. The result is often an overly conservative portfolio, much like Greg Norman on that final Sunday when he just wanted to “play it safe.”
This would resemble Scenario 4 if Greg had avoided the pitfall of incorrect structuring (and the associated tax implications) by transferring the funds to an offshore trust. If that had been his route, the fund value today would be around R38.9 million. However, if the investment had been held in a South African trust and invested in the country’s largest balanced fund (Scenario 1), the capital available to the children would still be R50.6 million—about 30% more.
Apart from how the investment is structured (not just which entity, but also which type of product), the actual return over time naturally makes a world of difference. In my opinion, this is where the portfolio construction dilemma lies for direct offshore investors and trustees of offshore trusts for the decade ahead.
Over the past decade, returns have generally been strong for offshore equities but weak for offshore fixed-income investments. In a mixed portfolio, the high returns from equities therefore “saved the day”—much like someone who does not drive the ball well but sinks all their putts.
Looking ahead, returns from the largest offshore equity market (the US) are likely to be lower in the foreseeable future. Add to this increasing global political and policy uncertainty (with countries trying in different ways to move away from excessive dependence on the dollar and US bonds), and I believe many standard offshore portfolios will struggle to deliver the same combination of return and stability—regardless of where you position yourself on the risk/return spectrum.
In conclusion: there are far too many nuances to prescribe a single “correct” structure, because every individual and family situation differs. One must consider many factors (such as where the ultimate beneficiaries are located) before deciding on a structure.
What I can say with some confidence is this: if you make large investments in your own name—especially offshore, and particularly in jurisdictions such as the US and the UK—you have already lost the tax battle (and therefore the capital protection battle) before you even begin.
I often see people blindly trying to reduce their South Africa risk by simply moving money out of the country. It is important to understand: your primary risk does not lie in a potential tightening of exchange controls, but in the definite taxes that may be levied upon your death.
If you successfully clear the first hurdle (proper structuring), the allocation of your funds (asset allocation) becomes a critical second hurdle in protecting family wealth. We see many people clear the first hurdle neatly, only to stumble over the second.
So, make sure you don’t play like Greg Norman—setting the course alight for the first three rounds, only to throw it all away on the final day.
Andró Griessel is the CEO of Woodland Wealth. Contact him at info@woodlandwealth.co.za.
Although all possible care has been taken in the preparation of this document, the factual correctness of the information contained herein cannot be guaranteed. This document does not constitute advice and anyone who intends to take any financial action based on this document is strongly advised to first consult with his/her personal financial advisor. Woodland Wealth is an authorized financial service provider with FSP no. 5966.