Blog

Founder secondary sales, where an owner sells some of their existing shares rather than issuing new equity, are an important valuation event in Australia because they crystallise part of a business’s market value without changing the business itself in the same way as a full sale. For founders, investors, and advisers, the key question is not simply how much cash can be taken off the table, but what the transaction says about control, marketability, tax outcomes, and the value of the remaining stake. A properly scoped valuation engagement is essential to ensure the price reflects current market conditions, the business’s risk profile, and the rights attaching to the shares being sold.

What a founder secondary sale actually means

A secondary sale occurs when existing shares are transferred from the founder to a new or existing investor. Unlike a primary capital raising, the company does not receive the sale proceeds. The founder receives the cash, while the buyer acquires an ownership interest in the company. In valuation terms, this distinction matters because the shares sold may be subject to different rights, restrictions, and minority characteristics than the company as a whole.

For Australian private businesses, secondary sales often happen before a broader exit, during growth capital rounds, or where a founder wants to reduce concentration risk, fund personal liquidity, or create a partial succession pathway. In each case, the transaction price should be tested against the value of the underlying business, adjusted for the rights attached to the shares and the nature of the interest changing hands.

Why valuation is central to a founder liquidity event

Secondary share sales are frequently negotiated in the context of limited market evidence. Private companies rarely have a quoted market price, so the valuer must consider income, market, and asset-based approaches, then reconcile them against the specific facts of the business. A valuation is particularly important where the shares being sold are a minority parcel, where voting control remains with the founder, or where the company’s future cash flows are still being built rather than fully stabilised.

For investors, the issue is whether the price is supported by a defensible methodology. For founders, it is whether they are selling at a fair market value, whether the remaining equity still captures upside, and whether the sale may create downstream tax or governance consequences. For advisers, the valuation engagement needs to be robust enough to withstand scrutiny from other shareholders, boards, lenders, and the ATO where relevant.

Control, minority status, and marketability

A secondary sale is rarely a simple pro rata exercise. A buyer acquiring a minority parcel usually expects a discount for lack of control, because they cannot direct dividends, strategy, capital expenditure, or an exit. At the same time, private company shares are illiquid, so a discount for lack of marketability may also be relevant. The size of these discounts depends on the constitution, shareholders’ agreement, drag and tag rights, dividend policy, any buy-sell arrangements, and whether a realistic exit is foreseeable.

In some growth businesses, the buyer may accept a premium if the shares come with strategic influence, veto rights, or a pathway to control. In those situations, the valuer must separate enterprise value from equity value and then analyse the specific rights of the parcel being transferred.

Common valuation methodologies used in Australia

The right methodology depends on the business model, stage of maturity, and quality of earnings. For established trading businesses, a normalised earnings multiple approach is often appropriate, using EBITDA or SDE where owner benefits need to be adjusted. For recurring revenue businesses, revenue or ARR multiples may be relevant, but only where retention, growth efficiency, and customer quality support that approach. For businesses with project-based or cyclical earnings, a discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis may better capture the timing and risk of future cash flows.

Australian private market evidence generally shows that valuation multiples vary widely by sector and by quality. As a broad illustration, mature, lower-growth services businesses may trade on modest EBITDA multiples, while software and subscription businesses with strong net revenue retention (NRR), low churn, and predictable ARR growth can command materially higher multiples. A valuer must test whether growth is durable, whether margin expansion is real or temporary, and whether working capital requirements are understated.

Normalisation of earnings matters

Founder secondary sales often expose the difference between reported and maintainable earnings. A buyer will usually focus on normalised EBITDA or SDE, which may require adjustments for one-off expenses, owner-related benefits, excessive private expenditure, related-party charges, and non-recurring revenue. Because the founder is selling only part of the business, the market will also examine whether the remaining management depth and systems can sustain performance after the liquidity event.

Where the business relies heavily on the founder’s relationships or technical expertise, the valuation may need to reflect key person risk. That can materially affect the applicable multiple or discount rate, particularly in professional services, bespoke manufacturing, and founder-led distribution businesses.

How tax considerations can affect value and deal design

While tax advice sits with the client’s accountant or solicitor, taxation inevitably affects valuation outcomes and the pricing of a secondary sale. Capital Gains Tax (CGT) is usually central when a founder sells existing shares. Depending on the structure and ownership history, the small business CGT concessions may be available, including the 15-year exemption and other active asset rules. Whether those concessions apply can influence the founder’s after-tax position and therefore negotiation behaviour, but the valuer should not build in tax assumptions without proper instruction.

Private company sales can also interact with Division 7A if funds are extracted inappropriately from a company after the transaction. This is especially relevant where a founder uses sale proceeds to settle company-related obligations, repay shareholder loans, or restructure family wealth. Proper transaction design matters because debt-like items, working capital targets, and shareholder current accounts can all affect the equity value actually realised.

GST treatment also requires care. A business sale may be structured as a going concern in some circumstances, but a secondary share sale is generally a sale of shares, not a sale of business assets. That means the tax and valuation analysis must distinguish between the value of the entity, the value of the equity interest, and any embedded obligations or contingent liabilities.

Valuation implications for SMSFs and Division 296

Founder secondary sales are also relevant where the seller or buyer has interests in a self-managed superannuation fund holding business assets, business real property, or shares in a privately held company. Under Division 296, which commenced on 1 July 2026, realised earnings attributable to a member’s Total Superannuation Balance between $3 million and $10 million are subject to an additional 15% tax, and earnings above $10 million are subject to an additional 25% tax. The thresholds are indexed, the tax is personal to the individual rather than imposed on the fund, unrealised gains are not taxed under the final law, and first assessments are issued in the 2027-28 year for the 2026-27 financial year.

The valuation relevance is direct. SMSFs holding private company interests or business property must obtain current market valuations for Division 296 purposes, including where an optional cost base reset to market value is considered as at 30 June 2026. In a founder liquidity context, this increases the need for defensible market evidence because the valuation may affect not only the transaction price, but also the reported position of superannuation assets. A professional valuer will need to consider liquidity, control, rights attaching to the interest, and supportable market inputs.

What buyers look for in a secondary share price

In a well-run transaction, buyers do not simply ask what the founder wants to realise. They ask what the business can support on a reasonable basis. That means reviewing revenue concentration, customer retention, margin stability, growth rate, and the sustainability of earnings after normalisation. Where relevant, they compare the business with industry comparables and precedent transactions, adjusting for size, quality, leverage, and governance.

In higher-growth sectors, buyers will often focus on ARR expansion, NRR, gross margin, sales efficiency, and cohort behaviour. A strong NRR profile can support a higher multiple, but only if the retention is evidenced over enough periods and the growth is not dependent on unsustainable discounting. In lower-growth sectors, buyers may place greater weight on current cash flow, asset backing, and replacement cost. Either way, the valuer’s task is to test whether the secondary price is consistent with the business’s risk-adjusted future earnings.

Common mistakes founders make when taking money off the table

One common mistake is pricing the shares off headline revenue rather than maintainable earnings or cash flow. Another is ignoring the fact that a minority parcel cannot always command the same value per share as a controlling parcel. Founders also often underestimate the impact of transfer restrictions, drag-along and tag-along rights, vesting provisions, and future dilution from option pools or convertible instruments.

A further error is treating the transaction as purely a personal liquidity event and overlooking how it will be read by other stakeholders. A below-market transfer can create expectations among staff, co-investors, and family members. A poorly supported price can also complicate future fundraising, dispute resolution, or succession planning. This is why a limited scope valuation engagement may sometimes be suitable for a quick commercial assessment, but a full valuation engagement is usually preferable where the parcel is material or the ownership structure is complex.

Getting the valuation scope right

Under APES 225 Valuation Services, the scope of work must match the purpose. In practice, that means distinguishing between a valuation engagement, a limited scope valuation engagement, and a calculation engagement. For a founder secondary sale, the right scope depends on the level of decision-making required, the complexity of the business, and whether the result may be used in negotiations, governance processes, taxation matters, or related-party approvals.

A calculation engagement may be adequate where the parties agree on key assumptions and only need a professional computation. A limited scope valuation engagement can suit a narrower question with constrained access to information. A full valuation engagement is often the better choice where the shares are material, the structure is layered, or the transaction may become contentious. In all cases, the valuer should document assumptions, normalisation adjustments, methodology selection, and any applied discounts with care.

Conclusion

Founder secondary sales are more than a liquidity event. They are a valuation event that tests the true market value of a private business interest, the rights attached to the shares, and the tax consequences of the transaction. For Australian business owners, the best outcomes usually come from early valuation advice, clear transaction mechanics, and a defensible view of control, marketability, and maintainable earnings.

If you are considering a founder secondary sale, or need a valuation for transaction support, tax planning, or shareholder decision-making, contact InteleK Business Valuations & Advisory for a confidential valuation consultation.