Capital + CFO Strategy

Debt covenants, borrowing capacity, capex timing and working capital needs all shape which tax moves make sense and when. A timing election or an entity change that looks favorable in isolation can conflict with a covenant test or a planned drawdown. We model tax decisions against the operating plan directly, so the two are never evaluated separately and reconciled after the fact.

That means asking, before a move is made, what it does to borrowing capacity next quarter, whether it changes a ratio a lender is watching, and whether the cash it frees up is actually available when the business needs it. A recommendation that answers only the tax question is an incomplete recommendation.

This connects to the same forward tax projection that anchors every strategy area we work through, part of the same process that starts every engagement. Cash flow, debt schedules and liquidity needs feed into that projection alongside income and entity and compensation design, so a proposed strategy gets tested against the whole financial picture before it gets recommended, not against tax figures pulled out on their own.

This work matters most when the stakes around cash are highest: a period of growth that is straining working capital, an acquisition that changes the debt and liquidity picture, or an exit where the structure of the deal drives most of the tax outcome. In those moments, tax planning and cash planning are the same conversation, and treating them separately is where businesses get into trouble.

Owners rarely have a dedicated CFO on staff at the point where these decisions matter most, which is exactly when a CFO-level view of the numbers is most valuable. We bring that view to the table alongside the tax work, rather than leaving cash, debt and liquidity as someone else's problem to reconcile later.