Searchers! This one epic tax hack will save you $642,000 on your seller note!

searcher profile

April 30, 2025

by a searcher from University of Melbourne in Australia

Imagine closing a deal and saving $642,000 on your seller note—or at least $517,000 compared to a standard amortised note. That’s exactly what I’ve modelled using the Stanford Primer’s representative transaction (2021, p###-###-#### Here’s how you can maximise tax advantages on your seller note with a novel reweighting strategy. The Big Idea I have been thinking for a while about maximising the tax advantages on a Seller note. The premise being reweighting the principal and interest on a loan by guaranteeing targeted proceeds and reverse engineering a 30% mezzanine finance rate. You can start off with an amortised loan, simple interest annual rate or a one off simple interest on the sum of the loan and then transform the target proceeds to maximise the interest that can be claimed. I’ve built an Excel model to show you how, based on real-world assumptions. Our Assumptions I’m using the Stanford Primer’s example deal: Purchase Price: $15M EBITDA: $3M (5x multiple) Seller Note: $4.5M (30% of purchase price, 1.5x EBITDA multiple) Plus, insights from a previous Searchfunder thread: Interest Rate: 5% Loan Duration: 5 years Tax Rate: 21% (US corporate) Baseline Loan: Amortised Mezzanine Rate: 30% post-transformation (The maximum arms length rate achievable). Note: This assumes you can negotiate the seller note transformation with the seller, which may require some deal structuring finesse. How It Works Using Excel’s PMT function, the monthly payment for a $4.5M amortised seller note over 60 months at 5% is $84,###-###-#### Over 5 years, you pay $5,095,###-###-#### let’s call this target proceeds). Subtract the $4.5M principal, and you get $595,###-###-#### in interest###-###-#### % of proceeds). Here’s the magic: we reweight the principal and interest to maximize tax-deductible interest. We assign a 1.5 Mezzanine Weight (30% interest rate over 5 years) and a 1 Principal Weight, totalling 2.5 Total Weight. Scaling these into 25 units (15 mezzanine, 10 principal), we divide the target proceeds by 25, getting $203,###-###-#### per unit. This gives: Lifetime Principal: $2,038,###-###-#### units) Lifetime Mezzanine Interest: $3,057,###-###-#### units) These sum to the same $5,095,233.08, but now 60% of the payment is tax-deductible interest! Annually, that’s: Principal: $407,618.65 Mezzanine Interest: $611,427.97 The Payoff With a 21% US tax rate, the reweighted interest yields: Annual Tax Shield: $128,399.87 Lifetime Tax Shield: $641,999.37 (~$642,000) Compare this to a standard amortised note’s baseline tax shield of $124,###-###-#### The Relative Lifetime Cashflow Gain is $517,000.42 (~$517,000). That’s extra cash in your pocket to reinvest or distribute to investors! Why This Matters This model also accounts for: Deferral Periods: Relevant under new SBA rules for payment flexibility. EBITDA Penalties: A 10% EBITDA drop only affects the principal, keeping savings intact. Flexibility: Works with simple interest or one-off interest baselines (see my full model). Get the Model! I’ve shared the PDF here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GlwOlvvTBWkVrjKgX8LT0fZ33wgnkW5H/view?usp=drive_link Want the Excel model? Like and comment on this post, and I’ll send it your way. If this saves you an additional $517,000, I may ask for an intro to your investor network down the track? Lemme know what you think! Cheers! PS. I'm Australian. I'm not sure what other SBA rules apply. I am aware of deferral periods and I have built them into the model.
11
41
570
Replies
41
commentor profile
Reply by a professional
from Harvard University in Lynbrook, NY 11563, USA
As Mike pointed out, an intelligent seller is unlikely to accept anything remotely like this as he’d be turning capital gains into ordinary income (like 17% more assuming highest tax rates). Moreover, there are limitations on the deductibility of interest (30% of earnings) which apply even to small businesses if they have a significant amount of passive investment, which is common in ETA. His point on reduced goodwill is that money that is treated as interest is not capitalized and depreciated as goodwill so there is some loss of depreciation (though that in and of itself is much less than the tax savings from treating pmts as interest). It can be worth thinking through the impact of more interest v. less principal but it’s really a case by case evaluation and May often not be worth the brain damage because it’s the tail wagging the dog on a deal.
commentor profile
Reply by an intermediary
from The University of Chicago in Chicago, IL, USA
I don't know on what basis you split into 1.5 and 1. Why not 100 and 1? In the US, the end result is as-if the $4.5 M note with 5% interest is converted into a $2.038 M Note with 30% Interest to keep same PMT (My math shows it should be a $2.625 Note with 30% interest to keep same PMT). In the US there will be other tax issues: 1) Reducing Note principal by X and increasing interest by X (to keep the same PMT) converts seller's capital gain of X into ordinary income of X, which seller may not agree to. 2) Buyer's goodwill will reduce by X. So, the actual benefit will be lower.
commentor profile
+39 more replies.
Join the discussion