Mar 19
seen from China
seen from Ireland
seen from Germany
seen from Maldives
seen from Malaysia
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Switzerland
seen from United Kingdom
seen from China
seen from Switzerland
seen from Estonia
seen from Switzerland
seen from China
seen from Netherlands
seen from Malaysia
seen from China
seen from Switzerland
seen from Malaysia
seen from Mexico
seen from Malaysia
The Overlooked Pages of a Purchase Agreement That Shape a Seller's Next Decade
Most people who read about business sales in the popular press focus on the deal value. It is the number that shows up in the headline. But sellers who have been through the process, and lawyers who advise them, will tell you that a bigger determinant of the seller's outcome over the following decade is a section that rarely makes the news: the restrictive-covenants block.
Buried in the middle of a purchase agreement, usually a few pages long, these provisions determine what the seller can and cannot do professionally after closing. They cover non-competition, non-solicitation of customers, non-solicitation of employees, non-disclosure, and often several related covenants. And they are usually drafted by the buyer's counsel to be as broad as the market will bear.
This is a general-audience walkthrough of what those pages actually do, what to look for, and where the trap doors are. It is educational reading, not legal or tax advice - every deal has specifics that only the seller's own advisors can address.
Photo by Rayia Soderberg on Unsplash
What the block usually contains
A typical restrictive-covenant section covers:
A non-competition provision limiting the seller's ability to compete with the sold business
A non-solicitation of customers provision
A non-solicitation of employees provision
A non-disclosure or confidentiality provision
Related provisions on ownership of investments in competitors, and on cooperation with the buyer post-close
Each of these has scope, duration, and geographic parameters. Each has enforcement mechanics. Each interacts with the earnout, if there is one, and with the transition employment period, if there is one.
The interaction is where the surprises live.
The scope-of-activity trap
Non-competes are often drafted to prohibit "engaging in the business of the Company" for a defined period. What "engaging in the business" means is the question that determines whether the seller can consult, sit on boards, serve as an angel investor, or teach at a university without violating the covenant.
Broadly-drafted scope reaches all of those activities. Narrowly-drafted scope permits most of them. The negotiation between the two is where the seller's post-close options are decided.
The SEC's Investor.gov has general educational reading on how M&A affects executives who continue to be active in their industry. Legal counsel walking through the specific draft is the operational resource.
The customer non-solicit trap
Non-solicits of customers are often more restrictive than the non-compete for a seller who plans to stay active in the same industry. The non-compete may permit consulting; the non-solicit prohibits consulting for the specific customers of the sold business, which is often exactly who the seller would consult for.
Drafts frequently include prospective customers (people the company was pursuing) and affiliated companies of customers (parents, subsidiaries, sister companies). The scope of "customer" can be much broader than the seller initially understands.
The detailed writeup on restrictive covenant provisions covers the mechanics of the customer-non-solicit specifically.
The employee non-solicit trap
Employee non-solicits prevent the seller from hiring away key employees for a defined period. Drafts often extend to any employee, not just senior ones. Some drafts extend to former employees who left the company before the sale.
Sellers who plan to start or join a new venture in the same industry may find their most obvious hiring pipeline (former colleagues) is closed to them for the entire covenant period.
The tax allocation quietly built in
Restrictive covenants are typically allocated a portion of the purchase price under Section 197 of the Internal Revenue Code, and that allocation is ordinary income to the seller rather than capital gains. A large covenant allocation converts what looks like capital-gains sale proceeds into ordinary-income payments, at a materially higher tax rate for most sellers.
The buyer's initial draft often allocates more to the covenants than a seller would want. Tax advisors negotiate this alongside legal counsel. The AICPA publishes technical guidance CPAs reference for the specific accounting.
The timing trap
Non-competes drafted to run "from end of employment" rather than "from closing" can double or triple the effective restriction period if the seller has a multi-year transition employment agreement. A five-year non-compete plus a five-year employment agreement is effectively a ten-year restriction from closing.
Sellers often do not catch this until well after signing. Legal counsel with M&A experience catches it during drafting review.
The related timing question is what happens if you leave employment early. Some drafts accelerate the covenant to start from termination if the seller resigns for reasons the buyer does not consider "good reason." Others hold the covenant to the original schedule. The difference determines whether an early departure is manageable or catastrophic for the seller's post-close plans.
The choice-of-law question
The state law that governs enforcement of the covenants is specified in the purchase agreement. Different states enforce non-competes differently. The Federal Trade Commission has been active on federal non-compete policy in recent years, and state legislatures continue to move. What is enforceable today may be different in three or five years.
Choice-of-law matters most when the seller intends to change residency or when the buyer intends to enforce the covenants across state lines.
Photo by Gustavo Fring on Pexels
What sellers do about it
Sellers who navigate this section well share a few patterns:
They engage legal counsel with specific M&A experience early in the process, ideally before the letter of intent is signed
They coordinate legal counsel with tax and financial advisors before signing the purchase agreement
They read the covenant block themselves after their counsel walks through it, and ask questions until they can explain each provision back
They negotiate carve-outs for specific activities they intend to continue post-close
They understand the interaction between covenants, earnout, and transition employment before signing
None of these are dramatic. All of them make a difference in the outcome years later.
For general educational reading on the seller side of the transaction, the educational resources at Capivise cover the topics sellers typically raise with their advisors, and the walkthrough on restrictive covenant provisions covers the specific block discussed here.
For sellers still building an advisor team, FINRA BrokerCheck provides regulatory records for registered financial professionals, and the SEC's Investor.gov has general educational reading on advisor selection.
Why the popular press misses this
The restrictive-covenant section is not glamorous. It does not lend itself to headline numbers. Its consequences unfold over years, not at closing. And it varies dramatically by state, industry, and deal specifics.
But if you talk to sellers a year or two after their deals close, the topic that most often comes up as "the thing I wish I had negotiated harder" is not the price. It is some element of the covenants. The scope was broader than they realized. The duration was longer than they thought. The customer non-solicit blocks the specific consulting work they wanted to do. The tax allocation cost them more than the negotiation would have.
Sellers reading this before their own signing have the opportunity to avoid those outcomes. That opportunity closes at signature.
Read the covenant block. Ask questions. Negotiate what does not fit. That is the whole discipline.
How to Walk Through Restrictive Covenants With an M&A Attorney
Business sellers preparing for signing usually have their M&A attorney do a full walkthrough of the purchase agreement in the days before execution. The restrictive-covenant section of that walkthrough deserves specific attention. It is dense, it is technical, and it has consequences that unfold over years rather than at closing.
Below is a general-audience approach for how a seller can get the most out of that walkthrough. This is educational, not legal advice - your own attorney is the resource for the specific drafting of your specific agreement.
Photo by ron dyar on Unsplash
Before the meeting: read the covenants yourself once
Even if the language is dense, read the covenant section before the meeting. Highlight the sentences you do not fully understand. Note the ones that mention specific numbers (years, geographic radius, percentage ownership).
You are not trying to negotiate on your own. You are preparing to ask targeted questions so the meeting is efficient. Coming into a covenant walkthrough having read the section once is dramatically more useful than coming in cold.
Question one: what specifically am I agreeing not to do
Ask the attorney to describe, in plain English, the specific activities the covenant prohibits. Not the language. The activities.
Something like: "So starting at closing, I cannot start or work for a company that competes with the sold business, defined as any business that does X, Y, or Z, anywhere in the United States, for five years. Is that a fair description?"
The attorney's rephrasing is where you catch drafting that reaches farther than you intended. If they say "and it also prohibits you from being an advisor to a competing company," and you did not know that, note it.
Question two: what are the exceptions built in
Even the strictest non-compete typically has some exceptions - passive investment up to a percentage, board service in non-competing industries, charitable activities. Ask for the exceptions in the current draft.
Then ask: what exceptions do sellers typically negotiate for that are not in this draft? Your attorney will have a list. Consider each against your post-close plans.
The detailed writeup on restrictive covenant provisions covers common exceptions and how they are typically drafted, if you want general background reading before the meeting.
Question three: how does the timing work
Ask when the non-compete clock starts. From closing? From end of employment? If from end of employment, is there a defined end-of-employment date, or is it triggered by termination of an employment agreement that may itself run for years?
Ask the same about the non-solicits. They often run on different clocks from the non-compete.
Ask about tolling. If a dispute arises and lands in court or arbitration, does the covenant period stop and restart when the dispute resolves? A "five-year covenant with tolling for disputes" can effectively be much longer.
Question four: how does the customer non-solicit define customer
The word "customer" in a non-solicit can mean many things. Ask specifically:
Anyone the sold business did business with in the last two years?
Anyone the sold business was pursuing at time of closing?
Anyone the sold business was in preliminary discussions with?
Parents, subsidiaries, and sister companies of any of the above?
Sellers who plan to consult in the industry post-close find that the non-solicit is often the more binding restriction. Understanding the scope of "customer" is how you know what your post-close options actually look like.
Question five: what is the tax allocation
Restrictive covenants are typically allocated a portion of the purchase price under Section 197. The IRS treats that allocation as ordinary income to the seller. Ask your attorney what allocation is in the current draft, and whether that allocation matches economic reality.
If the allocation is substantial, coordinate with your CPA before signing. Tax outcome differences at this stage can be significant.
Question six: what happens if things go wrong
Ask about the enforcement mechanics. What court or arbitrator hears disputes? Under what state's law? What is the standard of proof? What are the remedies (injunction, damages, attorney's fees)?
Ask about the blue-pencil provision. If a court decides the covenant is over-broad, does it narrow the covenant to what is enforceable, or does it strike the whole covenant?
Ask about the seller's protections. Can the buyer's counsel enforce the covenant vindictively? What is the recourse if that happens?
Question seven: how does this interact with the earnout and employment
If there is an earnout, ask how the covenants interact with earnout eligibility. If employment is required for the earnout to pay out, how does the covenant work if you leave employment before the earnout completes?
If there is a transition employment agreement, ask how termination (for cause, without cause, resignation, mutual separation) affects the covenants and the earnout separately.
These interactions are where deals go sideways after signing. Understanding them before signing is protection.
Question eight: what if the buyer sells the business
Ask whether the covenants are assignable. Buyers frequently sell the businesses they buy within a few years. If the covenants are freely assignable, they may end up being enforced by an entity you never agreed to grant covenants to.
Ask for language that limits assignment to sale of the whole business, or that requires renegotiation on transfer.
Photo by Pavel Danilyuk on Pexels
After the meeting: write it down
Take the plain-English version of each provision, in your own notes, and read it against the actual drafting the next morning. Do the two match? If any provision surprises you when you re-read it, ask about it again before signing.
The gap between "what the attorney said" and "what the document actually says" is where signing mistakes happen.
Coordinating with your other advisors
The attorney handles the drafting. But the tax advisor should see the allocation, the wealth advisor should see how the covenants interact with your longer-term plans, and any earnout-related financial modeling should account for the covenant timing.
Getting all four (you, attorney, tax advisor, wealth advisor) on the same page before signing is how sellers preserve optionality after closing. This general reader on restrictive covenants covers the topics and how to frame them across the advisor team.
The Capivise educational library has a longer walkthrough of the specific provisions, framed as topics to raise with counsel.
For sellers still choosing or vetting an advisor team, FINRA BrokerCheck provides regulatory records for registered financial professionals, and the SEC's Investor.gov has general educational reading on advisor selection. The AICPA is the credentialing body for CPAs, whose local chapters can point sellers toward M&A-experienced tax advisors.
What the meeting is really for
The covenant walkthrough with your attorney is not primarily about being told what the document says. It is about the seller understanding the document well enough to make informed decisions about which provisions to negotiate, which to accept, and which to seek carve-outs for.
Reading a purchase agreement's covenant section is not something most sellers do more than once in a lifetime. Getting it right is the entire game.
Six Categories of Advisor to Coordinate Before a Business Exit
A business owner approaching a sale typically interacts with more advisor categories than the average financial planning conversation requires. The categories are different from each other in important ways, and the coordination among them often determines whether the post-sale picture looks the way the seller wanted it to look. This is an educational guide to the six categories most often involved, what each typically contributes, and what questions to ask when assembling the team.
This is not advice about which advisors any specific seller should hire or in what order. Every transaction has its own specifics and the right team composition varies. The list below is a starting point for understanding the categories.
1. Transaction counsel (M&A attorney)
Transaction counsel handles the legal mechanics of the sale: structuring the deal, drafting and negotiating the purchase agreement, managing due diligence, coordinating with the buyer's counsel, and closing the transaction. The role is typically the most active during the formal sale process and tends to be the first advisor engaged once a sale is imminent.
Topics typically raised with transaction counsel:
Deal structure (asset sale vs stock sale, with input from tax counsel)
Purchase agreement provisions (representations and warranties, indemnification, escrow, working capital adjustments)
Closing conditions and timeline
Coordination with the buyer's counsel
Post-closing dispute prevention
Questions worth asking when evaluating transaction counsel:
How many transactions of similar size and structure have they handled in the past three years?
Who else on their team will be involved?
How do they typically coordinate with tax counsel and the wealth advisor?
What is their fee structure for a transaction of this scope?
2. Tax counsel or CPA with M&A experience
Tax counsel or a CPA with M&A experience analyzes the federal, state, and local tax consequences of different deal structures and helps optimize the after-tax outcome for the seller. The work often runs in parallel with transaction counsel and benefits from being engaged early enough to inform structural decisions.
Topics typically raised:
Federal and state tax treatment of different deal structures
Application of Internal Revenue Code provisions relevant to the transaction (Section 1202 QSBS, Section 338(h)(10), Section 280G, others)
Treatment of earnouts and seller's note carry-backs
State tax residency considerations
Estimated tax planning for the year of sale
Questions worth asking:
How much of their practice is M&A tax vs other tax work?
How do they coordinate with the wealth advisor on post-sale tax planning?
What is their typical engagement structure (fixed fee, hourly, or hybrid)?
The AICPA professional resources cover the credentials and standards relevant to CPAs. The IRS general resources are the underlying authority for federal tax topics.
3. Wealth advisor
The wealth advisor (typically a financial planner, wealth manager, or family office representative) helps the seller plan for the post-sale financial picture. Where transaction counsel and tax counsel are heavily focused on the deal itself, the wealth advisor's focus extends across the seller's entire financial situation, before, during, and after the transaction.
Topics typically raised:
Cash management for sale proceeds during the transition window
Investment policy and asset allocation for invested proceeds
Coordination with longer-term planning (retirement income, philanthropy, family goals)
Liquidity needs in the post-sale period
Tax-efficient distribution planning over multiple years
Questions worth asking when evaluating wealth advisors:
Are they fee-only or commission-based?
Are they a fiduciary at all times or only on certain accounts?
How often have they worked with clients experiencing a sudden liquidity event of similar scale?
How do they coordinate with the other advisor categories?
The SEC investor education portal covers the regulatory framework for investment advisors. The FINRA BrokerCheck tool is the standard way to verify a financial professional's credentials and disciplinary history. The NAPFA member directory lists fee-only advisors. Educational materials on what to look for when evaluating wealth advisors during business sale planning are available at https://capivise.com.
4. Employment counsel
Employment counsel handles the human-side legal matters that accompany a business sale: employment agreement amendments, retention agreements, restrictive covenants, severance, and the broader employee transition planning. The role is sometimes overlooked when transaction counsel takes responsibility for these matters, but employment counsel typically brings deeper expertise on the employment-law specifics.
Topics typically raised:
Management retention agreement structure and provisions
Treatment of existing employment agreements at closing
Non-compete and non-solicitation enforceability in relevant jurisdictions
Severance arrangements for non-retained employees
Compliance with notification requirements (WARN Act for larger transactions, state equivalents for smaller)
For a more focused educational overview of management retention specifically, this educational guide on management retention agreements covers the topic in depth.
5. Estate planning attorney
For sellers whose sale will materially change their financial picture, an estate planning attorney often becomes relevant either pre-sale (to take advantage of planning opportunities before liquidity arrives) or post-sale (to update existing estate planning documents to reflect the new circumstances).
Topics typically raised:
Pre-sale gifting opportunities (transferring some equity before the sale to lower the taxable estate)
Trust structures appropriate for sale proceeds
Charitable planning structures (donor-advised funds, charitable remainder trusts, private foundations)
Updates to existing wills, trusts, and powers of attorney to reflect changed circumstances
Generation-skipping considerations for larger estates
The interaction between pre-sale estate planning and post-sale wealth planning is often where coordination with the wealth advisor and tax counsel pays off. Decisions made in one area constrain options in the others.
6. Insurance specialist
For larger transactions or transactions with specific risk profiles, an insurance specialist may be relevant. Categories of insurance that can become part of the sale conversation:
Representations and warranties insurance (covers buyer claims against the seller for breach of certain representations)
Tax liability insurance (covers specific tax positions that may be challenged post-closing)
Key-person life insurance (relevant when seller financing or earnouts depend on continued seller involvement)
Director and officer liability insurance for the seller's pre-sale activities
The insurance side of a business sale is highly fact-specific and not relevant in every transaction, but where it is relevant, it benefits from specialist input rather than from the seller's general insurance broker.
The coordination problem
Each of the six categories has a defined contribution. The harder problem is coordinating them so that decisions get made with input from all the relevant categories, not just the one in the room when the question comes up.
Patterns that tend to support good coordination:
A designated quarterback. One advisor (often transaction counsel, sometimes the wealth advisor) takes responsibility for ensuring cross-advisor questions are routed appropriately. Without a quarterback, decisions tend to fragment.
Regular all-hands check-ins. Weekly or biweekly conversations with the relevant advisors keep everyone aware of where the transaction stands. Email threads alone are usually not enough.
Shared document workspace. A common location where transaction documents, analyses, and notes live. Avoids version-control problems and missed information.
Defined escalation path. When cross-advisor disagreements arise (and they do), a defined process for resolving them is faster than ad hoc negotiation each time.
The cost of coordination overhead is real but typically smaller than the cost of decisions made without appropriate cross-advisor input. The longer educational overview on coordinating advisors during a business sale is available as part of the broader educational materials on business sale planning.
Topics to raise at the team-assembly stage
Once the categories are identified and individual advisors are being evaluated, several topics benefit from raising at the team-assembly stage:
How do the advisors plan to coordinate with each other?
What does the fee structure look like in aggregate (not just per advisor)?
Who is the primary point of contact on the seller's side?
What does the realistic timeline look like for a transaction of this scope?
What are the major risk categories that have come up in similar prior transactions?
These conversations often happen informally if at all. Making them explicit upfront reduces the chance of surprises later.
A few external references
IRS general taxpayer resources
SEC investor education
FINRA BrokerCheck
AICPA professional resources
NAPFA fee-only advisor directory
What this educational guide is and is not
This is an educational overview of advisor categories that often appear in business sale planning. It is not advice on which specific advisors any seller should hire, what fee arrangements to negotiate, or how to structure any specific transaction. Every business sale is different and the right team composition varies. The categories above are a starting point for the conversations that ultimately produce the team.
Section 280G Parachute Payment Issues in Business Sales: An Educational Overview
Section 280G of the Internal Revenue Code is one of the less-discussed but more consequential tax provisions that can affect compensation arrangements in a business sale. When a corporation undergoes a change in control, certain compensation payments to "disqualified individuals" (typically senior executives, certain shareholders, and other highly-compensated employees) can become subject to a 20 percent excise tax on the recipient and a loss of corporate deduction for the paying company, if the payments exceed defined thresholds.
This is an educational overview of how the rules generally work and what topics to raise with qualified tax counsel and transaction counsel during a business sale. None of what follows is tax advice. Application of Section 280G to any specific transaction depends on facts that benefit from professional analysis.
What Section 280G generally covers
In broad terms, Section 280G applies when:
The entity being sold (or undergoing a change in control) is a corporation (with specific rules for S-corporations and small business exceptions)
Compensation payments to "disqualified individuals" exceed three times the individual's "base amount" (generally average annualized W-2 compensation over a five-year lookback)
The excess payments are "contingent on" the change in control
When all three conditions are met, the excess over the base amount is treated as "excess parachute payments" subject to a 20 percent excise tax on the recipient and a non-deductible expense to the corporation.
The mechanics are complex. The compensation amounts that count toward the threshold include not just retention bonuses but also acceleration of equity vesting, severance, and various other payments triggered by or made in connection with the change in control. Determining the base amount requires careful review of the affected individual's compensation history.
Why this often surprises people
Several aspects of Section 280G tend to surprise people who encounter the rules for the first time:
The 3x threshold is on the base amount, not on the change-in-control payments. A modest base amount and substantial change-in-control payments combined can trigger 280G even when the change-in-control payments alone are not particularly large in absolute terms.
The excise tax is on the entire excess over the base amount, not just the excess over the 3x threshold. A payment that exceeds the 3x threshold by even a small amount can trigger the excise tax on a much larger portion of the total.
The corporate deduction loss compounds the cost. The selling corporation loses the deduction for the excess parachute payments, which effectively increases the cost of the payments by the corporate tax rate. For C-corporations this is a meaningful additional cost.
Some payments that look unrelated to the transaction may still count. Compensation arrangements that pre-date the deal but have terms that are accelerated or affected by the change in control can be drawn into the 280G calculation.
The "shareholder approval" exception
There is a meaningful exception for certain corporations (generally those not publicly traded) where excess parachute payments can be approved by shareholders holding more than 75 percent of the voting power, after appropriate disclosure. Where available, this exception can eliminate the 280G consequences entirely. The mechanics of the approval process are specific: the disclosure must meet defined requirements, the voting must occur before the payment is made, and the affected individuals generally cannot vote.
For privately held companies considering a sale, the question of whether the 280G shareholder approval mechanism is available, and whether it makes sense to use it, is often a key topic for tax counsel input early in the transaction.
Topics to raise with tax counsel during sale planning
When sale planning is in process, several topics about Section 280G benefit from review with tax counsel:
Whether the entity being sold is structured in a way that triggers Section 280G consideration at all
Whether the proposed compensation arrangements would create 280G exposure absent mitigation
Whether the shareholder approval exception is available, and what disclosure and voting mechanics would be required
Whether alternative compensation structures (cash vs equity, timing modifications, allocation across pre- and post-transaction periods) would change the 280G calculation
Whether the proposed retention agreements interact with existing change-in-control provisions in employment or equity agreements
Whether 280G insurance (sometimes offered in larger transactions) is appropriate
These are inherently fact-specific questions. The general framework is documented in IRS regulations but application to a specific transaction requires careful professional analysis.
Topics to raise with the affected individuals
For senior executives who may be affected by Section 280G, several topics benefit from review with their personal tax advisors:
Whether the affected individual is likely to be a "disqualified individual" under the rules
The likely base amount calculation given the individual's compensation history
Whether existing compensation arrangements (equity grants, deferred compensation, severance provisions) contribute to the 280G calculation
The personal tax impact of the 20 percent excise tax if triggered
Whether any provisions in employment agreements provide for gross-up payments (these have become less common but still appear in older agreements)
Whether any modifications to existing arrangements can reduce 280G exposure before the transaction closes
The interaction between the individual's tax planning and the corporate-level mechanics often benefits from coordination between the individual's tax advisor and the corporation's tax counsel.
Why this is sometimes addressed late
In many sale processes, Section 280G analysis happens later than ideal. Several reasons:
The 280G calculation requires details (final compensation amounts, transaction structure, base amount calculations) that are not finalized until late in the process
The shareholder approval mechanism requires disclosure and voting that is often left until the final weeks
Affected individuals may not be brought into the planning conversation until retention agreements are being finalized
Tax counsel may not be engaged until the transaction is well underway
When 280G analysis is delayed, the options for mitigation narrow. Some modifications that would have reduced exposure earlier in the process are no longer feasible by the time the analysis is run. This is one of the topics where earlier advisor engagement tends to produce better outcomes.
For a broader educational overview of management retention topics that often arise in business sales (including the 280G considerations that intersect with retention package design), this educational guide on management retention agreements provides additional context as part of the educational materials at https://capivise.com.
A few external references
For readers wanting to read the underlying regulatory and educational materials directly:
The IRS general taxpayer resources cover the underlying tax framework
The SEC investor education portal covers broader investor protection topics
The AICPA professional resources cover accounting and tax topics relevant to transaction structuring
The FINRA BrokerCheck tool is the standard way to verify a financial professional's credentials
The NAPFA fee-only advisor directory is one resource for identifying fee-only advisors
The Treasury Department regulations contain the underlying detailed rules
These are general educational references. Application to any specific transaction or compensation arrangement benefits from qualified tax counsel and other professional input tailored to the specifics.
What this educational overview is and is not
This is an educational overview of how Section 280G generally functions and what topics tend to surface during business sale planning. It is not tax advice. It is not legal advice. It does not recommend any specific compensation structure, mitigation approach, or shareholder approval mechanism for any specific transaction.
Application of Section 280G is fact-intensive, and the rules have been clarified, modified, and interpreted by tax authorities over many years. Anyone involved in a transaction where the rules may apply benefits from working with qualified tax counsel who can analyze the specific facts and provide advice tailored to the situation.
A note on planning ahead
The topics in this piece are easier to address with advisor input than to address mid-transaction under time pressure. For business owners considering a future sale, raising the Section 280G topic with tax counsel during pre-sale planning (rather than during the transaction itself) often produces more flexibility. Pre-sale modifications to compensation structures, equity vesting schedules, and severance provisions can sometimes meaningfully change the 280G calculus by the time the transaction occurs.
This is one of several pre-sale planning topics where early advisor engagement tends to pay off. The broader category of pre-sale planning encompasses tax structuring, estate planning, advisor team assembly, and operational preparation. Each benefits from being addressed before the transaction is in motion rather than during it.
Six LOI-Stage Questions to Raise With Your Tax Advisor
The tax advisor is sometimes brought into a business sale process later than the lawyer and the financial advisor, often because owners think of taxes as a closing-time topic rather than a deal-structuring one. By the time the LOI is signed, however, many of the most consequential tax-planning decisions are already constrained by the structure committed to in the document.
This article is an educational walkthrough of six questions worth raising with your tax advisor at the LOI stage of a private business sale. It does not provide tax, legal, accounting, or financial advice; specific decisions should be reviewed with appropriately licensed professionals familiar with the deal.
Photo by Alexey Demidov on Pexels
1. Asset sale or stock sale?
The single most consequential structural decision in many private-company sales is whether the transaction is structured as an asset sale or a stock sale (or a merger that achieves equivalent treatment). The LOI typically commits to one structure or the other.
Topics worth raising with the tax advisor:
What are the tax consequences of an asset sale vs a stock sale for the specific entity structure (C corporation, S corporation, LLC, partnership)?
Is the proposed structure favorable or unfavorable for the seller's tax situation?
Are there alternative structures (F reorganization, taxable Section 338(h)(10) election) that produce different consequences?
If the proposed structure is unfavorable, is renegotiating to a different structure feasible at this stage?
The Internal Revenue Service guidance provides general reference material on the federal tax treatment of business sales, but the specific application to a given deal requires a qualified tax advisor's review.
2. How is the purchase price allocated across asset categories?
In an asset sale, the buyer and seller allocate the purchase price across categories of assets (inventory, accounts receivable, equipment, real property, goodwill, intangibles, non-compete agreements). The allocation has different tax consequences for each side.
Topics to clarify:
How is the allocation determined? (Negotiated, formula-driven, set by appraisal.)
What allocation does the LOI commit to, if any?
What allocation is most favorable for the seller's tax situation?
How does the allocation interact with Section 1060 reporting requirements?
Are there allocation strategies that the LOI's language allows for or forecloses?
The allocation is one of the most consequential tax topics in an asset sale and is sometimes negotiated separately from the headline purchase price.
3. How will contingent payment components be taxed?
If the deal includes earnouts, escrows, or holdbacks, each has its own tax treatment with respect to timing of income recognition.
Topics to clarify:
How is the earnout taxed? (Installment method, deferred reporting, ordinary income vs capital gain treatment.)
How are escrow funds taxed? (At closing, when released, depending on contingency.)
How are holdback amounts taxed?
Are there interest imputation rules that apply to delayed payments?
How does the tax treatment of each component interact with the seller's overall tax planning?
These questions are particularly important because the timing of income recognition affects the seller's tax liability in each year. A poorly understood earnout can produce surprises three or four years post-closing.
4. Are there state and local tax considerations the LOI affects?
State and local tax exposure can be significant in a private business sale, particularly for multi-state operations.
Topics to clarify:
What is the seller's state tax exposure under the proposed structure?
Are there state-level elections that need to be made before closing? (Sales tax, transfer tax, withholding obligations.)
Does the seller's state of residence affect the after-tax outcome?
Are there state-level audit risks tied to the deal structure?
How do multi-state operations affect the tax planning?
State considerations are often less visible than federal in the LOI discussion but can affect the after-tax outcome materially.
Photo by fauxels on Pexels
5. Does the LOI affect any tax-advantaged structures the seller already has?
Owners with Section 1202 qualified small business stock, Section 1045 rollover opportunities, qualified opportunity zone investments, or other tax-advantaged structures need to confirm that the LOI's structure preserves the benefits.
Topics to clarify:
Does the proposed structure preserve Section 1202 eligibility, if applicable?
Are there timing constraints on Section 1045 rollovers that interact with the closing date?
Do existing qualified opportunity zone investments need to be considered?
Are there estate planning structures (defective grantor trusts, GRATs, family LLCs) that the deal interacts with?
Are there charitable planning structures (CRT, CLT, donor-advised funds) that should be set up before signing the LOI?
These structures often have timing and structural requirements that constrain what the LOI can commit to without inadvertently disqualifying the seller from the benefit.
6. What tax-planning steps should happen before signing vs after?
Some tax-planning steps need to happen before the LOI is signed; others should happen during the exclusivity period; others happen at or after closing.
Topics to clarify:
Are there charitable contributions that should happen before signing?
Are there entity restructurings (F reorganizations, drop-down transactions, internal reorganizations) that should happen before signing?
Should the seller change state of residence before signing?
Should specific assets be carved out or carved in before signing?
What is the cadence of tax-planning steps across the exclusivity period?
The sequencing matters because some steps cannot be done effectively after the LOI is signed (or in some cases, after the deal is publicly known). The tax advisor's view on what should happen first is the right input at this stage.
The role of broader advisor coordination
The tax advisor's input at the LOI stage interacts with the lawyer's review of the document language and the financial advisor's view of the after-close picture. The lawyer sees the structure as a legal document; the tax advisor sees the same structure as a set of tax consequences; the financial advisor sees the same structure as a stream of after-tax proceeds.
Coordinating across the three is the pattern that produces an LOI the seller can sign with confidence. The team at Capivise is one educational resource where owners can review how advisor coordination typically works in an exit context.
Common questions sellers ask about the tax review
A few questions that consistently come up when sellers first engage their tax advisor at the LOI stage:
Is it too early to involve the tax advisor? No. The LOI stage is the right time. Decisions made in the LOI are difficult to unwind in the definitive agreement, and many tax-planning steps have lead times that make starting later impractical.
Will the tax review delay the LOI signing? A focused tax review can be done in a few business days for most deals. The delay is usually small relative to the benefit of getting the structural decisions right.
Can the buyer's structural preferences be renegotiated? Sometimes. The buyer may prefer a stock sale and the seller may prefer an asset sale (or vice versa). The structural choice is often a negotiating point at the LOI stage; once committed, harder to revisit.
What if the tax advisor surfaces a problem the lawyer hasn't flagged? This is exactly why both perspectives are needed. The tax advisor's view on structure is different from the lawyer's, and a problem flagged by one is often invisible to the other.
Educational resources worth reviewing
A few publicly available references:
The Internal Revenue Service for general federal tax guidance.
The American Bar Association's Business Law Section for accessible M&A practice material.
The SEC's investor education hub for general principles of securities transactions.
The Capivise blog for educational articles on advisor coordination across an exit.
These resources are educational and do not replace conversations with a qualified tax advisor familiar with the specific deal.
The longer read on the LOI conversation
This article focuses on the tax advisor's role specifically. The broader conversation about the LOI's full set of provisions, the role of counsel and the financial advisor, and the patterns of advisor coordination across the document sits in a longer guide on the Letter of Intent in a business sale and the topics to clarify with advisors before signing.
The recurring pattern: the tax advisor's input is most useful before the LOI is signed, not after. By the time the document is signed, many of the structural decisions are constrained. Topics worth raising with the tax advisor at this stage are the ones that determine the after-tax outcome of the deal.
Conditions to Closing in a Business Sale LOI: Topics to Clarify
The conditions-to-closing section of a letter of intent (LOI) is often glossed over in early review because the language tends to be high-level and standard-looking. The standard-looking nature is what makes it risky. Each condition listed in the LOI becomes an exit lane for the buyer if the condition is not satisfied; the breadth of the list and the precision of the definitions together determine how much exposure the seller has during the exclusivity period.
This article is an educational overview of the conditions-to-closing topics worth raising with your transaction counsel before signing. It does not provide legal, tax, accounting, or financial advice; specific decisions should be reviewed with appropriately licensed professionals familiar with the deal.
Photo by Markus Spiske on Pexels
What the conditions section typically covers
A typical conditions-to-closing list in a private-company LOI will include some or all of:
Satisfactory completion of due diligence by the buyer.
Absence of material adverse change in the seller's business between signing and closing.
Receipt of any required regulatory approvals.
Receipt of necessary third-party consents (landlords, key customers, lenders).
Buyer financing (if the deal is financed by external sources).
Receipt of audited or reviewed financial statements covering the relevant period.
Satisfactory employment arrangements with key employees.
Receipt of legal opinions on specific topics.
No pending litigation that affects the transaction.
Each item on the list looks reasonable in isolation. The question is how each is defined and how broad the buyer's discretion is in determining whether the condition is satisfied.
Topics to clarify about each condition with counsel
For each condition listed, the educational topics worth raising:
Who decides whether the condition is satisfied? A buyer-friendly version gives the buyer broad discretion ("the buyer's satisfaction in its sole discretion"). A more balanced version uses a reasonableness standard ("the buyer's reasonable satisfaction"). The standard meaningfully affects the seller's exposure.
What specifically is being conditioned? "Satisfactory completion of due diligence" is the broadest possible formulation. A tighter version might list specific diligence categories or specific findings that would trigger walk-away. The breadth of the language matters.
Is the condition mutual or one-sided? Most conditions in an LOI are buyer-side; a few may be mutual (regulatory approval) or seller-side (receipt of board approval). Identifying which apply to which side clarifies the symmetry of the deal.
Is there a cure period? Some conditions include a window during which the seller can address the issue before the buyer can walk. Others do not. The cure period structure affects the practical importance of any condition.
Is the condition objective or subjective? "Receipt of audited financial statements" is objective (the statements exist or they do not). "Absence of material adverse change" is subjective (reasonable people can disagree). Subjective conditions give the buyer more flexibility and the seller less certainty.
Specific conditions worth a closer read
A few conditions that consistently warrant attention:
Material adverse change. The MAC clause is one of the most heavily negotiated provisions in private M&A. The LOI may sketch a definition that becomes the negotiating baseline for the definitive agreement. Topics to clarify with counsel include what specifically triggers a MAC (revenue decline, customer loss, regulatory change), what is excluded (industry-wide events, macroeconomic conditions, COVID-style disruptions), and what the threshold of materiality is.
Buyer financing. If the buyer is relying on third-party financing, the LOI may make the deal contingent on the financing's availability. Topics to clarify: how firm is the buyer's financing commitment, what specific financing is contemplated, and what happens if the financing terms change.
Third-party consents. Customer contracts, landlord agreements, and lender consents may be required to close. The LOI may make the deal contingent on receiving these. Topics to clarify: who is responsible for obtaining each consent, what is the timeline, and what happens if a consent is denied or delayed.
Key employee retention. The LOI may make the deal contingent on key employees signing new employment or non-compete agreements. Topics to clarify: which employees are "key," what specific terms must be agreed, and what happens if an employee declines.
Due diligence completion. "Satisfactory completion of due diligence" is the broadest condition. Topics to clarify: what specific diligence the buyer plans to conduct, how the satisfaction standard is determined, and what happens if diligence surfaces issues.
Topics to clarify with the tax advisor
Even though conditions to closing are primarily a legal topic, the tax advisor has views on a few:
Tax-related conditions. Some LOIs make the deal contingent on receipt of specific tax opinions or rulings. The tax advisor's view on whether these conditions are appropriate matters.
Conditions affecting the deal structure. If a condition requires the parties to change the deal structure (for example, restructuring as an asset sale instead of a stock sale), the tax consequences may shift. The tax advisor can flag the implications.
Conditions affecting purchase price allocation. If conditions tied to specific asset categories (real property, intellectual property, inventory) might shift the allocation, the tax consequences may change.
Photo by Nic Wood on Pexels
Topics to clarify with the financial advisor
The financial advisor's view on conditions to closing is primarily about timing:
Closing date certainty. Each condition introduces uncertainty about when (or whether) closing will occur. The financial advisor can help the seller think through how the timing uncertainty affects liquidity planning, reinvestment scenarios, and the after-close picture.
Earnout interaction. If the deal includes an earnout, the closing date and the earnout measurement period interact. Conditions that push closing later may shift the earnout window in ways that affect the seller's expected proceeds.
Escrow and holdback timing. Conditions tied to specific events (regulatory approval, third-party consents) may affect when escrow or holdback periods begin running. The financial advisor's view on the implications matters.
Common patterns worth understanding
A few patterns that show up consistently in conditions-to-closing language:
Buyer "outs" can be one-sided. Many LOIs include conditions that give the buyer the right to walk without giving the seller a corresponding right. Symmetry is a negotiating point.
Subjective conditions favor the side that controls them. A condition tied to the buyer's "satisfaction" gives the buyer significant flexibility. Renegotiating to "reasonable satisfaction" or to objective criteria is often possible at the LOI stage and harder later.
Cure periods matter more than the condition's existence. A condition with a 30-day cure period and a defined remediation process is much less risky than the same condition with no cure period.
Specificity reduces disputes. A condition listing specific items the buyer will review is much less prone to dispute than a generic "satisfactory diligence" condition. Specificity is a seller-side ask that counsel can help negotiate.
The role of advisor coordination
Each of the topics above sits at the intersection of legal, tax, and financial considerations. Counsel handles the language; the tax advisor flags structural implications; the financial advisor flags timing and liquidity implications. Coordinating across the three before signing the LOI is the pattern that produces a conditions section the seller can live with.
An advisor coordination resource like Capivise is one place where owners can review the categories of advisor specialty involved in a business sale and the types of questions raised in each.
Educational resources worth reviewing
A few publicly available references:
The American Bar Association's Business Law Section for accessible M&A practice material.
The SEC's investor education hub for general principles of securities transactions.
The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis economic research portal for macroeconomic context.
The Capivise homepage for educational material on exit-related advisor coordination.
These resources are educational and do not replace conversations with licensed counsel or qualified advisors.
The longer read on the LOI as a whole
This article focuses on the conditions-to-closing section. The broader conversation about the LOI as a stage in the transaction, the role of advisor coordination, and the topics worth raising with each advisor specialty before signing sits in a longer guide on the Letter of Intent in a business sale and the topics to clarify with advisors before signing.
The conditions section often gets less attention than the price and structure sections at the LOI stage, and pays for it later. Each condition is a potential exit lane for the buyer. Understanding the breadth and definition of each, and coordinating with counsel and the broader advisor team before signing, is the discipline that produces a closing-conditions section the seller is willing to commit to.
How to Coordinate Tax, Legal, and Accounting Advisors on the Escrow Provisions of a Business Sale
The escrow provisions of a business sale agreement sit at the intersection of legal language, tax treatment, and accounting mechanics. Coordinating across the three advisor disciplines is one of the higher-leverage tasks in the deal preparation, and one of the most common places where coordination breaks down.
This is an educational step-by-step on how to run that coordination in practice. It does not provide tax, legal, accounting, or financial advice. Decisions about your specific transaction should be reviewed with appropriately licensed professionals familiar with your situation.
Step 1: Map the escrow terms to the three disciplines
Before the coordination meeting, build a one-page map showing which provisions of the escrow are primarily legal, primarily tax, and primarily accounting:
Primarily legal:
Indemnification language and the definition of "loss"
Survival periods for representations and warranties
The claim and dispute process
Recourse structure (sole versus partial)
The role of representation and warranty insurance, if any
Primarily tax:
Treatment of the escrowed funds under IRS installment-sale rules, if applicable
Tax character of interest earned during the hold period
Timing of income recognition for the seller
State and local tax implications
Tax treatment of the eventual release
Primarily accounting:
Interaction with the working capital adjustment
Treatment of any specific contingent liabilities reflected in the escrow
Documentation requirements during the hold period
Mechanics of the eventual release calculation
The map is not perfect - every column has overlap with the other two - but it helps each advisor see where their work overlaps with the other disciplines.
Step 2: Run the initial review with each advisor separately
Before the coordinated session, give each advisor time to review the documents with their discipline-specific lens. The instructions are different per advisor:
Transaction counsel: Review the indemnification and escrow language for completeness and clarity. Flag any provisions that diverge from standard practice in recent comparable deals. Identify specific terms where the buyer's draft puts the seller at a disadvantage.
Tax advisor: Model the tax treatment of the escrowed funds under the current structure. Identify any alternative structures that might produce a better after-tax outcome. Flag any provisions where the tax treatment is unclear.
Accounting team: Trace the interaction between the escrow, the working capital adjustment, and any specific contingent liabilities. Identify any provisions where the documentation requirements are heavier than they need to be. Flag any mismatches between the deal accounting and the escrow mechanics.
Give each advisor a week or so to do this work. Then convene.
Step 3: Run the coordinated session
The coordinated session is the highest-leverage hour or two of the deal preparation. The goal is for each advisor to react to the others' input and surface the cross-discipline issues that one-on-one reviews would miss.
Structure for the session:
Open with the legal review (transaction counsel walks through their findings)
Tax advisor responds with any tax implications of the legal structure as drafted
Accounting team responds with any accounting mechanics implications
Round 2: each advisor revises their findings based on the others' input
Round 3: alignment on the specific terms to negotiate with the buyer
The session works best when the seller (or a financial planner representing the seller) is present to react to the implications for the post-close financial plan. Without the seller's voice, the advisors can optimize for elegance over practical outcome.
Step 4: Document the joint decisions
The output of the coordinated session is a short document listing:
The terms the seller will negotiate to change
The fallback positions if the buyer pushes back
The terms the seller is willing to accept as drafted
The cross-discipline implications of any structural changes under consideration
Without this document, the work of the coordinated session is lost in translation between sessions. Transaction counsel needs to know what the seller will and will not accept when they are at the table with the buyer's counsel.
Step 5: Plan the second round
Most deals require more than one coordinated session. The first surfaces the issues; the second confirms the resolution after the buyer has responded to the proposed changes.
Topics to plan for the second session:
Which provisions the buyer accepted, rejected, or counter-proposed
The tax and accounting implications of the counter-proposals
Whether any structural changes have downstream effects on other provisions
The timeline to signing
The second session is shorter than the first - usually 30 to 45 minutes - if the first one was effective. If it is longer than that, the first session probably did not fully surface the issues.
Step 6: Hand off to post-close monitoring
The escrow review does not end at signing. The seller needs to track the escrow's status over the hold period, respond to any claims, and document the release at the end. Topics to clarify during the coordinated review:
Who at the company or on the advisor team owns the post-close monitoring
The cadence for reviewing any claim activity
The process for responding to claim notices
The documentation needed for the eventual release
Without explicit ownership, the monitoring sometimes lapses, and sellers discover claims at the end of the hold period that have been pending for months. The SEC's investor education portal and similar regulatory resources cover general background on the regulatory framework around private-company transactions for sellers who are themselves accredited investors.
What goes wrong without coordination
A few common failure modes when the coordination does not happen:
Tax-inefficient structures get locked in. The legal team optimizes for clear indemnification language, the accounting team optimizes for clean working capital mechanics, and neither has time to think about the tax timing. The seller signs an agreement that produces a worse after-tax outcome than necessary.
Working capital and escrow interact unexpectedly. The working capital adjustment depletes the escrow because no one mapped the interaction. The seller is surprised by how much of the escrow is gone before the hold period even starts.
Specific indemnities get rolled into the general fund. A specific environmental or tax indemnity that should have been a separate sub-escrow gets bundled into the general escrow. The seller's exposure on the general provisions ends up larger than intended.
Post-close monitoring lapses. No advisor is explicitly responsible for tracking the escrow, claim activity goes unmonitored, and the release at the end of the hold period is partial because of unresolved claims that no one was watching.
How this fits into the broader sale preparation
The escrow coordination is one element of a broader sale preparation effort that also covers the purchase price structure, the working capital target, any earnouts, employment agreements, and the seller's post-close financial plan. Background on the broader topics is at https://capivise.com, and the fuller article specifically on escrow holdback topics is at https://capivise.com/blog/escrow-holdback-after-business-sale-topics-clarify-advisors. The American Bar Association M&A resources cover the legal-side standards in more depth.
This is general background, not advice
The steps above are educational, intended to help business owners frame the coordination with their advisor team. They are not investment, tax, legal, accounting, or financial advice. Every decision about your specific transaction should be reviewed with appropriately licensed professionals familiar with your jurisdiction, deal structure, and personal financial circumstances.
Sellers who run the coordination as a structured process during the negotiation, rather than treating each advisor's input in isolation, tend to end up with terms that match their goals across all three disciplines. The structure is the leverage.