Article

Tax due diligence in carve-out transactions

Protecting deal value through focused tax diligence

August 26, 2026
#
Federal tax Income & franchise tax Business tax M&A tax services

Executive summary

How informed tax diligence drives smarter deals

Carve-out transactions move fast, and tax due diligence often is deprioritized in the push to close the transaction. That can be a costly mistake. For executive leadership and private equity sponsors, tax diligence is not just a compliance exercise. Understanding the tax profile of a carve-out is crucial to protecting value, reducing risk, and structuring the deal for long-term success.

Although parties to deals increasingly rely on tax insurance to help limit downside exposure, it is not a substitute for a thorough review. When done thoughtfully, diligence uncovers opportunities and flags issues before they become costly surprises.

In this article, we’ll walk through why tax diligence matters, what to look for, and how the right insights can give you confidence at the negotiating table.

The strategic value of tax due diligence in carve-outs

Tax due diligence plays a different role in carve outs than in traditional acquisitions. The business being sold has often operated for years inside a larger corporate group, with shared systems, intercompany arrangements, and historical restructuring that may not be fully visible at first glance.

For buyers, diligence helps confirm whether expected tax benefits, such as net operating losses (NOLs) or interest deductions, are actually usable and whether there are hidden exposures that could impact both pre- and post-acquisition tax filings.

For sellers, diligence provides clarity around what tax attributes are truly being delivered with the business and helps avoid last minute surprises that can disrupt pricing or delay closing.

In both cases, diligence informs deal structure, purchase price adjustments, escrows, and indemnities—directly affecting transaction economics.

Inside the diligence process: What to expect

A robust diligence process is collaborative and data driven. Here’s what executive teams generally should expect from those conducting due diligence:

  1. Data Collection: Gather historical tax returns, past acquisition agreements, schedules of tax attributes, and documentation of prior tax positions.
  2. Attribute Analysis: Assess what tax attributes exist (e.g., NOLs, credits, asset basis, etc.) and whether there are limits to their use. 
  3. Exposure Identification: Review ongoing audits, uncertain tax positions, and any potential liabilities across all tax areas that could transfer to the buyer.
  4. Structuring: Use these insights to inform deal structure, purchase price adjustments, indemnities, and integration plans post-close.

A cautionary tale: The perils of scoped-down diligence

To illustrate the risks of insufficient diligence, consider the following real-world scenario:

A private equity firm (Buyer) acquired a carved-out business unit from a large multinational corporation (Seller) for $200 million. It was a classic carve-out deal and was structured as an asset purchase, which Buyer believed would largely insulate it from Seller’s historical tax exposures. The target business had substantial U.S. operations, but a relatively small footprint across several foreign jurisdictions. Seller had undergone an internal restructuring prior to the carve-out.

To expedite the deal and reduce costs, Buyer's executive team decided to limit the scope of tax due diligence. They focused heavily on U.S. federal and state tax matters, assuming the international activity was immaterial. Believing the risk was low, they agreed to a general tax indemnity from Seller, capped by a $1 million escrow.

Several months after the transaction closed, Buyer's new finance team began integrating the foreign operations. They discovered that, as part of the pre-carve-out internal restructuring, Seller had eliminated substantial intercompany account balances between the foreign entities that Buyer had acquired and entities that Seller had retained.

This "cleanup" of intercompany accounts, which seemed like a simple accounting entry, had triggered significant, unforeseen tax consequences in the respective countries. Foreign tax authorities deemed the elimination of these balances to constitute constructive dividends or capital contributions, resulting in an unexpected tax liability of $5 million for withholding taxes and other local indirect taxes.

Because Buyer had not identified this specific risk during its limited diligence, this risk was not carved out for special treatment in the purchase agreement. Buyer’s only recourse was the general tax indemnity, which was capped at $1 million.

While Buyer was able to recover $1 million from the escrow, it was left responsible for the remaining $4 million in tax liabilities. The assumption that an asset purchase and a "small" international presence mitigated risk proved to be a multimillion-dollar mistake. While the $4 million liability was not large in the context of the overall deal, this multimillion-dollar liability discovered post-transaction constituted a material sunk cost to Buyer.

Key diligence focus areas for executives

Here are some key due diligence areas in carve-outs:

Legacy transactions and tax attribute limitations

Past M&A activity can restrict the use of valuable tax attributes. Review prior deals, company activity, relevant studies and elections (such as section 338(h)(10) elections) that could affect the attributes that are truly available to the buyer. An example is an ownership change, which, under the section 382 NOL rules, can limit NOL utilization after an ownership change.

State and local tax liabilities

Multistate operations add complexity. For example, nexus rules and filing requirements differ from state to state, and some states do not follow federal tax treatment in various tax matters. Analyze where the business is exposed, how state taxes are calculated and whether there are any compliance gaps.

International and cross-border risks

U.S. shareholders with foreign subsidiaries may owe U.S. tax on certain foreign earnings, even if profits stay offshore. Large companies making deductible payments to related foreign entities could be subject to the base erosion and anti-abuse tax (BEAT). Even limited foreign operations can create exposure through intercompany transactions, withholding taxes and local indirect taxes, particularly following internal reorganizations. Review the seller’s foreign structure, intercompany payments and related exposures.

Aggressive or uncertain tax positions

Positions taken on historical returns, such as uncertain tax positions or aggressive transfer pricing, can result in future liabilities if challenged by the IRS or other authorities. Review tax reserves, ongoing and/or historical audits, and correspondence with tax agencies.

Non-income-based taxes and other risks
  • Sales and use tax: Online sales and shifting nexus rules can create unexpected liabilities if not properly addressed.

  • Payroll and withholding: Worker misclassification or complex payroll practices across multiple states can trigger penalties.

  • Deferred compensation (sections 409A and 280G): Ensure that change-in-control and deferred compensation plans meet requirements to avoid penalties and lost deductions.

  • Property tax: Confirm that all property is accurately assessed and any disputes are resolved.

  • Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act: For deals with U.S. real estate and foreign investors, withholding and reporting obligations may apply.

  • Value-added tax and indirect taxes: For international carve-outs, review compliance with value-added and similar taxes.

Past M&A activity can restrict the use of valuable tax attributes. Review prior deals, company activity, relevant studies and elections (such as section 338(h)(10) elections) that could affect the attributes that are truly available to the buyer. An example is an ownership change, which, under the section 382 NOL rules, can limit NOL utilization after an ownership change.

Multistate operations add complexity. For example, nexus rules and filing requirements differ from state to state, and some states do not follow federal tax treatment in various tax matters. Analyze where the business is exposed, how state taxes are calculated and whether there are any compliance gaps.

U.S. shareholders with foreign subsidiaries may owe U.S. tax on certain foreign earnings, even if profits stay offshore. Large companies making deductible payments to related foreign entities could be subject to the base erosion and anti-abuse tax (BEAT). Even limited foreign operations can create exposure through intercompany transactions, withholding taxes and local indirect taxes, particularly following internal reorganizations. Review the seller’s foreign structure, intercompany payments and related exposures.

Positions taken on historical returns, such as uncertain tax positions or aggressive transfer pricing, can result in future liabilities if challenged by the IRS or other authorities. Review tax reserves, ongoing and/or historical audits, and correspondence with tax agencies.

  • Sales and use tax: Online sales and shifting nexus rules can create unexpected liabilities if not properly addressed.

  • Payroll and withholding: Worker misclassification or complex payroll practices across multiple states can trigger penalties.

  • Deferred compensation (sections 409A and 280G): Ensure that change-in-control and deferred compensation plans meet requirements to avoid penalties and lost deductions.

  • Property tax: Confirm that all property is accurately assessed and any disputes are resolved.

  • Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act: For deals with U.S. real estate and foreign investors, withholding and reporting obligations may apply.

  • Value-added tax and indirect taxes: For international carve-outs, review compliance with value-added and similar taxes.

Information as a negotiation lever

The value of tax diligence lies not just in risk identification, but in how findings are used. Well supported diligence insights allow leadership teams to:

  • Negotiate purchase price adjustments or escrows tied to identified risks.
  • Allocate responsibility for known issues through targeted indemnities.
  • Make informed decisions between asset and stock structures.
  • Reduce reliance on broad, capped indemnities that may offer limited protection.

Once a transaction closes, negotiating leverage disappears. Diligence is the point at which value can still be preserved.

 

Conclusion: Tax due diligence creates strategic advantage in carve-outs

For C-level and private equity executives, tax due diligence is a strategic tool to protect and grow value. A well-executed diligence process, centered on transparency and collaboration, helps you anticipate risks, negotiate from a position of strength and deliver lasting value to your stakeholders. Tailoring diligence to the unique parameters of your transaction supports deal value long after closing.

RSM contributors

Related insights

Tax resources

Timely updates and analysis of changing federal, state and international tax policy and regulation.

Subscribe now

Stay updated on tax planning and regulatory topics that affect you and your business.

Washington National Tax

Experienced tax professionals track regulations, policies and legislation to help translate changes.