Every acquisition produces a familiar announcement: a valuation, an explanation of the strategy and often a photograph of executives shaking hands. Global mergers and acquisitions reached about $4.8 trillion in 2025, the second-highest annual total on record.
Those announcements capture the signing, but not the work that determines whether the transaction ultimately delivers its promised value. Financing, tax treatment, regulatory approval and integration can continue shaping an acquisition long after public attention has moved elsewhere.
Amit Jain, a principal at Dhruva Advisors USA, has spent more than 20 years structuring and negotiating cross-border acquisitions, primarily for sellers. His work has included transactions across the U.S.-India corridor in which several countries can claim regulatory or tax jurisdiction over a single deal.
Jain is also a judge at Venture Dock, where he evaluates early-stage companies and their business plans. He argues that acquisitions are frequently won or lost through decisions made after the major terms have been announced.
Beyond the announcement
The visible elements of an acquisition are its price, buyer and stated strategic purpose. The purchase price, however, reflects expectations about future performance that still must be realized through financing, regulatory compliance and the transfer of ownership.
Jain cited a cross-border sale in which he represented the founders of a U.S. software company with an Indian subsidiary. The buyer was owned in Israel, placing the transaction under the tax and regulatory systems of three countries.
According to Jain, he led the term-sheet and deal negotiations, addressed tax and structural issues, supported the seller’s attorneys on indemnities and warranties and helped organize the distribution of proceeds to the founders.
“A signed deal is a promise,” Jain said. “Whether it turns into value depends on decisions that never make it into a press release.”
Where value can be lost
Experience can play a significant role in acquisition performance. Boston Consulting Group found that seasoned acquirers outperformed less experienced buyers by about 7 percentage points in total shareholder return.
Repeat buyers may be better positioned to identify problems involving tax treatment, integration and earn-out provisions before those issues reduce a deal’s value.
In another transaction, Jain said he advised the founder of a power-electronics manufacturer being purchased by a larger company. The seller had accumulated past losses, while part of the payment depended on the company’s future performance.
Jain said the transaction was structured so the seller could offset those losses without surrendering the earn-out conditions. The example illustrates how the amount announced publicly can differ from what a seller ultimately retains.
“Most of what a seller keeps is decided in the structure, not the price everyone talks about,” Jain said.
Planning beyond the transaction
After a price is established, an acquisition’s outcome may depend on whether essential employees remain and whether its structure holds up under regulatory review and day-to-day operations.
Jain explored that argument in Why the Best Acquisition Strategy Is Forgetting About the Acquisition, an essay focused on the work required after a transaction closes.
The deal terms remain important, but integration can determine whether the buyer realizes the projected benefits. Companies that devote most of their attention to closing the transaction can be left unprepared to combine teams, systems and operations.
“Winning the deal and capturing its value are two different skills,” Jain said. “Most teams are good at the first and assume the second will follow. It does not.”
Considering multiple perspectives
Cross-border transactions introduce additional accounting, regulatory and cultural considerations. A structure that works for a buyer may create different consequences for a seller or conflict with the requirements of another jurisdiction.
Jain examines this decision-making approach in his book, Anekanta Capital: A Framework for Modern Business Decisions Inspired by Jain Principles. The framework encourages decision-makers to consider an issue from several perspectives before committing to one approach.
Applied to an acquisition, that can mean examining the transaction from the positions of the buyer, seller, employees and regulators rather than focusing only on projected financial benefits.
“The costly mistakes I have seen came from certainty, not from bad math,” Jain said. “Someone was sure, and no one in the room was standing where they could see the problem.”
The outlook for cross-border deals
BCG found that cross-border acquisitions involving companies in the same geographic region delivered an average two-year relative shareholder return of about 1.2%. Domestic transactions produced an average return of negative 0.9%, while deals spanning different global regions returned about 0.6%.
The figures do not mean crossing a border automatically produces a better result. BCG attributed the stronger performance of intra-regional transactions partly to cultural familiarity and more manageable integration challenges.
For sellers, the research underscores the importance of examining how a transaction will operate after the term sheet is signed. Entity structure, earn-out provisions, integration planning and regulatory obligations can all affect the final outcome.
“The next advantage in cross-border deals will not go to whoever moves fastest,” Jain said. “It will go to whoever can keep a plan coherent across borders long after the signing, when the attention has moved on.”