Later-life divorce is becoming a more visible planning consideration for Asia’s private wealth industry. The trend is not uniform across the region, and the available data varies significantly by jurisdiction. In some markets, divorce rates have risen over time; in others, divorce rates have stabilised or declined. But the wealth planning implications are becoming increasingly relevant.

Across Asia-Pacific’s mature wealth markets, people are living longer, marrying later, remarrying more often, accumulating larger pools of retirement assets, and holding wealth through more complex structures. A separation or divorce in a couple’s 50s, 60s or 70s is therefore rarely just a family law matter. It can affect retirement income, property ownership, liquidity, succession intentions, family businesses, trusts, insurance, beneficiary nominations, adult children, grandchildren and second-spouse dynamics.

For private bankers, external asset managers, trustees, lawyers, family offices and wealth planners, later-life marital transition sits at the intersection of matrimonial law, retirement planning, estate planning, liquidity management and intergenerational wealth transfer.

A Regional Trend, But Not A Uniform One

The regional picture is nuanced. OECD data indicates that crude divorce rates have increased in most Asia-Pacific countries since 2005, and by nearly 20% across the region on average. However, the same OECD analysis notes that crude divorce rates have fallen among the OECD economies in the Asia-Pacific region, including Australia, Japan, Korea and New Zealand.

That distinction matters. The story is not simply that divorce is rising everywhere. The more relevant point for wealth advisers is that family structures, marriage timing, longevity and asset complexity are changing across the region, even where headline divorce rates are not rising.

Hong Kong is one example. According to official data, Hong Kong’s crude divorce rate rose from 1.11 per 1,000 population in 1991 to 2.52 in 2024. The median age at first marriage also moved higher over the same period, reaching 32.6 for men and 31.0 for women in 2024. Remarriage has become much more prominent, accounting for 47.4% of registered marriages in 2024, compared with 11.5% in 1991.

Singapore also points to the later-life dimension of divorce. In 2024, divorces and annulments rose 3.7% year-on-year, while the median age at divorce reached 44.4 for male divorcees and 40.9 for female divorcees. The median duration of marriage before divorce was 11.1 years, up from 10.4 years in 2014.

Australia’s data points in a different direction on the headline divorce rate, but still supports the broader planning theme. In 2024, the number of divorces fell 3.0% year-on-year and the crude divorce rate declined to 2.1 divorces per 1,000 people. Yet the median age at divorce remained relatively high, at 47.1 for men and 44.1 for women, and the median duration of marriages ending in divorce increased to 13.2 years.

South Korea also underlines the need for care in describing the trend. In 2024, the number of divorces fell 1.3% year-on-year to 91,000, while the crude divorce rate stood at 1.8 per 1,000 people. Official data also show that divorces among couples married for 30 years or more accounted for 16.6% of total divorces. The advisory relevance therefore lies less in making a single regional claim and more in recognising that divorce, remarriage and family reconfiguration are occurring against a backdrop of ageing populations, longer lives and more complex household balance sheets.

Longer Lives, Longer Financial Horizons

Longevity is central to the later-life divorce conversation. In Hong Kong, life expectancy at birth in 2024 was around 83 years for men and 88 years for women. In Singapore, resident life expectancy at birth reached 83.5 years in 2024, with life expectancy at age 65 rising to 21.2 years.

That changes the financial planning analysis. A couple separating in their early or mid-60s may still need to fund 20 or more years of independent living. This is not simply about dividing the assets accumulated during the marriage. It is about rebuilding two separate financial lives, often at or near retirement age.

Housing, healthcare, long-term care, insurance, daily living costs, adult children, grandchildren, philanthropy and legacy intentions all need to be reassessed. In some cases, assets that once appeared sufficient for one shared retirement may need to be restructured to support two households.

Why Later-Life Divorce Is Different

Divorce later in life usually presents a different set of considerations from divorce in earlier adulthood. There may be fewer disputes over minor children, school fees or day-to-day parenting arrangements. But there may be more difficult questions around retirement security, the family home, pension assets, illiquid investments, family businesses, trusts and inheritance expectations.

A younger divorcing spouse may still have time to rebuild income, savings and career momentum. A spouse separating at 60 or 70 may not. Earning capacity may be limited, health needs may be rising, and the capacity to recover financially from a settlement may be much lower.

This makes liquidity important. A family may be asset-rich but cash-constrained. Wealth may be concentrated in a principal residence, a private company, a family business, a trust structure, retirement accounts, insurance policies or real estate held across several jurisdictions. Dividing those assets fairly can be complicated where some are illiquid, tax-sensitive, emotionally significant or difficult to value.

The Former Matrimonial Home

For many older couples, the family home remains one of the most emotionally significant and financially important assets. It may also be mortgage-free, making it a major source of retirement security.

After divorce, one home may need to become two. If neither party can retain the home while meeting the other’s entitlement, a sale may be necessary. That can be especially complicated for retirees, who may face more limited borrowing capacity and less flexibility to rebuild housing security.

Where one spouse wants to remain in the home, advisers may explore whether an offset is possible. This might involve one party retaining the property while the other receives a greater share of liquid assets, investments, retirement savings or other property. But those assets are not always equivalent. A home provides immediate use and security. Retirement assets may be inaccessible. Business interests may be illiquid. Trust interests may not be directly owned. A superficially equal division may not produce equal financial outcomes.

Retirement Assets Are Moving To The Centre

Retirement assets are increasingly important in later-life divorce. In Hong Kong, Mandatory Provident Fund assets surpassed HK$1.5 trillion, with a provisional figure of HK$1.53 trillion, as at end-September 2025. In Singapore, CPF savings, CPF-related investments and property bought using CPF savings may need to be addressed in divorce-related asset division. In Australia, superannuation is expressly dealt with under the family law framework and can be split when a couple separates.

The details vary by jurisdiction, but the planning consideration is consistent. Retirement savings may have been accumulated before marriage, during marriage and after separation. They may also be illiquid, tax-sensitive, inaccessible until a certain age, or payable through lump sums, income streams or both. They may have been treated by the family as a shared retirement resource, even if legally held in one person’s name.

This can create difficult trade-offs. One spouse may hold the larger retirement account but have limited access to it. The other may need immediate housing or liquidity. A clean division of assets may therefore require careful modelling of timing, tax, accessibility, investment risk and future care needs.

For advisers, the key is to avoid treating retirement assets as simple line items. Their value depends not only on the headline balance, but on when they can be accessed, how they can be divided, how they are taxed, and what role they were expected to play in the couple’s retirement plan.

Trusts, Companies And Family Businesses

Later-life divorce can be especially complex where wealth is held through trusts, family investment companies, private operating businesses or cross-border structures.

The legal owner of an asset may not be the only relevant question. Courts may look at control, access, historic distributions, the purpose of a structure, and whether an asset is realistically available as a financial resource. The answer will depend on the jurisdiction, the structure and the facts.

This is particularly relevant in Asia, where family wealth may be intertwined with operating companies, founder-controlled entities, family offices, offshore trusts, insurance structures and multi-jurisdictional asset holding vehicles. A separation may test governance arrangements that had previously been largely unexamined: ownership records, family loans, succession intentions, the boundary between personal and business assets, and assumptions about how family structures may be treated in a matrimonial context.

For trustees, protectors, directors and advisers, a later-life divorce can create overlapping duties, expectations and sensitivities. One spouse may seek disclosure or access. Adult children may be concerned about how family wealth will be preserved, divided or redirected. Trustees may need to balance confidentiality, fiduciary obligations and court processes. Family businesses may face valuation questions or liquidity needs at an inopportune time.

Cross-Border Families, Cross-Border Considerations

Many Asian private wealth families are not confined to one jurisdiction. A couple may live in Hong Kong or Singapore, hold property in Australia or the UK, have children educated overseas, maintain tax residency considerations across multiple places, and hold assets through companies, trusts, insurance wrappers or bank accounts in several financial centres.

That creates real complexity. Divorce proceedings in one jurisdiction may interact with asset ownership, tax rules, succession law or enforcement questions elsewhere. A settlement that appears clean locally may create tax leakage, liquidity pressure or estate planning complications internationally.

Cross-border considerations are especially important where the family has real estate in multiple countries, trusts governed by foreign law, citizenship or residency planning arrangements, offshore insurance, family business interests, or intended inheritances for children in different jurisdictions.

This is why later-life divorce should not be handled in isolation by one adviser. It often requires coordinated input from family lawyers, tax advisers, trustees, private bankers, estate planners and, where relevant, immigration or residency advisers.

Remarriage, Blended Families And Inheritance

Later-life divorce is often followed by new relationships or remarriage. That can raise sensitive questions for adult children and grandchildren.

The individual may want to provide financial security for a new spouse or partner. Children from a first marriage may expect family wealth to remain within the original family line. A new spouse may have children of their own. The family home may carry emotional significance for one branch of the family and financial significance for another.

These dynamics are not necessarily contentious, but they benefit from clear structure. Wills, beneficiary nominations, trust documents, letters of wishes, life insurance, powers of attorney and prenuptial or postnuptial agreements may all need to be reviewed.

In many cases, the most difficult disputes arise not because the planning options were unavailable, but because expectations were left unstated. A later-life relationship can be personally fulfilling, but financially complex. Advisers need to help clients distinguish between emotional commitment, legal obligation and succession intention.

The Role Of Nuptial Agreements

Prenuptial and postnuptial agreements are becoming more relevant in later-life wealth planning, particularly for second marriages and blended families.

Their legal status and enforceability vary by jurisdiction. They should not be treated as universal solutions. But where properly prepared, supported by disclosure and independent legal advice, and entered into freely, they can provide a useful framework for managing expectations.

For older clients, a nuptial agreement may be less about anticipating failure and more about protecting clarity. It can help define what assets should remain separate, how housing will be treated, what provision should be made for a spouse, and how children from earlier relationships should be protected.

For wealthy families, the conversation should take place before conflict emerges. The more complex the family structure, the more important it becomes to document intention clearly.

Estate Planning Must Be Revisited

Divorce should generally prompt a full estate planning review. This is particularly true for older clients.

Wills, enduring powers of attorney, lasting powers of attorney, beneficiary nominations, insurance policies, superannuation or pension nominations, trust letters of wishes, executor appointments and medical decision-making arrangements may all need to be updated.

The review should not wait until the divorce is finalised. Interim arrangements may also be needed, especially where one spouse previously held decision-making authority under a power of attorney or was the primary beneficiary of insurance, pension or estate planning documents.

For clients with family businesses or trusts, the review should go further. Advisers should examine governance documents, shareholder agreements, succession plans, trustee powers, protector roles, distribution histories and liquidity arrangements. The question is not only who receives what on death, but who has control, who has access, and what happens if family relationships change.

What Advisers Should Be Asking

For the private wealth industry, later-life divorce requires a more integrated advisory approach. The relevant questions include:


Can each spouse fund a separate retirement without excessive depletion of capital?
Is the family wealth liquid enough to support a fair settlement?
Are retirement assets accessible, divisible or tax-sensitive?
Is the family home emotionally important, financially efficient, or both?
Are trusts, companies or insurance structures likely to require closer review?
Are there cross-border tax, succession or enforcement considerations?
Have wills, powers of attorney and beneficiary nominations been updated?
Are adult children, grandchildren or second spouses likely to be affected?
Is there a need for a prenuptial, postnuptial or family governance agreement?
Have care costs, healthcare needs and longevity been modelled realistically?

 

These are not only legal questions. They are wealth planning questions.

A Wealth Planning Event, Not Just A Personal Transition

Later-life divorce can be personally complex, and it is often financially consequential. It may prompt families to revisit assumptions built over decades: that one home would support one retirement, that one pension would fund two lives, that a family business would remain undisturbed, or that wealth would pass smoothly to the next generation.

In Asia’s private wealth markets, the subject is likely to become more visible as families live longer, marry later, remarry more often and hold assets across more jurisdictions and structures. The data does not support a simplistic claim that later-life divorce is rising uniformly everywhere. But it does support a more important conclusion: later-life marital transition is now a material planning consideration for families with complex assets.

The advisory role is not to make personal judgements about divorce, but to help clients understand the financial, legal and succession implications clearly. That means protecting both spouses’ long-term financial security, preserving family wealth where possible, and ensuring that structures, documents and expectations remain aligned with the family’s current reality.

Later-life divorce is ultimately about more than dividing the past. It is about funding the future – often across two households, multiple generations and several jurisdictions.

**

This article was inspired by a Partner’s Insight titled “Silver Splitters: The Rise of Silver Divorce” in October, 2024, written by Anisha Ramanathan, Partner, and Philippa Hewitt, Senior Knowledge Lawyer of Withersworldwide.

**

Sources


OECD – Society at a Glance: Asia/Pacific 2025 – Marriage and Divorce [LINK]



Hong Kong Census and Statistics Department – Marriage and Divorce Trends in Hong Kong, 1991 to 2024 [LINK]



Singapore Department of Statistics – Statistics on Marriages and Divorces, 2024 [LINK]



Australian Bureau of Statistics – Marriages and Divorces, Australia, 2024 [LINK]



Statistics Korea / Ministry of Data and Statistics – Marriage and Divorce Statistics in 2024 [LINK]



Hong Kong Census and Statistics Department – Hong Kong Life Tables / Life Expectancy Statistics [LINK]



Singapore Department of Statistics – Complete Life Tables for Singapore Resident Population, 2023-2024 [LINK]



Mandatory Provident Fund Schemes Authority – Total MPF assets surpassed $1.5 trillion [LINK]



Central Provident Fund Board – Division of CPF Assets [LINK]



Australian Attorney-General’s Department – Superannuation Splitting [LINK]


 

**

Disclaimer: This article is provided for general information only and does not constitute legal, tax, financial, investment or estate planning advice. The treatment of divorce, matrimonial assets, pensions, trusts, estate planning arrangements and cross-border structures varies by jurisdiction and depends on the specific facts and circumstances of each case. Readers should seek independent professional advice from appropriately qualified legal, tax and financial advisers before taking any action or making any decisions based on the matters discussed.