Wrong foundations are the most expensive to change later. Entity structure, founding equity, partner selection, jurisdiction, and market posture are decisions that compound. The first thirty days determine what the next three years cost to fix.
The person you need is the one who has structured this before, across borders, and will say what the default choice costs you in year three. Bring the situation. I meet you there.
Delaware C-Corp, LLC, Swiss AG, holding company above operating company, single-member vs multi-member. Each choice closes some doors and opens others. The default lawyer's answer is rarely the right answer for what you are actually building.
Vesting, cliffs, voting trust, preferred vs common, equity reserved for future hires. The split that feels fair in month one becomes the fight in month thirty. The time to structure it is now, with the people who are still aligned.
Non-US founder entering the US. US operator expanding into Europe or GCC. European technology with US distribution. Every border shifts the operating logic. Assuming the home-market playbook travels is the most common and most expensive mistake.
Co-founder roles, outside partnerships, distribution partnerships, channel partnerships. The structure you negotiate before revenue is the structure you are stuck with when revenue arrives. Early is cheap. Late is expensive or impossible.
By the time the build has revenue, a board, or investors, the foundational decisions are baked in. Rewriting an entity structure after the first term sheet is seven-figure legal work and twelve-month timeline. Renegotiating founder equity after the first executive hire is company-ending work. The decisions feel small on the day they are made. They are not small.
The new build is priced at the beginning. You just cannot see the invoice yet.
The structure a founder picks at incorporation quietly sets the ceiling for every downstream decision. What the default setup does not protect against, and what has to be chosen deliberately.
Equity decisionA split that felt fair in year one. What it looked like in year three when one founder scaled into the business and the other did not, and how the conversation finally closed.
Market entry decisionExpansion into a second jurisdiction that looked clean on the spreadsheet and hollowed out the operating company by month eighteen.
A single focused engagement for one decision or structural question.
Apply for this engagement Tier 02Recurring outside read for operators making consequential decisions continuously.
Apply for this engagement Tier 03On-site, principal-to-principal. Boards, founding teams, and ownership groups in transition.
Apply for this engagementIf the build is primarily a cross-jurisdictional move and the entity is one part of that, start here.
Adjacent pathIf the build is already in motion and one specific structural decision will not close, start here.
For multi-party roomsIf the build involves co-founders, investors, or multi-party governance structuring, the team engagement covers it.
Before the first irreversible decision. Entity type, equity structure, jurisdiction selection, and partner terms are the most expensive items to unwind later. Advisory earns its fee in the first month by preventing structural debt that would otherwise surface at the first term sheet or the first senior hire.
Delaware is the default answer. The default answer is not always correct. For a non-US founder, the right answer depends on tax treaty alignment, banking access, visa posture, and what the operating company actually does. The conversation tests those variables against your specific situation rather than assuming the default.
Not inherently. It is a mistake when the split is chosen to avoid a harder conversation about roles, commitment, and future contribution. If 50-50 is the answer after testing those variables, it is the right answer. If it is the answer because the conversation did not happen, it will age badly.
No. This is structural decision-making that happens before lawyers and accountants execute. The advisor names the structural question, the counsel documents the decision. Both are needed. They are different roles.
The new build is priced at the beginning. Structure it while it is still inexpensive to structure.