Note: This article is informational only. It summarises publicly available loyalty-program terms as of January 2026 and explains how those programs are structured. It is not legal, tax, or estate-planning advice, and I am not a lawyer. Program rules change, and outcomes may vary by jurisdiction and by how an account is handled.

This piece explains why bank-issued transferable points behave differently from airline miles and hotel points when a member dies.

It does not offer strategies or workarounds. It describes how these currencies are structured, who controls them, and why outcomes differ once accounts are closed or estates are settled.

The focus is on mechanics, not outcomes in individual cases.

This companion piece looks specifically at transferable currencies. For airline and hotel programs held directly with providers, see the main reference guide.

Airline miles and hotel points live inside loyalty programs.

Transferable points live inside financial accounts.

That single distinction explains most of the difference in how balances are treated when a member dies.

With airline and hotel programs:

With transferable points:

This does not make transferable points “safer” in an absolute sense. It places them upstream of airline and hotel death clauses.

“Transferable” does not mean portable property. It means redeemable into other programs at the cardholder’s direction while the account remains open.

In practical terms:

That sequencing is important. A point that has not yet been transferred is not subject to airline or hotel membership rules.

Across issuers, a common principle applies:

There are variations in process, timing, and discretion, but the balance is generally not independent of the account that earned it.

What differs from airlines is who controls the decision:

That difference alone produces more flexibility, even when points are still described as “not property.”

Several transferable currencies use global branding but operate as country-specific programs. The name travels. The rules do not.

American Express Membership Rewards is best understood as a family of national programs.

In both the US and UK:

The difference is procedural rather than conceptual. The UK process tends to be more formal. The US process is more widely discussed. The underlying structure is the same. There is no global MR balance, and holding cards in multiple countries does not merge outcomes.

Capital One Miles uses global branding for regionally distinct products.

In the US, Miles function as a flexible account-level currency with transfer partners. Outside the US, rewards are more limited and often closer to statement credits. In those markets, account closure typically ends the balance with little flexibility.

The upstream position exists everywhere, but practical room to preserve value is much greater in the US.

Citi ThankYou Points is one of the most fragmented programs under a single name.

In the US, pooling and linked accounts can allow balances to persist beyond the closure of one account. Outside the US, the ThankYou brand often covers much narrower reward systems, with limited pooling and fewer transfer options. In those cases, balances usually end when the account closes.

The brand is shared. The mechanics are not.

Barclays Arrival is effectively a US-only product. Rewards function as fixed-value travel credits tied directly to the card account. When the account closes, the balance typically disappears. There is no meaningful non-US analogue.

HSBC Credit Card Points are international in branding and local in execution.

In the UK, points are administered conservatively and usually expire when the card account closes during estate administration. In other markets, mechanics vary, but rewards remain account-level and governed by local banking rules. They sit upstream of airline programs, but offer less flexibility than US Membership Rewards.

Chase Ultimate Rewards is US-only but widely referenced. Its behaviour reinforces the same pattern: balances may persist if another eligible household account remains open, but usually end when the final account closes.

Being upstream does not eliminate risk.

Balances can still disappear when:

Transferable points do not remove the rules altogether. They change which rules apply.

The earlier reference piece documented what airlines and hotels say in their own terms. This piece explains why people structure balances upstream when they can.

The contrast is simple:

The rules change depending on where the balance sits.

Transferable points do not eliminate uncertainty.

They place the balance inside a financial account rather than a loyalty program. What happens next depends on how that account is handled when it closes.

That distinction explains why outcomes differ. It does not guarantee preservation.