News: Brokerage

Post-closing seller liabilities when transferring a company - by Aaron Soury

Approximately eight out of ten businesses fail within the first 18 months; only 4% make it to $1 million in revenue and only 0.4% to $10 million, according to Forbes. Thus, for any business owner having succeeded among the 500,000+ businesses started each year and come to the point where they are ready to sell is an impressive feat. 

But, while managing and then transferring a business is a matter in itself, the life for the owner post-closing is quite a different challenge. 

Post-closing, life will be without the same challenges as running a daily business–even though it is “very lonely at the top” for many entrepreneurs. Short of re-investing into a new venture, gone is the need for great leadership over large teams. And often the skillset of a great business leader does not transfer to social settings or other tasks. Furthermore, the influx of a considerable amount of money can become quite isolating for some as well.

“Despite the aforementioned, many business owners are ‘burnt out’ after fifteen to twenty years,” said Achim Neumann, president of A Neumann & Associates, LLC, a N.J.-based mergers & acquisitions advisory firm, “and simply want ‘out.’ They often approach us to put a team of transaction attorneys, CPAs and M&A experts together to facilitate a business transfer in an efficient, confidential manner.”

One key consideration in every business transfer is the post-closing liability for the business seller. Naturally, every buyer will attempt not to assume any liabilities, and likewise for a seller who won’t want to continue carrying liabilities.

For example, this can include explicit liabilities such as product or service warranties, customer pre-payments, vendor payments, environmental or tax liabilities. Hidden liabilities exist as well, such as a negative change in customer structure, pending competitor pricing pressures, or endangered supply routes. 

It’s important that all knowable liabilities are clearly disclosed and allocated to the party assuming (or retaining) to avoid any post-closing litigation. Very often, such assignment is a negotiation of ‘give and take’ among the respective attorneys of either party during the Definitive Agreement formulation, but it can sometimes be resolved in the early stages during the deal negotiation phase by the M&A advisor (at much less cost).

Often, a part of the liabilities transfer can be avoided by structuring a deal as an asset sale, whereas the business buyer creates a new company acquiring clearly defined assets and liabilities.

Obviously, the lesser liability exposure a buyer has, the higher the deal price as any buyer will fold liability into a transaction price.

Sellers beware: A seasoned business buyer or investor–certainly a smart buyer’s transaction attorney–will most definitely identify liability risks during the due-diligence phase. 

Consciously not disclosing such liabilities, in an ultimately fraudulent transfer, will in all likelihood subsequently surface and result in litigation expenses at a multiple of the original liability expenses. If such a discovery was not already made in the due-diligence phase, there will be a complete loss of the seller’s credibility resulting in an aborted transaction by the buyer.

In short, post-closing, many facets in the life of a seller will already change, and litigation due to improper liability limitation should be one aspect to be avoided.

Aaron Soury is a managing director at A Neumann & Associates, LLC, Atlantic Highlands, N.J.

MORE FROM Brokerage

NYSCAR June 2026 president’s message - by Mercedes Brien

As I write this letter, we are preparing to be at the Annual Conference being held at the Rivers Casino, Schenectady, New York. I look forward to reporting on the conference in my next letter. We have some great courses coming up via Zoom. Please be sure to keep watch on upcoming courses by visiting nyscar.org/resources and tools/professional development.
READ ON THE GO
DIGITAL EDITIONS
Subscribe
Columns and Thought Leadership
Tri-state capital  migrates nationally amid  regulation pressure - by Reese Weaver

Tri-state capital migrates nationally amid regulation pressure - by Reese Weaver

New York tri-state multifamily investors are increasingly reallocating capital to less-regulated markets across the U.S. as rent control and legislative risk erode returns at home. With over 60% of New York City’s rental housing stock classified as rent-stabilized, the traditional value-add model — buying under-performing buildings,

The anticipated effect of Basel III and ISO 20022 implementation on commercial real estate - by Michael Zysman

The anticipated effect of Basel III and ISO 20022 implementation on commercial real estate - by Michael Zysman

July 1, 2025 is the deadline for US banks to begin to adopt Basel III banking standards and July 14, 2025 is the deadline for U.S. banks to adopt ISO 20022 messaging standards. Both will have a significant effect on the banking and commercial real estate (CRE) finance sectors.
A fresh start - by Shallini Mehra and Amit Doshi

A fresh start - by Shallini Mehra and Amit Doshi

For the past several years, the New York City multifamily housing market has been defined by disruption. The combined impact of the HSTPA rent laws and a sharply higher interest rate environment has fundamentally reduced
The death of the generic offering memorandum: What buyers expect in 2025 - by Kimberly Zar Bloorian

The death of the generic offering memorandum: What buyers expect in 2025 - by Kimberly Zar Bloorian

There was a time when an offering memorandum (OM) was pretty bare bones, some photos, a few bullet points on income, and a rent roll thrown in at the back. That used to get the job done. Not anymore. In 2025, buyers are sharper, faster, and more selective. They’re looking