Planning for what matters – Part 4: Digital assets in modern succession planning

For many families, digital assets are still treated as a side issue. Something separate from the main wealth conversation, or something that can be dealt with later. Increasingly, that approach looks out of date.

No longer a niche issue

A modern estate or family balance sheet may include not only bank accounts, property interests and investment portfolios, but also digital holdings, online business interests, tokenised assets, cloud-stored records, intellectual property, digital wallets and access credentials that are known to only one person. Even where the monetary value is modest, the practical importance can be significant.

This is why digital succession has moved from niche concern to mainstream planning issue. This is a topic we have been touching on for some time now, highlighting the risk that families can lose access to valuable or meaningful digital assets after death if those assets have not been properly identified and planned for. More recently digital-assets coverage has also examined the use of trusts for digital holdings, the risks of AI-drafted wills and the need for careful, bespoke advice in this evolving area.

The risks of overlooking digital wealth

The basic problem is straightforward. An asset cannot be administered properly if nobody knows it exists, where it is held, or how it can be accessed. Digital assets introduce all three problems at once. They may be dispersed across platforms, protected by private keys or passwords, subject to changing terms of service, or structured in a way that creates cross-border complications.

Planning needs to catch up with reality

In that environment, a traditional succession plan may not be enough on its own. A will can be essential, but it may still leave practical gaps if the individual’s digital life has not been documented properly. A trust framework may help in some circumstances, especially where continuity and control matter, but even then it needs to be supported by accurate records, thoughtful governance and a realistic understanding of how the asset class works.

There is also a behavioural issue. People often keep digital matters private, informal or fragmented. Passwords are remembered rather than recorded. Devices are used personally rather than in a way others can navigate. Valuable online accounts may not be recognised as assets at all. That makes digital succession as much an organisational challenge as a legal one.

At the same time, this is an area where overconfidence can be risky. The growth of generative AI and online template tools may tempt individuals to deal with digital succession informally or without specialist input. STEP’s recent commentary has made the opposite point: where assets and family arrangements are complex, bespoke legal and fiduciary advice remains the safer route.

Good housekeeping matters

The practical response is usually not to overcomplicate matters. It is to start with good housekeeping. Identify what exists. Separate the sentimental from the financial. Record how access works. Consider whether any digital holdings should sit within a wider structure. Review whether trustees, executors or family members would have enough information to act if required. And revisit arrangements as technology and holdings change.

Digital assets are part of modern life

For trustees, there is a wider lesson here. Digital assets should not be treated as a novelty. They are part of the broader responsibility of stewarding wealth in a world where ownership, value and access are increasingly mediated through technology.

Families do not need alarmism in this area. They need practical planning. The right answer will vary from one family to another, but the principle is consistent: if digital assets are part of modern life, they should be part of modern succession planning too.