2026 Year-End Tax Planning: The Deadline Is Real, the Plan Is Multiyear
By Frazer Rice For much of the past decade, year-end planning meant racing a cliff. Estate
By Frazer Rice For much of the past decade, year-end planning meant racing a cliff. Estate
By Frazer Rice
For much of the past decade, year-end planning meant racing a cliff. Estate planners told clients to use their exemption before it disappeared. Income tax planners braced for a return to higher rates.
That urgency is gone. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act made the federal estate and gift tax exemption permanent and eliminated the scheduled 2026 reduction. The planning opportunity has not disappeared. It has become more sophisticated.
The better question for the fourth quarter is which decisions the economics, the valuation, or the succession plan make right for 2026, not whether an exemption is about to expire. That shift rewards disciplined, multiyear planning, and it penalizes families who wait until a sale, a death, or a dispute turns a planning project into an emergency.
Readers pressed for time can skip to the fourth-quarter calendar near the end for the full year-end checklist.
A handful of figures anchor this year’s planning conversation:
These figures are general. Your tax advisor can confirm what applies to your specific return.
Start with a real 2026 income projection, built around where the income comes from, what kind it is, when it happens, and how much control you have over it, rather than a rough guess based on last year’s return.
A useful forecast separates:
Determining the bracket is only the starting point. The real decision is whether income should be sped up, delayed, shifted within the family where lawful, offset, or turned into a different type of income. Individuals who expect meaningfully lower income in 2027 may have a reason to defer discretionary income. And those with a 2026 sale, sizable deductions, or unused capital losses may benefit from recognizing gain before year-end. The right answer depends on the full model: state taxes, expected future rates, cash flow, investment return, charitable intent, and estate objectives.
Many families still treat the income tax consequences of a nongrantor trust as an afterthought. In 2026, that habit will be expensive. A trust reaches the 37% federal bracket above $16,000 of taxable income, a threshold vastly lower than the comparable figure for an individual.
That calls for a review of:
Retaining income in trust is often the correct outcome. Asset protection, family governance, and beneficiary circumstances can justify paying more tax. The mistake is treating the result as automatic rather than reviewed. Trust taxation involves both tax and legal judgment calls; your tax advisor and attorney should weigh in together.
Roth conversions remain useful in years when income is temporarily depressed, deductions are unusually high, or an individual has a long investment horizon and expects higher future marginal rates. A conversion can reduce future required distributions from the converted assets, but it also accelerates taxable income now, so it should be modeled against Medicare, state tax, cash flow, charitable, and inheritance considerations.
Conversion analysis should weigh more than the federal bracket:
The better question is not whether Roth conversions are advisable in general, but whether paying tax today, at a known combined marginal rate, improves the family’s outcome once spending, charitable, investment, and inheritance plans are modeled together. Treatment depends on your income for the year and how you file. Confirm with your tax advisor before acting.
For a family with a meaningful annual giving budget, philanthropy is no longer a line item to finalize in December. The 0.5% of adjusted gross income floor and the 35-cent cap on itemized benefits for top-bracket taxpayers change the arithmetic behind every gift, not just the timing of it. A family that itemizes should quantify projected adjusted gross income and total annual giving before choosing a vehicle, not after. None of this touches a family’s underlying reason for giving, only the mechanics of how and when that giving gets funded. For families making large gifts, the choice of vehicle can affect the tax result, so it helps to compare options before year-end.
Several structures remain useful once that math is done:
For a family in the top bracket, the marginal tax value of a charitable dollar is now closer to 35 cents than 37, and the first half a percent of adjusted gross income in otherwise deductible gifts may produce no itemized benefit at all. A family funding a foundation, a donor-advised fund, or a multiyear pledge at real scale should model that math alongside its tax and legal advisors before year-end, rather than discover it on the return. Charitable vehicles carry their own legal formalities; your tax advisor and attorney should confirm the structure before you fund it.
Gain inventories, not harvesting decisions, are where families often fall short.
A year-end capital gain inventory should include public securities, concentrated stock, partnership interests, private company shares, carried interests, real estate, installment obligations, cryptocurrency, and equity compensation. For each position, the review should establish the cost basis and holding period, whether the gain is short-term or long-term, the state tax impact, any losses available to offset it, and whether a sale is being discussed, negotiated, or already locked in under a signed agreement.
Tax-loss harvesting can offset realized gains, but it is not a license to sell a sound investment purely to generate a tax number. The portfolio has to stay aligned with the family’s investment plan and liquidity needs. A loss also must be real to count: the wash-sale rule disallows the loss if the same or a substantially identical security is bought back within 30 days before or after the sale, so replacement holdings need to be chosen with that window in mind. Harvesting gains can make just as much sense when a client is in a lower tax bracket for the year, holds capital losses that might otherwise go unused, wants to reset the cost basis, or has estate or concentration reasons (holding too much in one position) to trim it. A basis step-up at death can be valuable, but it is not a complete investment policy, and current law does not guarantee it will remain unchanged indefinitely.
The original Qualified Opportunity Zone program creates an unusually concrete deadline this year. Eligible gain deferred into a qualified opportunity fund under the original program generally becomes taxable on the earlier of a qualifying inclusion event, such as a sale of the fund interest, or December 31, 2026.
For many early QOF investors, deferral expires this year even though the fund interest itself stays illiquid. An investor may owe tax on deferred gain while holding an interest that produces no cash distribution, which is exactly why QOZ positions deserve review now rather than during tax return preparation.
Investors are not necessarily locked into the full original deferred gain. The amount includible in income generally equals the excess, if any, of (the lesser of the remaining deferred gain or the QOF interest’s fair market value on December 31, 2026) over the investor’s adjusted basis in that interest, and a well-supported independent valuation may matter where the interest is illiquid, lacks control, or has declined in value. An unsupported or aggressive discount carries its own risk: if the IRS successfully challenges the valuation, the investor can face accuracy-related penalties on top of the additional tax owed. The valuation approach and documentation should be reviewed with the investor’s tax and valuation advisors.
We cover the appraisal mechanics, along with a worked example, in our article How a Qualified Appraisal May Affect Your 2026 QOF Tax Bill.
One more distinction matters here. The 2026 inclusion of original deferred gain generally cannot simply be reinvested to restart that same deferral. Separately, gain realized in a later qualifying transaction, or triggered by its own inclusion event, may be eligible for the revised post-2026 opportunity zone provisions if all statutory requirements are met and the investment is timely made on or after January 1, 2027. Those are two separate questions, and a family should analyze each on its own terms, apart from the eventual ten-year exit analysis that determines whether the investment still makes sense once the tax attributes are set aside. Deadlines and amounts vary by situation. Verify yours with your tax advisor.
The permanence of the current exemption removes one arbitrary deadline. It does not remove the reasons to make completed gifts, create trusts, recapitalize a family business, transfer minority interests, plan for succession, or allocate generation-skipping exemption.
Families should not make gifts because Congress might act someday. They should make gifts once they have a clear answer to a short set of questions: Does the donor retain enough capital, income, and flexibility? Is the asset likely to appreciate outside the donor’s estate? Is there a governance, creditor protection, or succession reason for the transfer? Does the donor intend a completed gift, a retained interest structure, or a sale to a trust? Is a future basis step-up at death more valuable than the estate tax savings from gifting now?
The most valuable planning happens before a family needs it. Once a company sits under a letter of intent, a founder’s health declines, or a family dispute begins, the available options narrow quickly.
A 2026 transfer can also be the foundational step in a 2027 transaction. Families may use this year to:
A hastily signed trust on December 29 rarely reflects a family’s best governance thinking. Entity formation and trust funding carry specific legal requirements, so loop in both your attorney and your tax advisor well before year-end.
Low basis remains the central tension in every gifting decision. A completed lifetime gift carries the donor’s basis. Property included in a decedent’s estate may receive a basis adjustment at death. For a highly appreciated asset unlikely to create a taxable estate under the current exemption, holding the asset can sometimes produce a better family outcome than gifting it away purely to chase estate tax savings. The right answer depends on comparing after-tax, after-transfer-tax, control, and governance outcomes across a realistic range of life expectancy, appreciation, and tax scenarios, not on a fixed rule about low-basis assets.
For families expecting meaningful future appreciation, one technique to consider is a sale to a grantor trust (a trust whose creator pays the income tax on the trust’s earnings). A sale of this kind may, if properly structured and effective under applicable law, help transfer future appreciation outside the transferor’s taxable estate, and carefully designed note terms can add flexibility. The technique requires more than a promissory note and an optimistic valuation. It calls for a review of how well the trust is funded going in, the applicable federal rate (the minimum interest rate the IRS allows on such a loan), the cash flow available to service the note, and whether the family would still want the structure if the asset’s value declined. A sale to a trust is a financing transaction between related parties, and it deserves the same discipline as any other one. Additional risks include note default, inadequate seed capital, valuation challenge, retained control, mortality, asset underperformance, and changed law.
These are practical planning targets rather than statutory filing deadlines, aside from the QOZ recognition date noted earlier. Your advisory team can confirm which items apply to your situation.
Year-end planning starts with a family’s objectives: liquidity, succession, philanthropy, control, and preserving options.
In 2026, that means treating the year-end deadline as real while resisting the panic that used to come with it. The estate tax exemption is generous, but it should not invite complacency. QOZ deferred-gain recognition is approaching for many investors, but it should not lead to an artificial valuation. Income and capital gain planning can create real value when integrated with investment and cash-flow decisions. Charitable planning can remain powerful under the new rules, provided the giving is deliberately structured rather than assumed.
Families who use the fourth quarter to complete transactions that fit a multiyear plan, and document them properly, may enter 2027 with a stronger balance sheet, cleaner governance, and fewer decisions waiting for the next crisis.
Bringing a family’s income, charitable, capital gain, and estate decisions together across its full advisory team is the kind of orchestration Next Vantage is designed to help provide. If your fourth quarter includes a QOZ recognition event, a gifting decision, or a business transaction, now is the time to bring your advisors around a shared plan. Schedule a conversation by calling (212) 433-1108 or emailing frice@nextcapitalmgmt.com. This article is educational and general in nature, and is not tax, legal, or investment advice.
Frazer Rice is Director of Family Office Services and a Partner at Next Vantage, the Family Office Services group of Next Capital Management in New York City, where he has spent more than two decades advising families navigating exceptional financial complexity.
Next Capital Management, LLC (“Company”) is an SEC registered investment adviser located in New York, New York.
Next Vantage is a separate non-advisory service/business offered by certain members of/associated with Next Capital Management, an SEC registered Investment Adviser located in New York. In addition to, and separate from, the investment advisory services offered by Next Capital Management affiliates through Next Capital Management, Next Vantage provides separate business services, including consultation on personal financial matters and coordination with unaffiliated professional service providers. While the Next Vantage service does not entail provision of investment advice, clients of Next Capital Management may decide to use Next Vantage for related non-investment services. Next Vantage personnel may have a financial incentive to recommend the services of Next Capital Management. Clients are under no obligation to use Next Capital Management and may select any provider of their choice. Next Vantage is not a separately registered investment adviser. Next Vantage does not provide legal or accounting services. Next Vantage clients should consult their legal or tax professional for these services.
The Company may only transact business in those states in which it is registered, or qualifies for an exemption or exclusion from registration requirements. The Company’s website is limited to the dissemination of general information pertaining to its advisory services, together with access to additional investment-related information, publications, and links. Accordingly, the publication of the Company’s website on the Internet should not be construed by any consumer and/or prospective client as the Company’s solicitation to effect, or attempt to effect transactions in securities, or the rendering of personalized investment advice for compensation, over the Internet. Any subsequent, direct communication by the Company with a prospective client shall be conducted by a representative that is either registered or qualifies for an exemption or exclusion from registration in the state where the prospective client resides. A copy of the Company’s current written disclosure Brochure and Form CRS discussing the Company’s business operations, services, and fees is available on this website and/or from the Company upon written request. The Company does not make any representations or warranties as to the accuracy, timeliness, suitability, completeness, or relevance of any information prepared by any unaffiliated third party, whether linked to the Company’s website or incorporated herein, and takes no responsibility therefor. All such information is provided solely for convenience purposes only and all users thereof should be guided accordingly.
Please remember that different types of investments involve varying degrees of risk, and there can be no assurance that the future performance of any specific investment or investment strategy (including those undertaken or recommended by the Company), will be profitable or equal any historical performance level(s). Neither the Company’s investment adviser registration status, nor any amount of prior experience or success, should be construed that a certain level of results or satisfaction will be achieved if the Company is engaged, or continues to be engaged, to provide investment advisory services. The Company’s registration status does not imply a specific level of skill or training.
Certain portions of the Company’s website (i.e., newsletters, articles, commentaries, etc.) may contain a discussion of, and/or provide access to, the Company’s (and those of other investment and non-investment professionals) positions and/or recommendations as of a specific prior date. Due to various factors, including changing market conditions, such discussion may no longer be reflective of current position(s) and/or recommendation(s). Moreover, no client or prospective client should assume that any such discussion serves as the receipt of, or a substitute for, personalized advice from the Company, or from any other investment professional. The Company is neither an attorney nor an accountant, and no portion of the website content should be interpreted as legal, accounting or tax advice.
Please Note: Limitations. Neither rankings nor recognitions by unaffiliated rating services, publications, media, or other organizations, nor the achievement of any professional designation, certification, degree, or license, membership in any professional organization, or any amount of prior experience or success, should be construed by a client or prospective client as a guarantee that the client will experience a certain level of results if the investment professional or the investment professional’s firm is engaged, or continues to be engaged, to provide investment advisory services.
To the extent that any client or prospective client utilizes any economic calculator or similar interactive device contained within or linked to the Company’s website, the client and/or prospective client acknowledges and understands that the information resulting from the use of any such calculator/device, is not, and should not be construed, in any manner whatsoever, as the receipt of, or a substitute for, personalized individual advice from the Company, or from any other investment professional.
This article is for general educational purposes only and is not tax, legal, accounting, valuation, insurance, or individualized investment advice. Tax, estate, charitable, trust, and QOZ planning outcomes depend on each person’s facts, applicable law, transaction documents, valuations, and timely implementation. Neither tax savings nor any particular investment, estate-planning, or charitable result is guaranteed. Consult qualified independent tax, legal, valuation, and other advisers before acting.
Qualified Opportunity Zone rules are complex. The amount and timing of any deferred-gain inclusion, the tax treatment of a QOF interest, and the relevance of any valuation depend on the investor’s specific facts and applicable federal and state law. An appraisal or valuation does not assure a particular tax outcome and may be subject to IRS review.
Gifts, trust transactions, entity planning, and sales to trusts can involve transfer-tax, income-tax, valuation, fiduciary, liquidity, creditor, and administrative risks. These strategies may not be appropriate for every family and should be implemented only with advice from qualified legal and tax professionals.
References to securities sales, rebalancing, tax-loss harvesting, concentrated positions, and other investment considerations are general in nature and are not recommendations to buy, sell, or hold any security or to implement any investment strategy.
By Dan Magier CFP® and CAIA® The wire clears and the balance on the statement is
By Dan Magier CFP® and CAIA®
The wire clears and the balance on the statement is the largest number you have ever owned. Most of that balance isn’t yours yet because you haven’t paid the tax on it. Within weeks, private deals and requests for money start arriving. Most of them are far easier to get into than out of.
The same 90-day clock starts after most large liquidity events, whether the money came from selling a company, a partnership buyout, a carry distribution, or an equity award that settled at a public listing. The tax owed on each of those is calculated differently, so the reserve in Step 1 depends on which one produced your money. Everything after Step 1 is the same regardless of the source.
Ninety days is enough time, provided the work happens in the sequence below and the irreversible decisions come last.
Don’t keep a large balance in one bank account. Federal deposit insurance covers up to $250,000 per depositor, per insured bank, per ownership category, which leaves an eight-figure balance almost entirely uninsured.
Two places to hold it while the long-term plan is built:
The tax reserve comes next. How much you set aside depends on which kind of event produced the money.
If the proceeds came from selling stock or a partnership interest you held, most of the amount is usually taxed as capital gains. The reserve needs to cover:
These components apply differently depending on your state, your filing status, and the character of the proceeds. Please consult your tax advisor regarding your specific situation.
If the proceeds came from compensation, ordinary income rates apply instead, and they run higher. This covers equity awards that settle at a public listing, buyout payments structured as income, carried interest that has not met its three-year holding requirement, and large fee awards. Here the problem is withholding rather than the reserve:
Your estimated tax payment for the quarter in which the money arrived is due on the usual schedule. At the income levels this article addresses, the safe harbor is 110% of last year’s total tax. Paying that amount through withholding and quarterly estimates can protect you from an IRS underpayment penalty. It does not reduce what you owe, and the balance is still due at filing. Withholding rates and safe harbor calculations are general figures. Your tax advisor can confirm the amount that applies to your return and the date it is due.
The flood of investment offers and requests that arrives after a publicized liquidity event catches many by surprise.
Private business deals, requests from friends to invest, direct real estate opportunities, and private operating companies all start showing up within the first month, and each one is much harder to sell or exit than publicly traded stocks. Resisting those immediate pitches is essential, because making a major purchase or investment in your first month means committing funds before you’ve finalized your new long-term financial plan.
Requests from family members for financial help often arrive during this same tight window. Setting a clear, written policy before you start those individual conversations is much easier to maintain than making decisions one call at a time.
This is also the right time to review your personal liability insurance and how your assets are titled, as your public profile and visibility change the moment the transaction becomes public.
While gifts made after the money arrives cannot reduce your tax bill retroactively, several strategies are still available.
Timing your charitable donations to match this high-income year can reduce your tax burden. Beginning with the 2026 tax year, itemized charitable deductions are subject to a floor of 0.5% of adjusted gross income, which is your total income after certain adjustments, and for top-bracket filers the value of itemized deductions is capped at 35 cents per dollar.
Making a single, large contribution in the year the money arrives clears that floor, and a donor-advised fund, which is an account you fund now and grant from over time, can handle that process efficiently. A charitable remainder trust, which pays you income for a period of years and passes the remainder to charity, can work if you prefer to spread income across multiple years. Deduction floors and caps depend on your income for the year and how you file. Confirm the treatment with your tax advisor before making the contribution.
This applies only to the qualified small business stock described in Step 1. The full exclusion requires a five-year holding period. Shares issued after July 4, 2025, also carry partial exclusions at three and four years, so whether selling early costs you anything depends on when your shares were issued. If you held the shares for more than six months and sold before reaching the five-year mark, Section 1045 allows you to elect to roll the proceeds into replacement qualifying stock within 60 days of the sale. Equity compensation from a public company does not qualify, and neither do partnership or fee payments. Whether your shares qualify under Section 1202, and whether a Section 1045 election is available to you, depends on facts specific to the company and to when your shares were issued. Your tax advisor and your attorney should confirm both before you act on the 60-day window.
Your foundational estate documents remain open for updates. That includes a revocable trust, which holds assets during your lifetime and passes them without probate, along with powers of attorney and the beneficiary designations on your accounts.
Calculate how much cash you need over the next two years from your real expenses.
Draft the investment policy before any capital moves. Your advisory team writes it, and it should state your target mix of assets, the amount of cash you keep accessible, the conditions under which the portfolio returns to those targets, and what would justify amending the policy itself. The value is in fixing it in writing before the first allocation decision, while the reasoning is still yours and not a reaction to whatever the market did that week.
Spreading purchases across several months may reduce the risk of committing everything at one price. Long-term investments that are hard to sell belong at the end of the sequence, after the core accessible money is in place, because tying up cash early can limit your flexibility for everything else.
Your attorney and your accountant each handle a different part of the work after a liquidity event, and your financial advisor handles a third. They rarely coordinate their schedules after the transaction. Next Capital’s wealth planning services are built around sequencing this work. Next Capital acts as the central coordinator for your entire team, and the work is designed to keep your tax payments and your investment schedule on the same timeline.
If your liquidity event happened within the last 90 days, several of the steps above carry deadlines and need sequencing guidance.
Schedule a conversation with our team by calling (212) 433-1111 or emailing info@nextcapitalmgmt.com.
It depends on how the proceeds are taxed. For a sale of stock or a partnership interest, set aside enough to cover federal capital gains tax, the 3.8% net investment income tax, and state and city tax, reduced by any Section 1202 exclusion you qualify for. For compensation income, including equity awards that settle at a listing and large fee or buyout payments, your top marginal rate applies, and employer withholding at 22% on the first $1 million usually falls short of it. Segregate the amount the week the money arrives. At these income levels the safe harbor is 110% of last year’s total tax, and paying that through withholding and quarterly estimates can protect you from an underpayment penalty. The figures above are general. Your tax advisor can calculate the reserve for your situation.
No, though your choices are more limited. Transfers of appreciation that occurred before the event had to be funded beforehand. What remains open includes revocable trusts and other foundational documents, along with updated beneficiary designations. You can still apply transfer strategies to future growth in the newly diversified portfolio. Confirm which ones apply within the first 60 days.
Short-duration Treasury bills or a Treasury money market fund, spread across multiple custodians. FDIC insurance covers $250,000 per depositor, per insured bank, per ownership category, so a large balance in a single account is mostly uninsured. Treasuries stay liquid, so nothing forces an allocation decision before you’re ready.
Until the investment policy is written, which usually takes 60 to 90 days. The policy sets your allocation targets and your cash requirements, and it defines when the portfolio returns to those targets. Spreading purchases after that may reduce the risk of committing everything at one price. Next Capital works through that policy with clients before deploying capital.
Dan Magier is a Partner and Managing Director of Wealth Strategy and Advisory at Next Capital Management, where he works with founders, executives, and complex families on pre-liquidity planning, tax strategy, and multigenerational wealth coordination. He holds the CFP® and CAIA® designations and earned a BA in Economics from the University of Michigan.
Next Capital Management, LLC (“Company”) is an SEC registered investment adviser located in New York, New York.
The Company may only transact business in those states in which it is registered, or qualifies for an exemption or exclusion from registration requirements. The Company’s website is limited to the dissemination of general information pertaining to its advisory services, together with access to additional investment-related information, publications, and links. Accordingly, the publication of the Company’s website on the Internet should not be construed by any consumer and/or prospective client as the Company’s solicitation to effect, or attempt to effect transactions in securities, or the rendering of personalized investment advice for compensation, over the Internet. Any subsequent, direct communication by the Company with a prospective client shall be conducted by a representative that is either registered or qualifies for an exemption or exclusion from registration in the state where the prospective client resides. A copy of the Company’s current written disclosure Brochure and Form CRS discussing the Company’s business operations, services, and fees is available on this website and/or from the Company upon written request. The Company does not make any representations or warranties as to the accuracy, timeliness, suitability, completeness, or relevance of any information prepared by any unaffiliated third party, whether linked to the Company’s website or incorporated herein, and takes no responsibility therefor. All such information is provided solely for convenience purposes only and all users thereof should be guided accordingly.
Please remember that different types of investments involve varying degrees of risk, and there can be no assurance that the future performance of any specific investment or investment strategy (including those undertaken or recommended by the Company), will be profitable or equal any historical performance level(s). Neither the Company’s investment adviser registration status, nor any amount of prior experience or success, should be construed that a certain level of results or satisfaction will be achieved if the Company is engaged, or continues to be engaged, to provide investment advisory services. The Company’s registration status does not imply a specific level of skill or training.
Certain portions of the Company’s website (i.e., newsletters, articles, commentaries, etc.) may contain a discussion of, and/or provide access to, the Company’s (and those of other investment and non-investment professionals) positions and/or recommendations as of a specific prior date. Due to various factors, including changing market conditions, such discussion may no longer be reflective of current position(s) and/or recommendation(s). Moreover, no client or prospective client should assume that any such discussion serves as the receipt of, or a substitute for, personalized advice from the Company, or from any other investment professional. The Company is neither an attorney nor an accountant, and no portion of the website content should be interpreted as legal, accounting or tax advice.
Please Note: Limitations. Neither rankings nor recognitions by unaffiliated rating services, publications, media, or other organizations, nor the achievement of any professional designation, certification, degree, or license, membership in any professional organization, or any amount of prior experience or success, should be construed by a client or prospective client as a guarantee that the client will experience a certain level of results if the investment professional or the investment professional’s firm is engaged, or continues to be engaged, to provide investment advisory services.
To the extent that any client or prospective client utilizes any economic calculator or similar interactive device contained within or linked to the Company’s website, the client and/or prospective client acknowledges and understands that the information resulting from the use of any such calculator/device, is not, and should not be construed, in any manner whatsoever, as the receipt of, or a substitute for, personalized individual advice from the Company, or from any other investment professional.
Each client and prospective client agrees as a condition precedent to his/her/its access to the Company’s website, to release and hold harmless the Company, its officers, directors, owners, employees and agents from any and all adverse consequences resulting from any of his/her/its actions and/or omissions which are independent of his/her/its receipt of personalized individual advice from the Company.
By Frazer Rice People who invested capital gains in a Qualified Opportunity Fund (QOF) were allowed
By Frazer Rice
People who invested capital gains in a Qualified Opportunity Fund (QOF) were allowed to postpone paying tax on those gains. But that delay ends on December 31, 2026.
On that date, investors generally must report the delayed gain on their tax return—even if they have not sold their QOF investment or received any cash from it. However, most investors don’t realize they have options in measuring their gain that can have a material impact on their ultimate tax bill.
The Opportunity Zone (OZ) tax law states that investors’ deferred gain is calculated as the lower of two numbers:
This matters because owning part of a private fund is not the same as owning cash or publicly traded stock. An investor often cannot easily sell the interest, force the fund to sell its properties, or demand a payout.
Because of those limits, a professional appraiser may conclude that the investor’s fair market value is worth less than its stated Net Asset Value. This is not dissimilar to the discounts that professional appraisers use for estate planning purposes.
Suppose an investor deferred a $5 million capital gain by investing it in a QOF.
By the end of 2026, the investor’s share of the fund’s assets appears to be worth $5.75 million. However, an independent appraiser determines that the investor’s actual interest is worth $4.025 million because it is difficult to sell and provides limited control.
| Without Appraisal | With Appraisal | |
| Deferred gain | $5,000,000 | $5,000,000 |
| Value used for tax calculation | $5,000,000 | $4,025,000 |
| 10% reduction for holding period | −$500,000 | −$500,000 |
| Taxable amount | $4,500,000 | $3,525,000 |
| Federal tax at 23.8% | $1,071,000 | $838,950 |
In this example, the appraisal reduces the federal tax bill by about $232,000.
A QOF investor should not automatically assume the full original gain will be taxed in 2026. A qualified, independent appraisal may support a lower taxable value for an ownership interest that is hard to sell and does not give the investor control over the fund.
The appraisal must be properly prepared and dated as of December 31, 2026. Investors should discuss this issue well before year-end with their tax adviser, legal counsel, and a qualified valuation professional.
This is an educational summary, not tax or legal advice. Adapted from the provided article.
Sources:
Tax Notes Federal, Vol. 192, July 20, 2026 — “Qualified Appraisals May Save QOF Investors Millions From Deemed Realization,” pp. 415–420.
Falcon Rappaport & Berkman LLP https://www.linkedin.com/posts/frblaw_qualified-appraisals-may-save-qof-investors-activity-7487575234930446338-iHmP/
Frazer Rice is Director of Family Office Services and a Partner at Next Vantage, the Family Office Services group of Next Capital Management in New York City, where he has spent more than two decades advising families navigating exceptional financial complexity.
This summary is for educational purposes only and is not tax or legal advice.
Any hypothetical scenarios referenced in this article are for illustrative purposes only and do not reflect an actual client. Actual results will vary based on individual circumstances, tax rates, business performance, and transaction terms.
Next Capital Management, LLC (“Company”) is an SEC registered investment adviser located in New York, New York.
The Company may only transact business in those states in which it is registered, or qualifies for an exemption or exclusion from registration requirements. The Company’s website is limited to the dissemination of general information pertaining to its advisory services, together with access to additional investment-related information, publications, and links. Accordingly, the publication of the Company’s website on the Internet should not be construed by any consumer and/or prospective client as the Company’s solicitation to effect, or attempt to effect transactions in securities, or the rendering of personalized investment advice for compensation, over the Internet.
Due to various factors, including changing market conditions, such discussion may no longer be reflective of current position(s) and/or recommendation(s). Moreover, no client or prospective client should assume that any such discussion serves as the receipt of, or a substitute for, personalized advice from the Company, or from any other investment professional. The Company is neither an attorney nor an accountant, and no portion of the website content should be interpreted as legal, accounting, or tax advice.
Each client and prospective client agrees as a condition precedent to his/her/its access to the Company’s website, to release and hold harmless the Company, its officers, directors, owners, employees and agents from any and all adverse consequences resulting from any of his/her/its actions and/or omissions which are independent of his/her/its receipt of personalized individual advice from the Company.
Many families just focus on whether or not to build a family office. The next
Many families just focus on whether or not to build a family office. The next question often gets ignored: Which of the three models fits?
A single-family office, a multi-family office, and a hybrid each solve the same problem differently, and each requires the family to give something up in exchange. Sometimes that’s money, sometimes it’s privacy or control.
We filmed a short video walking through what each of the three models costs and what each one asks you to give up, so you can see which structure makes sense for your situation.
When families ask what a family office costs, they expect a dollar figure, but money is the easiest part of the answer. The harder costs are privacy and control. A single-family office gives you the most of both, and it costs accordingly.
A multi-family office costs far less and asks you to share. Understanding those trade-offs is how you pick the right structure.
Hi, I’m Teresa Armel, a director at Next Vantage, and today I want to walk you through those three structures on those terms.
Let’s start with the single-family office, built and staffed for one family alone. This is the model that most people picture, and it buys you the most control and privacy. Every decision, every hire, and every investment sits inside your own walls, answering only to you.
This tends to make sense for families running an operating business or holding concentrated positions that demand attention every day, but the price is steep. You carry the full operating budget yourself, often $1 to $3 million a year, with no one to share that cost. You also become an employer, responsible for recruiting and retaining specialized talent in a market that is genuinely difficult.
So privacy and control are the real benefits, but the trade-off is that you are now running a company on top of everything else you already do. That trade-off is the reason the multifamily office exists.
Here, several families share one infrastructure, which means they share the cost and the operational burden that comes with it.
You get institutional-grade professionals and systems at a fraction of what building them alone would cost. This fits families whose needs are substantial, but not unusual, and who would rather hire expertise than manage it. The trade-off here, though, is privacy.
Your affairs live alongside other families inside the same organization. You give up a measure of control too, because the priorities are set for the group rather than for you specifically. For many families, that exchange is more than fair.
For a family whose situation is unusual enough to demand bespoke attention, the shared model can start to feel like a suit that almost fits. Which brings us to the hybrid. And this is where the choice gets interesting.
A hybrid keeps a small, dedicated team close to the family for decisions that are personal, and it outsources the rest to shared or external providers. You hold on to control and privacy where they matter the most, and you rent scale everywhere else.
This suits families with one or two areas that genuinely require dedicated attention, like a family foundation or a complicated set of trusts, while everything else runs fine on shared infrastructure.
The hybrid asks you to decide which functions your family should keep close and which ones you could hand off, and many families find that decision difficult. Get it right, and you pay only for the control you need. Get it wrong, and you end up with the coordination problem you were trying to solve in the first place.
So the three office models aren’t better or worse than one another. The question is, which one matches what your wealth demands of you?
Families who get this right usually start by looking at what their situation requires day to day rather than what they can afford.
Think of it this way: affordability tells you what is possible; daily reality tells you what is necessary.
That is the work that we do with families here at Next Vantage before any structure gets built, and it’s often the conversation that saves them from building the wrong one.
If you’re weighing these structures, schedule conversation with us by calling 212-433-1108. Thanks for watching.
We talk to founders regularly who have heard of QSBS, know the $15 million number,
We talk to founders regularly who have heard of QSBS, know the $15 million number, and have mentally checked that box. Most of them haven’t thought through how many things have to go right between now and an exit for that benefit to hold.
A poorly timed stock redemption. A business model shift that edges into a restricted industry. New shares issued after the company’s balance sheet crossed a threshold nobody was watching. Each of these can disqualify equity that looked clean the day it was issued, and in most cases, nobody catches it until the term sheet is already signed.
The OBBBA changed the rules significantly in July 2025, and the new structure creates real planning opportunities for founders who are paying attention. We put together a video that walks through what the current rules require, where eligibility breaks down, and how the stacking strategies that can multiply the benefit are supposed to work.
If you have equity you expect to be worth something significant, watch it before your next funding round.
If you sold your company tomorrow, do you know what you’d owe in taxes? Most founders think they do. They’ve heard about QSBS and they know the $15 million number and they filed it away as something their lawyer is handling. What they’re usually missing is how many things have to go right for that benefit to hold and how fast it disappears when one of them doesn’t.
I’m Dan Magier, a Partner and Managing Director at Next Capital Management. This video covers what QSBS requires where founders run astray and why the gap between having this benefit and preserving it is wider than expected. Qualified small business stock known as Section 1202 of the tax code is one of the most significant tax benefits available to company founders.
If your equity qualifies and you’ve held it long enough, you may be able to exclude a substantial portion of your gain from federal capital gains tax entirely. Here’s how the numbers work under current law. And yes, the exact calendar date dictates your entire strategy.
For stock issued after July 4th, 2025, the game has changed. Your lifetime exclusion cap is now $15 million or 10 times your adjusted basis. Under these new rules, you no longer have to wait a rigid five years to see a benefit.
The law now offers a graduated schedule. Hold for three years and 50% of your gain may be excluded. Hold for four years and that rises to 75%.
And if you cross the five-year mark, you can potentially exclude 100% of your gain up to the cap. But those early exits come with a catch. The unexcluded portion of your gain is taxed at a 28% rate.
And when you add the net investment income tax, your effective federal rate looks more like 15.9% for a three-year hold. That rate drops to just under 8% for a four-year hold. It’s a massive discount compared to a standard asset sale.
But the math is complex. For stock issued before that July 2025 cutoff, the old rules apply. That means a strict $10 million cap and an all or nothing five-year hold with no partial credit.
The most common mistake I see founders make with QSBS is assumption. Founders who built venture-backed C-corporations assume they qualify. Sometimes they do, but other times something shifted along the way and nobody caught it.
Take the gross asset test. For stock issued under the current rules, your company’s gross assets at the time of issuance had to be under $75 million. For older stock, that limit was $50 million.
But here’s the trap. That limit is based on the tax basis of the assets on your balance sheet. Your company’s market valuation does not change this number.
A significant capital raise or acquisition of a small competitor can push your balance sheet over that threshold in a few weeks. If new shares are issued after that limit is crossed, including through option exercises, those specific shares may not qualify. This means early employees are often hit the hardest.
The gross asset test is just one place this comes apart. At least 80% of the company’s assets also need to be deployed in a qualified business throughout the entire holding period. And that requirement has to hold for as long as you own the stock.
Certain industries are explicitly excluded from QSBS, such as law, health, financial services, and consulting. Shifting your direction to target a new market is a normal part of scaling a business. If that new revenue stream pushes your company into one of these restricted categories, it can completely eliminate the tax exemption on your shares.
Then there’s the redemption trap. If the company repurchases stock from any shareholder within a certain window, generally one year before or one year after a new issuance, that single transaction can disqualify the new shares for everyone on the cap table. Founders frequently use redemptions to clean up messy cap tables or to provide quick liquidity to a departing executive.
It rarely occurs to anyone in the room that it might affect the next funding round. We’re going to spend an entire video on this topic because the list of ways founders lose eligibility is long. Stacking, which in my opinion is the part most people miss.
Protecting your own shares is the foundation, but Section 1202 goes further than a lot of founders realize. There’s a gifting provision built into the law that allows you to transfer qualified stock to another person or entity. And when you do, that recipient gets their own separate $15 million exclusion on top of yours.
Imagine a founder who sets up three independent trusts before a sale, creating one for their spouse and one for each of their two children. The family now has four distinct exclusions. That means the total federal tax exclusion could climb from $15 million to $60 million.
The final outcome depends on your timeline and the exact legal structure. The timeline for this type of gifting is critical. It works best in the early stages of your company when the share value is still low.
Gifting shares at a low valuation means you use very little of your lifetime gift tax exemption. If you wait until a term sheet is already on the table, the shares are worth far more, which limits your options. This type of planning requires active coordination between your legal counsel and your wealth advisor from the beginning.
All that trust planning assumes the federal exclusion is the whole story. And for most founders it is, but QSBS is a federal benefit and each state sets their own rules on whether they recognize it. The majority of states conform to the federal treatment, but California does not.
A California-based founder may owe state capital gains tax on gain that is fully excluded at the federal level. New Jersey recently changed course and now conforms for tax years starting in 2026. Check with your attorney to ensure that you comply with your state’s requirements.
For founders in non-conforming states, the federal savings are still worth protecting. A full exclusion on a $15 million gain at a 23.8% federal rate is a substantial number, but the tax picture looks different than it might appear on paper and you should know it before you plan around it. Founders getting the most from QSBS are treating it as an ongoing coordination problem.
Every funding round, every cap table change and every shift in business model is a moment when something can go right or wrong. In many cases, the people who would catch an issue are not talking to each other in real time. The attorney drafts the redemption agreement and the CPA finds out about it a year later during tax prep.
By then the damage is done. In the next videos in this series, we’ll discuss ways founders lose eligibility and how to use a rollover strategy to carry the benefit into your next venture. If you have equity that you expect to be worth something significant at exit, understand where you stand before your next move, not after it.
At Next Capital, we work with founders on this kind of planning and you can connect with us through the link below.
By Frazer Rice A founder can spend 20 years building something extraordinary and watch 90 bad
By Frazer Rice
A founder can spend 20 years building something extraordinary and watch 90 bad days at the closing table cost them a significant portion of what they built. These 90 days are typically not a fluke; they are the inevitable result of years of owner-dependence and insufficient financial structuring. After all, a business that only runs because its owner shows up every day isn’t a transferable asset; it’s just a high-paying job.
To understand why so many exits go off the rails, I recently spoke with Alexandria Seydel of Ripple’s Edge Advisors, a firm that works with founders three to five years before they go to market, getting their business ready for when a buyer starts looking under the hood.
One statistic she shared has stayed with me since we spoke: somewhere between 70% and 80% of owners report dissatisfaction after selling. The deal itself usually closed without incident. What soured the experience, in many cases, was who they sold to and how the process unfolded along the way.
Alexandria and I are looking at the same problem from different chairs, hers on the business balance sheet, mine on the personal and fiduciary side.
Here is what I tell founders who are starting to think seriously about exit planning and business exit readiness, well before the term sheet arrives.
Most owners believe their company could function without them in the room, but few have tested that belief. Here is a useful exercise, one I borrowed happily from Alex: imagine three weeks in Europe with no cell reception. Who calls first, and what decisions stall while you’re unreachable? By the time you land, what is still sitting undone in your inbox?
The answers usually reveal exactly where owner dependence will be used against them at the negotiating table, long before a banker ever runs a valuation model.
Buyers price this risk directly. Think of a law firm built almost entirely on one lawyer’s reputation, where clients hire the person and not the practice. Or picture a founder-led manufacturer whose largest accounts have never spoken to anyone but the owner in 15 years.
Businesses like these look larger on paper than a buyer will ever pay for, because the value walks out the door with the founder. The fix won’t be glamorous: training a successor, documenting how decisions get made, and moving client relationships onto a team rather than resting them on one person’s calendar.
Given three to five years, that work is manageable. Given three months before a letter of intent lands, it is close to impossible.
Buyers do not pay for a story about the business. They pay for what survives diligence, the process where a buyer’s team verifies the financials, contracts, and operations before money changes hands. These are just a few examples of due diligence red flags the buyer may look for:
Each of these becomes a lever for a lower price after the letter of intent is signed, which is precisely the wrong moment to discover them.
Consider a made-up but common example: a boat, a car lease, or a family member on payroll in name only, each suppressing EBITDA (i.e., earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization) for years without the owner noticing.
Pull those personal expenses back out, and a buyer starts applying their multiple against a larger, cleaner number instead of a discounted one. The exercise simply makes sure the price reflects what the business truly earns.
Professionalizing the back office carries similar weight. Larger and public acquirers want a business that could slot into their own reporting structure without months of cleanup on their end. Formal financials, documented processes, and a management team that functions the way the org chart says it does all reduce the number of reasons a buyer has to reprice the deal at the eleventh hour.
Owners tend to fixate on the headline price, but the structure behind that number often determines what they walk away with. Most acquisitions pay the seller in layers: some cash at close, an earnout tied to how the business performs afterward, and a retained stake in the buyer’s company.
I encourage every client to run one test before signing anything: if the earnout and the retained stake both went to zero, would the cash at close still feel like a fair outcome on its own? If the answer is yes, everything else is a potential gain on top of an outcome you’ve already accepted. If the answer is no, that is the signal to negotiate harder, restructure the deal, or wait.
Rollover equity in particular deserves a healthy dose of skepticism. Buyers will often tell a seller that the retained stake is going to multiply many times over, and in some deals it has—but in plenty of others, it was worth nothing within five years. Treat it as a potential bonus, never as the foundation of a retirement plan.
Owners that end up satisfied with a sale started planning well before they were ready to sign anything. On my side of the table, that means engineering what an ordinary Tuesday looks like a year after closing, well beyond the vacation that follows the wire transfer.
The owners I see struggle most after a transaction closes are the ones who lost the structure and purpose that came from running their company, without ever building a plan for what would replace it.
On the operating side, that same runway allows time for succession planning, cleaner financials, and reduced owner dependence: the things that determine whether a buyer sees a transferable asset or a business that only functions because one person shows up every day.
Family-owned businesses carry an added layer of complexity. When some owners want to grow and others want liquidity, that misalignment tends to surface the moment a buyer starts asking questions. Addressing it early, through honest conversation and documented governance, keeps a single disagreement from becoming a reason to reprice the deal or walk away from it entirely.
None of this replaces coordinated advice from professionals who understand both the personal and business sides of a transaction. The owners navigating an exit well are usually the ones whose advisors were already talking to one another years before the process began. That coordination is what Next Vantage is built to provide: a single point of oversight that keeps the tax, legal, and wealth planning aligned from the early stages through the close and beyond.
If you are a founder starting to think seriously about what a sale should look like, start that conversation long before the first offer arrives. Contact us at (212) 433-1108 or frice@nextcapitalmgmt.com.
Three to five years before a sale is the range most advisors point to, and for good reason. That window allows time to reduce owner dependence, clean up financials, and train a successor, all of which take longer than most owners expect.
Starting even a year in advance is far better than starting once a buyer is already at the table, but the earlier this work begins, the more options an owner has when it matters most.
Owner dependence describes how much of a business’s revenue, client relationships, or day-to-day operations rely on one person, usually the founder. A business that only runs smoothly because the owner is personally involved in sales, decisions, or key relationships looks riskier to a buyer, because that value may not transfer after closing. Reducing owner dependence, through delegation, documentation, and a trained team, tends to support a stronger multiple.
Many acquisitions split payment across cash at close, an earnout tied to future performance, and rollover equity in the buyer’s company. Each piece carries different risk: cash at close is certain, while an earnout depends on performance the owner may no longer control, and rollover equity depends on the buyer’s future success, which is uncertain by nature. Understanding how much of the total number is genuinely certain, versus contingent on outcomes outside the owner’s control, is central to evaluating any offer.
Diligence is when a buyer examines financials, contracts, operations, and legal history in detail. Issues found during this process, such as disorganized books or unclear ownership of intellectual property, typically lead to a lower price or a walk-away deal instead of a quick fix once the process is underway. Addressing these issues years before going to market, instead of waiting for diligence to surface them, preserves both negotiating position and price.
When family members disagree about whether to grow, sell, or hold, that misalignment tends to surface during diligence and can concern a buyer regardless of the business’s underlying performance. Addressing disagreements early, through honest conversation and clear governance, keeps a personal disagreement from becoming a business risk in a buyer’s eyes.
Frazer Rice is Director of Family Office Services and a Partner at Next Vantage, the Family Office Services group of Next Capital Management in New York City, where he has spent more than two decades advising families navigating exceptional financial complexity.
By Dan Magier, CFP® and CAIA® The acquisition offer arrives at year three. The terms are
By Dan Magier, CFP® and CAIA®
The acquisition offer arrives at year three. The terms are good (genuinely good), and you want to take it. But you’ve been counting on QSBS to shelter a significant portion of the gain, and five years is the threshold. You’re two years short.
Most founders at this point believe they have two choices: turn down the deal or forfeit the tax benefit. Neither is true, but the option that exists has a 60-day deadline and very specific requirements, which almost never comes up until after the term sheet is signed.
That option is Section 1045, the rollover provision written into the tax code alongside Section 1202. It allows you to sell qualifying stock before the five-year mark, reinvest the proceeds into new QSBS within 60 days, and defer the gain on the original sale. The holding period from your original shares carries over to the replacement shares, so the clock doesn’t restart.
This strategy rarely works when founders discover it mid-process; it works when their advisors understand the mechanics before the deal is ever on the table.
When you sell QSBS, you have 60 calendar days to close on replacement QSBS. The clock starts on the date of sale. No extensions, no grace periods. The gain deferred on the original sale reduces the basis of the replacement shares dollar-for-dollar—postponed, not erased—and the five-year clock on the replacement shares picks up where the original left off.
The 60-day window is a tax deadline, but the decision inside it is a wealth planning decision. More than filing a form, you’re committing a substantial sum to a new investment under time pressure, without the diligence runway you would normally want. Founders who treat Section 1045 as an emergency option tend to find themselves choosing between a bad investment and a missed deadline. The strategy works when the reinvestment target is already identified before the deal closes.
The Section 1045 election must appear on the tax return for the year you sold your original QSBS, not the year you completed the reinvestment. If you sell in November and close on the replacement shares in January, the election belongs on the November year’s return, even though the investment happened in the new year. Miss it, and the deferral is gone regardless of whether everything else was done correctly.
The replacement shares must qualify as QSBS under Section 1202 on their own merits: a domestic C corporation, stock acquired at original issuance, company gross assets under $75 million at issuance (for post-OBBBA shares), and an active qualified business for at least 6 months after issuance.
Founders often assume the replacement must be a brand-new company. It doesn’t. Rolling proceeds into another early-stage startup, taking a founding position in a co-founder’s venture, or investing in a qualifying seed round can each work, provided the shares are original issuances and the company passes the tests.
Founders who want to roll into a company they start themselves can do that too, but the IRS requires genuine operating substance. A legitimate business plan, real activities, and a properly structured C-corporation. Rolling proceeds into a holding company sitting on cash will not survive scrutiny.
Even if they don’t ask it out loud, most founders wonder, What if the replacement company fails? The deferred gain from the original sale is embedded in the basis of the replacement shares, so the outcome depends on that company’s trajectory. If the shares become worthless, you may be able to claim a loss under Section 1244, but this is not a consequence-free move. The reinvestment must make sense as an investment, independent of the tax benefit.
The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, signed into law on July 4, 2025, left Section 1045 untouched. What shifted is the landscape around the rollover. Under the pre-OBBBA rules, selling QSBS before five years meant no exclusion at all, so the rollover was the only path. The new tiered schedule for post-OBBBA shares changed that calculus at years three and four, but not across the board.
The table below shows where the rollover remains essential and where a founder with post-OBBBA shares now has more options.
| Holding Period | Pre-OBBBA Shares (issued on or before July 4, 2025) | Post-OBBBA Shares (issued after July 4, 2025) |
| Under 6 months | No exclusion. Rollover not available. | No exclusion. Rollover not available. |
| 6 months to 3 years | No exclusion. Rollover defers the gain. | No exclusion. Rollover defers the gain. |
| 3 to 4 years | No exclusion. Rollover defers the gain. | 50% exclusion available. Rollover still the path to 100%. |
| 4 to 5 years | No exclusion. Rollover defers the gain. | 75% exclusion available. Rollover still the path to 100%. |
| 5+ years | 100% exclusion up to $10M per issuer. | 100% exclusion up to $15M per issuer (inflation-adjusted after 2026). |
That said, the rollover remains the right tool in specific situations. If you want the full 100% exclusion and can hold replacement shares to the five-year mark, the rollover outperforms a partial exclusion on the original sale. If the gain exceeds the $15 million per-issuer cap, rolling the excess into a second qualifying company defers recognition rather than triggering it. For founders still holding pre-OBBBA shares under the old all-or-nothing framework, the rollover is the only legitimate option for an early exit.
Rolling pre-OBBBA shares into new replacement stock does not upgrade them to the post-OBBBA tiered schedule. The exclusion percentage is tied to the acquisition date of the original shares. The replacement company is evaluated under whichever rules applied when it issued its own shares. That matters for the gross asset cap and per-issuer limit, but it is a separate question from the exclusion percentage.
Founders who miss this window rarely lack good advisors; their advisors likely aren’t talking to each other before the deal closes.
The attorney negotiating the purchase agreement is focused on representations and indemnification. The CPA is managing the tax return. The wealth advisor is often brought in after the term sheet is signed. None of them is independently responsible for flagging that a qualifying reinvestment needs to be identified before the 60-day clock starts.
This is a coordination problem, not a knowledge problem. Section 1045 is well documented. What is harder to find is an advisor who can sit at the intersection of the tax deadline, the investment decision, and the estate planning implications of moving a concentrated gain into a new position, and who runs that coordination proactively rather than reactively.
If you have equity approaching a potential liquidity event before the five-year mark, the time to work through this is before the letter of intent is signed. At Next Capital, we work with founders on exactly this kind of pre-exit planning, coordinating with your existing legal and tax counsel so nothing falls through the cracks.
Yes, with significant conditions. The replacement company must be a legitimate operating business with genuine activities, a real business plan, and a properly formed C-corporation. Rolling proceeds into a shell holding cash will not qualify. The provision was designed to encourage continued entrepreneurship, and the IRS expects the replacement company to reflect that intent. Work closely with both legal and tax counsel before structuring this; the substance requirement is real and needs to be documented carefully.
You must have held the original QSBS for more than six months. This is a hard floor with no exceptions. Stock held for six months or less does not qualify for the rollover, regardless of how quickly you reinvest the proceeds or how clean the replacement stock is.
No. The rollover defers the gain; it doesn’t erase it. The deferred amount reduces your basis in the replacement shares. When you eventually sell the replacement stock, that gain will be recognized unless you’ve held long enough to qualify for the Section 1202 exclusion at that point. If the replacement shares fail or lose value, the deferred gain is still embedded in your basis, which is why the investment decision and the tax decision need to be evaluated together.
No. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, signed July 4, 2025, left Section 1045 unchanged. What changed under the OBBBA is the Section 1202 framework surrounding the rollover: the per-issuer exclusion cap increased to $15 million for post-OBBBA stock (up from $10 million), the gross asset threshold for qualifying companies increased to $75 million (up from $50 million), and a tiered partial exclusion schedule now applies to stock issued after July 4, 2025. The 60-day window and six-month minimum hold are unchanged.
Yes. Section 1045 allows you to split the proceeds across multiple qualifying QSBS issuances, and each company carries its own per-issuer exclusion cap. A founder who rolls into two separate qualifying companies may have access to two distinct exclusion caps when those shares are eventually sold, provided each company independently meets the Section 1202 requirements at that time. The investment rationale for each company has to hold up on its own terms.
Generally, no. A Section 1045 rollover requires you to reinvest your liquidation proceeds directly into replacement stock issued by a qualifying domestic C corporation. Because standard venture capital and private equity funds are structured as pass-through partnerships (LPs or LLCs) rather than C corporations, purchasing an interest in a fund will not satisfy the rollover requirements.
While an investment fund can execute a Section 1045 rollover at the partnership level when the fund sells and reinvests in portfolio companies, an individual investor cannot roll individual exit proceeds into a fund structure. Pre-packaged 1045 QSBS funds designed to absorb individual rollover capital do not exist under current tax law. To keep your clock running, you must deploy the capital directly into a qualifying C corporation’s original equity issuance.
Dan Magier is a Partner and Managing Director of Wealth Strategy and Advisory at Next Capital Management, where he works with founders, executives, and complex families on pre-liquidity planning, tax strategy, and multigenerational wealth coordination. He holds the CFP® and CAIA® designations and earned a B.A. in Economics from the University of Michigan.
There is a phrase that crosses every culture and every generation of wealth: “shirtsleeves to
There is a phrase that crosses every culture and every generation of wealth: “shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations.”
Most families have heard some version of it; fewer stop to ask why it keeps proving true.
I recently recorded a short video exploring an idea I’ve been thinking about for a long time. I call it the Citizen Heir. The core of it is that raising a responsible heir and being a good citizen draw from exactly the same source. Both are forms of received responsibility, and both deteriorate when privilege loses its connection to obligation.
Families who break the shirtsleeves cycle treat the preparation of their heirs as seriously as the management of their assets.
Successful families right now are struggling mightily to raise their kids to be productive, moral people in an Instagram, me-first world. The question I keep hearing from parents who are serious about it is, “Where do you turn when achievement gets measured in dollars and likes?” The stories of ruined generations are as old as time itself. There’s even a phrase for it, “shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations.”
Every culture has a version of that saying, and they all mean the same thing. The question I keep coming back to: Why do some families break that pattern when so many others don’t? The ones who do almost always took seriously something harder than drafting a good estate plan. They took seriously the job of raising a good heir.
I’m Frazer Rice. I work with families navigating significant financial complexity at NextVantage and today I want to share a concept I come back to constantly in those conversations. I call it the Citizen Heir.
Citizenship has been on my mind a lot lately, especially with America’s 250th birthday coming up. We live in divided times and the discourse around civic responsibility has suffered for it. Many people feel that core ideas and institutions are no longer worthy of their trust.
We’ve become loose from our moorings. That might sound like a political observation, but it’s actually a family one. Because when you strip away the noise, what families with significant wealth are really trying to do is transmit values alongside resources, and that’s exactly where most of them run into trouble.
They get very close to the money and somewhere in the process they forget the value part. Here’s the connection I keep making: a good citizen and a good heir are operating under the same moral logic.
A good citizen doesn’t treat rights as pure entitlement. They understand they’ve received something they didn’t fully build. It could be a society, a tradition, a set of institutions, and yet they are responsible for what they do with it.
A good heir works exactly the same way. Wealth isn’t a possession, it’s a trust. In Jewish, Christian, and Islamic traditions, this idea is ancient.
Wealth is treated as something given for service, not self-indulgence. A faithful person uses what they receive with humility, with charity, and with accountability. The good heir honors the giver by using the inheritance wisely.
Both are tests of whether a person can handle a gift without becoming enslaved by it. Politically, a good citizen sustains the Republic not just by obeying laws, but by defending institutions and resisting the pull toward passive entitlement. A good heir does something analogous within a family.
They preserve capital and avoid waste. They use resources in ways that strengthen something larger than themselves over time. In both cases, the person is a custodian of an order that predates them and should outlast them.
Citizenship without duty is just a passport. Inherited wealth without responsibility is just a balance. Both require something from the person holding them or they stop meaning anything at all.
Neither the citizen nor the heir chose the structure they were born into, but both are answerable for what they do with it. The good citizen and the good heir each prove themselves by converting privilege into obligation and obligation into something durable. A family’s educational efforts have to acknowledge that reality.
Preparing an heir isn’t a side project. It deserves as much intention as any other part of the plan. At NextVantage, we work with families to build the structures that reinforce this kind of thinking.
Things like governance frameworks, family councils, stewardship expectations that are written down and revisited. The families who get this right have one thing in common. They treated that preparation of their heirs as seriously as the management of their assets.
If this connects with something that you’re thinking about, I welcome a conversation. You can reach us at Next-Vantage.com. The conversation doesn’t have to start anywhere complicated, it just has to start.
The families we work with often arrive at the family office question the same way.
The families we work with often arrive at the family office question the same way. Their financial situation has grown more complex than their current advisory structure can manage, and they want to know whether building a dedicated structure makes sense.
Complexity drives this decision—how many entities are involved, whether your advisors share a coherent view of your situation, and how many generations the plan needs to span. Those variables matter more than any single number.
Teresa Armel, Wealth Advisor at Next Vantage, walks through the six factors that genuinely shape this decision, including why a family office is not always the right answer.
If this is something you are working through, we hope the video gives you a useful framework.
You have a CPA, an estate attorney, a financial advisor, and probably a few other advisors. Each of them knows they’re part of your situation, but none of them is responsible for how the pieces connect. And you are the one managing that gap, on top of running a company or a demanding career, on top of your family, and on top of everything else you have going on.
At some point, the question of a family office surfaces. Most people approach it by just asking whether they have enough wealth to justify one. But that question on its own misses the bigger picture.
Hi, I’m Teresa Armel, a wealth advisor at Next Vantage. We work with families who have reached a point where their financial complexity has outpaced their current advisory structure. Whether establishing a family office is the right answer to that problem depends on six key factors.
The first factor is complexity. The question of having enough wealth matters in a sense that a family office is expensive, and there is a floor below which the economics simply don’t work. But complexity is what determines whether one is genuinely needed, and these two concepts don’t always move together.
For families overseeing businesses across multiple jurisdictions, real estate in different markets, and estate plans that span more than one generation, the coordination alone can grow well beyond what a traditional advisory arrangement was ever built to manage. If the advisors you have are each working their piece without visibility into the others, that is a signal that you should consider a family office. The second factor to consider is cost.
A properly staffed family office is expensive to operate. Depending on the structure and scope, you are typically looking at somewhere between one to three million dollars a year, and sometimes even more. Before that number becomes the basis for a decision, it needs to be measured against what you are currently spending across all your advisors, and whether a dedicated structure would deliver better outcomes for the difference.
Some families find that comparison points clearly toward building a family office, others find that what they need is simply better coordination of the advisors they already have, and that is a different answer, and often a less expensive one. Assuming the economics support it, the third factor is purpose. A family office without a defined mandate tends to expand in directions that weren’t intended and underperform in areas that were.
Before building anything, the family needs to define what the office will be specifically responsible for. Investment management, tax and legal coordination, philanthropy, education for the next generation, those are just a few things to consider. The scope should really come from the family’s genuine needs, not from a general idea of what a family office is supposed to include.
The fourth factor is governance, and it is one that families most consistently underestimate. Governance means having written clarity around who makes which decisions, how disagreements between family members or branches get resolved, and how leadership responsibilities transfer over time. A structure without that clarity tends to function well until a specific moment arrives where it doesn’t.
The families that work through those questions before a conflict forces them to are the ones who navigate transitions with far less disruption. With governance defined, the fifth factor is people. A family office requires specialized professionals across several functions, including investment management, legal and tax expertise, estate planning, and operational staff experience in running a complex private organization.
The ability to attract and retain that talent is one of the most practical constraints on this decision. A well-designed structure with the wrong team will underperform a simpler one with the right people every time. And the sixth factor is structure, specifically, what are you building? The three models to consider are a single-family office built and staffed exclusively for one family, a multi-family office that distributes infrastructure and costs across several families, and then a hybrid that draws from both.
Each involves different trade-offs on cost, privacy, control, and operational responsibility. How the previous five factors resolve tends to make one of those options look considerably more appropriate than the others. Working through these six key factors does not always lead to the conclusion that a family office is the right answer.
For some families, the right structure is a more coordinated advisory relationship, one that delivers the oversight and integration a family office would provide without the cost and complexity of building a standalone organization. That distinction is a significant part of what we do at Next Vantage.
If you are managing complexity that your current advisory structure was not built to handle, we would welcome the chance to discuss what the right answer looks like for your specific situation. You can reach our team at next-vantage.com.
By Frazer Rice In the first part of this series, we examined The Architecture of Family
By Frazer Rice
In the first part of this series, we examined The Architecture of Family Wealth Meetings, exploring how to establish a formal cadence and draft a family mission statement. Once that structural foundation is in place, the next challenge is determining how and when to reveal the scale of family assets to the next generation.
The concern tends to be dual-sided: revealing too much too soon may stifle a child’s ambition, yet waiting too long can leave them unprepared for the responsibilities they’ll eventually inherit. In an era of instant digital access, the “wait and see” approach carries real risk. Children are observant. They notice behavioral cues, lifestyle choices, and what turns up in a search.
The deliberate wealth disclosure strategy we’ve outlined below is designed to replace accidental discovery with intentional education.
The disclosure process begins long before a dollar amount is ever mentioned. At this stage, the focus stays on concepts, not wealth: earning, saving, giving, and spending. Money is a tool, not a scorecard; and that framing, introduced early and reinforced consistently, is more durable than any formal conversation that comes later.
Simple structures work well here. An allowance tied to basic chores, three jars labeled “spend,” “save,” and “give,” and the experience of making small mistakes with their own money all build the habits that matter.
If a child notices your family’s house or vacations look different from their friends’, they don’t need a balance sheet. What they need is a simple exclamation: “Our family has more choices than some, which means we also have more responsibility to use that wisely and help others.”
At this stage, the conversation can move from abstract concepts to something more grounded. Children in this range are ready to hear that your family is comfortable or has more than enough (without numbers attached) and to understand that work, discipline, and time built that position.
Giving them a real role helps. Managing a modest budget for clothes, activities, or charitable giving, with a simple goal-setting requirement before funds are replenished, builds financial judgment in a low-stakes environment. Privacy norms are also worth introducing now: what is appropriate to post or discuss with friends, and why discretion matters both for safety and for basic humility.
This is where the conversation moves from vague to directional. Teenagers are ready to hear that there are significant assets, that some form of inheritance or trust support exists, and that this can work against them if approached carelessly.
The emphasis at this stage is on structure rather than totals. Explaining that investments and trusts are designed to support education, possibly a first home or a business, but not to fund an unlimited lifestyle, sets realistic expectations without overwhelming detail. Tying that support to expectations—school performance, work experience, responsible social media use, participation in a family giving project—reinforces that access and responsibility are connected.
An example that tends to work well at this age: “We have built enough that you’ll have real options—but options only matter if you’re prepared to make something of them. That part is still on you.”
Before legal documents and trust notices start arriving in their inbox, which they will, it’s worth having a more explicit conversation about what exists, what it’s for, and what the guardrails are. Young adults in this range are ready to hear that specific accounts and trusts exist, what they’re designed for, and what guardrails govern them.
Sharing general ranges or high-level net worth ranges, along with the actual terms of key trusts (e.g., ages of access, co-trustee structures, distribution standards) becomes appropriate once they’ve demonstrated basic financial competence. This is also the right time to begin bringing them into the professional ecosystem in a limited way: sitting in on a portion of the annual advisor meeting, reviewing an Investment Policy Statement summary, or discussing their potential role in a family business.
Consider a founder of a successful technology company with two children in their mid-20s. Rather than scheduling a single disclosure conversation at age 25, the founder used a three-year road map.
In year one, the children were invited to a meeting to discuss the family’s private foundation and were given a modest budget to manage. In year two, they sat in on a session with the family’s tax attorney to understand why certain assets were held in trusts. In year three, the founder shared a high-level summary of the total estate and the “in case of emergency” plan.
By the time the children understood the full scale of the wealth, they had already spent two years building the skills to handle it.
For mature adults who have established their own professional footing, the strategy moves toward full transparency. This means walking through the complete estate plan, reviewing governance documents, discussing who does what among trustees, directors, and advisors, and having the “if we’re gone tomorrow” conversation directly.
At this stage the process becomes genuinely collaborative. Co-creating a personal plan—how they’ll support themselves, what they can reasonably expect from family structures, how inheritance is staged rather than transferred in a lump sum—brings adult children into the process as participants rather than leaving them to discover the details later.
Inviting them into leadership roles gradually, whether on a charitable committee, a family council, or an investment education session, allows them to practice stewardship before major distributions arrive. The goal is that by the time full control transfers, it feels like a continuation of something they’ve been building toward for years.
Disclosure isn’t a single conversation. It’s a multi-year process, and the families who navigate it most effectively tend to treat it with the same structural discipline they would apply to any significant business transition. Next Capital and Next Vantage work with clients to develop these road maps, acting as a centralized framework where financial, legal, and tax information stays consistent and grounded in the family’s long-term goals. The aim is to have the next generation genuinely prepared, both financially and emotionally, by the time full transparency arrives.
Developing a wealth disclosure strategy is a meaningful step in preserving your family’s legacy. Reach out to us at (212) 433-1108 or frice@nextcapitalmgmt.com to discuss how we can help design a road map tailored to your family’s specific situation.
The age at which to tell children about family wealth depends less on a specific number and more on demonstrated maturity, but most families find a staged approach works better than a single conversation at any age. Early childhood is the right time to introduce concepts like earning, saving, and giving without attaching a dollar amount. The teen years are appropriate for directional information: that significant assets exist, that trusts are structured for specific purposes, and that access comes with expectations. Full financial transparency, including specific figures and trust terms, typically makes sense once a child has established their own professional footing, generally in their mid-to-late 20s.
To explain family wealth without affecting a child’s motivation, you should utilize a tiered disclosure strategy that emphasizes values and stewardship over specific dollar amounts. Framing the family capital as a tool for opportunity, such as education or entrepreneurship, helps the next generation view wealth as a responsibility to be managed rather than a replacement for personal effort. This approach allows heirs to develop their own professional identity before they understand the full scale of the family’s financial position.
If a child discovers family wealth online, the most effective response is a direct conversation that provides the context a search engine cannot. A public estimate shows a number; it does not explain the tax obligations, the legal structures, the guardrails on distributions, or the family’s long-term intentions. Acknowledging what they found, correcting any inaccuracies, and using the moment to begin a more structured disclosure conversation tends to be more productive than either dismissing it or treating it as a crisis.
Sharing estate plans and trust documents with adult children is generally appropriate between the ages of 22 and 28, once they have enough professional experience to understand the purpose and complexity of legal structures. The more useful disclosure at this stage is the “how” (e.g., who the trustees are, what standards govern distributions, and how the various structures interact) rather than simply the dollar figures. Introducing these documents gradually, ideally in the context of a family wealth meeting with an advisor present, gives adult children the professional context to understand what they’re reading.
Telling children that their inheritance will not be equal is best handled as a transparent explanation of the reasoning rather than a unilateral announcement. Distributions that reflect specific factors—active participation in a family business, varying levels of financial need, differing roles in family governance—are easier to accept when the logic is explained directly and grounded in the family’s stated values. Resentment most often follows decisions that arrive without context, not decisions that are genuinely explained. A family mission statement or written distribution framework gives that explanation a foundation that extends beyond any single conversation.
Frazer Rice is Director of Family Office Services and a Partner at Next Vantage, the Family Office Services group of Next Capital Management in New York City. With more than two decades of experience advising ultra-high-net-worth families, Frazer helps clients bring structure, clarity, and coordination to complex wealth. He specializes in intergenerational planning, fiduciary strategy, and family governance, helping clients manage both the financial and human sides of wealth. Known for his sharp, strategic thinking, Frazer provides a board of directors-level perspective, helping families identify risks, organize priorities, and align advisors around long-term goals.
Before joining Next Capital, he served as Regional Director at Pendleton Square Trust and spent 16 years at Wilmington Trust, where he rose to Managing Director in the New York office. He is the author of Wealth, Actually: Intelligent Decision-Making for the 1% and host of the Wealth Actually podcast, exploring the modern wealth ecosystem.
Frazer earned his BA in Political Science and History from Duke University and his JD from Emory University School of Law. He serves as President of the New York City Estate Planning Council and is a frequent speaker on wealth management and family dynamics. A Manhattan resident, his interests include golf, yoga, media production, politics, horror movies, and 1980s pop culture. To learn more about Frazer, connect with him on LinkedIn.
Next Capital Management, LLC (“Company”) is an SEC registered investment adviser located in New York, New York.
The Company may only transact business in those states in which it is registered, or qualifies for an exemption or exclusion from registration requirements. The Company’s website is limited to the dissemination of general information pertaining to its advisory services, together with access to additional investment-related information, publications, and links. Accordingly, the publication of the Company’s website on the Internet should not be construed by any consumer and/or prospective client as the Company’s solicitation to effect, or attempt to effect transactions in securities, or the rendering of personalized investment advice for compensation, over the Internet. Any subsequent, direct communication by the Company with a prospective client shall be conducted by a representative that is either registered or qualifies for an exemption or exclusion from registration in the state where the prospective client resides. A copy of the Company’s current written disclosure Brochure and Form CRS discussing the Company’s business operations, services, and fees is available on this website and/or from the Company upon written request. The Company does not make any representations or warranties as to the accuracy, timeliness, suitability, completeness, or relevance of any information prepared by any unaffiliated third party, whether linked to the Company’s website or incorporated herein, and takes no responsibility therefor. All such information is provided solely for convenience purposes only and all users thereof should be guided accordingly.
Please remember that different types of investments involve varying degrees of risk, and there can be no assurance that the future performance of any specific investment or investment strategy (including those undertaken or recommended by the Company), will be profitable or equal any historical performance level(s). Neither the Company’s investment adviser registration status, nor any amount of prior experience or success, should be construed that a certain level of results or satisfaction will be achieved if the Company is engaged, or continues to be engaged, to provide investment advisory services. The Company’s registration status does not imply a specific level of skill or training.
Certain portions of the Company’s website (i.e., newsletters, articles, commentaries, etc.) may contain a discussion of, and/or provide access to, the Company’s (and those of other investment and non-investment professionals) positions and/or recommendations as of a specific prior date. Due to various factors, including changing market conditions, such discussion may no longer be reflective of current position(s) and/or recommendation(s). Moreover, no client or prospective client should assume that any such discussion serves as the receipt of, or a substitute for, personalized advice from the Company, or from any other investment professional. The Company is neither an attorney nor an accountant, and no portion of the website content should be interpreted as legal, accounting or tax advice.
Please Note: Limitations. Neither rankings nor recognitions by unaffiliated rating services, publications, media, or other organizations, nor the achievement of any professional designation, certification, degree, or license, membership in any professional organization, or any amount of prior experience or success, should be construed by a client or prospective client as a guarantee that the client will experience a certain level of results if the investment professional or the investment professional’s firm is engaged, or continues to be engaged, to provide investment advisory services.
To the extent that any client or prospective client utilizes any economic calculator or similar interactive device contained within or linked to the Company’s website, the client and/or prospective client acknowledges and understands that the information resulting from the use of any such calculator/device, is not, and should not be construed, in any manner whatsoever, as the receipt of, or a substitute for, personalized individual advice from the Company, or from any other investment professional.
Each client and prospective client agrees as a condition precedent to his/her/its access to the Company’s website, to release and hold harmless the Company, its officers, directors, owners, employees and agents from any and all adverse consequences resulting from any of his/her/its actions and/or omissions which are independent of his/her/its receipt of personalized individual advice from the Company.