An old man passed away, leaving behind NT$40 billion in a Swiss bank. His children took the deposit certificates to withdraw the money, but the bank said: “You can't withdraw it.”

This isn’t a movie plot—it's a true story about the founder of the Formosa Plastics Group. In October 2008, at the age of 88, he died of heart and lung failure in Hawaii. While sorting through his belongings, his children found several Swiss bank deposit certificates in an encrypted file cabinet—totaling NT$40 billion.

No one knew this money existed. The old man never mentioned it while alive, nor said how to access it.

The children formed a special team, taking the death certificate, proof of kinship, and deposit certificates to Switzerland. After verifying the documents, the bank staff coldly replied: “Withdrawal not possible.”

Why?

The account had multiple confidentiality clauses. For large confidential deposits, a withdrawal requires an authorization letter personally signed by the account holder, or fulfillment of some preset trigger condition. Can’t provide either? Then it’s stuck.

The children hired Switzerland’s top law firm to intervene. After investigation, they discovered it was a “full-authority trust account,” managed by the bank. Though the beneficiaries were registered, withdrawals required strict identity verification and review of the account terms. The most crucial issue—the account was linked to an undisclosed will attachment, which contained special instructions on how the deposit should be allocated and withdrawn.

But the children had never seen this attachment.

Meanwhile, inheritance disputes erupted in Taiwan. Besides the Swiss deposit, how should the group’s shares and real estate be divided? The children split into two camps: one insisted on dividing everything equally according to the law, while the other argued that the father’s special arrangements should be respected. The arguments were fierce.

In search of the will’s attachment, the children turned over all of the father’s belongings, even conducting data recovery on his computer.

In 2010, they finally found the sealed will attachment at the bottom of an old safe at the Taipei residence.

The instructions were clear: 60% to three designated children, 30% to a charity foundation, the remaining 10% to the bank as management and service fees.

Found it, so they could withdraw the money? Not so fast.

The Swiss bank required the will attachment to be notarized, then confirmed by a Swiss court, plus notarized inheritance documents from Taiwan. Cross-border notarization and judicial confirmation meant endless departments and processes, each more exhausting than the last.

During this period, the bank raised another issue: the deposit had been there too long, so account management and trust service fees would be deducted—totaling several billion New Taiwan Dollars. The children questioned the fee structure, and after several rounds of negotiation, managed to cut the deduction rate by 3 percentage points.

In 2015, all notarizations and judicial confirmations were finally completed, and another withdrawal application was submitted.

And again, they hit a wall.

International anti-money laundering regulations had become stricter, requiring the bank to thoroughly verify the source of funds. The group cooperated, providing financial reports and transaction records from the time, proving the funds were from legitimate business activities. This review took another two years, finally completing in 2018.

Just as the money was about to be released, some of the children who were not designated as heirs objected, claiming the will attachment was flawed and sued in a Swiss court for redistribution.

This lawsuit lasted five years. The court conducted handwriting analysis, heard witness testimonies, and after multiple hearings, in November 2023 confirmed the will attachment was authentic and valid, dismissing the objections.

Only then did the Swiss bank officially transfer the funds. After taxes, fees, and litigation expenses, about NT$32 billion was finally received. NT$24 billion was divided among the designated children, and NT$9.6 billion went to the charity foundation.

From 2008 to 2023—a full 15 years.

This story is a lesson for anyone involved in cross-border asset allocation: Swiss bank confidentiality is strict, laws differ between countries, and cross-border notarization and judicial processes are incredibly complex. For high-net-worth individuals, if inheritance plans aren’t clearly defined and properly notarized in advance, inheritance becomes a nightmare for descendants.

Legal experts say this case has become a classic negative example in cross-border estate planning. Many wealthy people have since adjusted their overseas asset allocation strategies and improved their inheritance documents.

That NT$9.6 billion in charity funds launched its first projects in early 2024, supporting education and medical aid in parts of Taiwan and mainland China.

After 15 years, the dispute is finally over, and the lesson is clear: regardless of wealth, a clear succession plan is the responsible choice for both family and society. Don’t let a sum of money turn into a marathon war of attrition.