Most sellers negotiate the percentage. Few truly negotiate the investment.
In many M&A transactions, the discussion around rollover equity focuses on a single question: how much needs to be reinvested?
In our experience, that is rarely the right question.
The more important question is this: is the seller making a voluntary investment, or accepting an economic condition required to close the transaction?
The answer is not always obvious. And that is precisely why it deserves attention.
Rollover Has Ceased to Be an Exception
In private equity, growth equity and sector consolidation transactions, rollover equity has become a common practice.
The rationale is straightforward: the buyer wants founders and management teams to retain economic exposure to the future of the business. For the seller, the proposal can also be attractive. It allows them to monetise part of the value created while maintaining exposure to future growth.
Some of the market’s most successful value-creation stories have not occurred at the first exit. They have occurred at the second.
But one point should be kept in mind: rollover equity does not exist solely to benefit the seller. It also reduces the buyer’s cash outlay, facilitates transaction financing and allocates part of the future execution risk. There is nothing problematic about that, provided all parties understand exactly what they are negotiating.
What Usually Happens
In many processes, rollover equity first appears in the letter of intent: sometimes as a percentage, sometimes as a generic obligation to be developed at a later stage.
At that point, the conversation focuses on the amount. There is rarely the same level of discussion around much more relevant issues: in which entity the investment will be made, with what economic rights, with what liquidity mechanisms, under which law and with what tax treatment.
The paradox is clear. While the buyer conducts extensive due diligence on the company it is acquiring, the seller makes a new investment decision with significantly less information about the structure into which it is reinvesting.
And that is where problems often begin.
What Appears Late Always Costs More
When the definitive documentation arrives weeks or months later, rollover equity ceases to be an abstract idea and becomes a concrete structure. That is when the truly relevant issues emerge.
The corporate structure: the seller does not reinvest in the operating company it knows, but in a holding company created for the acquisition, with specific value-distribution rules.
The valuation: the price of the company being sold has been negotiated in great detail, but the same rigour is not always applied to the valuation of the entity into which the seller is reinvesting.
The tax position: the transaction is assumed to be tax-efficient, but the final structure may present limitations arising from the jurisdiction, the instrument received or the percentage interests involved.
The governance: drag-along, call options, liquidity mechanisms, good leaver, bad leaver. Everything that barely occupied a few lines in the LOI can end up having a much greater economic impact than expected.
Not because there is bad faith. Simply because the conversation happened too late.
The Asymmetry That Is Rarely Discussed
When a buyer acquires a company, it requires access to detailed information, conducts extensive due diligence and requests a broad set of representations and warranties.
When the seller reinvests, it does not always receive an equivalent level of protection regarding the structure in which it is investing.
Paradoxically, the party making a new investment often has less information, less ability to conduct diligence and less contractual protection than the party acquiring the company. The buyer controls the process. But it remains an asymmetry. And the larger the rollover, the more relevant it becomes.
Governing Law Matters More Than It Seems
It is not uncommon to discover that the investment will be documented under a law different from the seller’s own, and subject to courts or arbitration in another jurisdiction. When this happens, the analysis is no longer purely economic: information rights, minority protections and litigation costs can vary significantly between jurisdictions.
For that reason, governing law should not be treated as just another administrative clause. It forms part of the real value of the investment.
A right is worth only as much as the practical ability to enforce it.
The Question Every Seller Should Ask
Rollover equity is probably the only significant investment that many founders accept before having decided whether they truly want to make it.
If the seller received the full purchase price in cash today, would it invest exactly the same amount in that structure, at that valuation, with those rights and under that governing law?
If the answer is clearly yes, the rollover probably makes sense. If the answer requires too many explanations, there are probably still issues that need to be understood.
Our View
Rollover equity should not be negotiated as a consequence of the sale. It should be negotiated as an independent investment, discussing from the outset the recipient entity, the valuation, the tax structure, the economic rights, the governance, future liquidity and the applicable jurisdiction.
Not because all of those issues will become problems, but because they are precisely the issues that will determine whether the rollover ultimately becomes an opportunity or a source of frustration years later.
The difference is rarely in the percentage reinvested. It is usually in when the conversation actually began.
Key Takeaways
→ Rollover equity is not an ancillary clause of the SPA: it is a new investment.
→ The main risk is not usually the percentage reinvested, but the lack of information when it is negotiated.
→ Valuation, tax, governance, leaver provisions and jurisdiction should be discussed from the LOI stage.
→ The best transactions are not those with the least rollover, but those where all parties understand exactly what they are negotiating.
At Across Legal, we advise founders, management teams and investors on domestic and international M&A transactions. If you are assessing a reinvestment structure or preparing a sale, we would be pleased to share our experience.
↳ Discover more content in the section Insight.
↳ Do you want to stay up today about the sector related news? Follow us on LinkedIn.
