NPT Research · Essay

The founder's tax problem.

The capital gains tax on a founder's equity may be the largest cost they will ever face. Planning for it rarely starts until a liquidity event is close. Started early, a strategy built for returns and diversification may also accumulate the losses to meet it.

July 2026

Many founders are, and should be, meticulous about their equity. The tax on eventually selling that equity, which is likely the greatest expense they will ever face, usually receives no planning at all until the issue is forced upon them.

This dynamic is somewhat understandable. For many years the equity was essentially worth nothing, and planning around a hypothetical fortune can feel premature. But equity tax planning has a property many decisions do not. Some of the most effective tools require years of lead time, so by the time the problem feels (or is) concrete, most of the options are less impactful.

Two common outcomes

The first is the fast exit. An acquisition closes quickly, and the proceeds arrive within months or a year of the initial discussions. A founder selling $20M of low-basis stock in a high-tax state pays roughly 37% of the gain, about $7.4M, in combined federal and state tax.1

The second is slower and potentially more damaging. The company goes public, the lockup expires, but the founder does not sell (partly out of loyalty and optics, partly because selling means a large tax bill). It could also be because up until now, they've only ever experienced their equity increase in value. Newly public stocks decline often and sometimes sharply. A founder, or early employee, holding through a 50%+ drawdown in the asset that represents nearly all of their net worth learns that the tax they were avoiding was the cheaper of the two costs.

Both outcomes share a cause. No tax capacity was in place when liquidity arrived, so every path led to either paying the full tax immediately or not selling at all.

What lead time buys

Founders do have one dedicated provision, qualified small business stock (QSBS), and for startups that qualify it is the first thing to understand. QSBS can exclude $10 million or more of gain per issuer outright.2 But QSBS is capped and not every company qualifies for it. For founders whose equity has grown in value significantly, it can cover part of the tax bill, but typically not all of it. For the remainder, one of the most effective tools is proper planning well in advance of a liquidity event. One tool that may be powerful in these situations is a tax-aware long/short investment strategy.

The strategy is built as an investment first. It seeks pre-tax returns from a diversified long/short equity portfolio, and it gives the founder liquid holdings independent of the company's fortunes. The loss harvesting comes on top of that investment case.

The strategy pairs long and short positions, which gives it tax loss harvesting ability in both up and down markets. Rising markets create losses on the short side, falling markets on the long side, with the strategy systematically harvesting while staying fully invested.3 Those losses accumulate year after year into a loss base that does not expire. In our simulations, run from 2016 through the middle of this year, the losses come to 20% to 30% of portfolio value in a typical year. The cumulative loss total passes 100% of invested capital around the third year, reaches ~1.7x the capital by the fifth year, and ~3x by the tenth.4

Those loss figures are the argument for starting early. A program started five years before liquidity, funded with even a fraction of the eventual proceeds, may deliver accumulated losses of ~1.7x the amount invested. A three-year head start accumulates losses on the order of the investment itself. Every dollar of losses absorbs a dollar of gain at the sale, deferring tax that would otherwise be paid immediately. Investing in the strategy after the liquidity event still works, but it builds the loss base after the gains are already being realized, and the first years of selling get less benefit.

Exhibit 1Two founders: same exit, different strategy inception dates.Source: NPT, illustrative
0%100%200%300%012345678910YearsCumulative realized losses · % of program capitalLiquidity eventarrives at the event with losses of ~1.7x the programstarts at the event, first sales taxed in full~300%started five years early~170%started at the event
Note. Illustrative pacing consistent with the NinePointTwo simulations cited in the text (cumulative net losses passing 100% of invested capital around the third year, roughly 1.7 times invested capital by the fifth, and roughly three times by the tenth). Both founders run the same program. Only the start date differs. Actual loss generation varies with market conditions and implementation, and losses offset capital gains, not ordinary income beyond a small annual allowance.

Where the capital comes from

The usual objection is that founders have little liquid capital before an exit. However, these days secondary sales and tenders have become routine at growth-stage companies. Proceeds from a Series C or D secondary are well suited to funding a tax-aware long/short strategy. So are accumulated savings, prior exits, or the first tranche sold after an IPO. The strategy needs to match the size of what the founder realistically intends to sell in the first few years, rather than the size of their entire stake.

And selling some of their equity, regardless of taxes, is generally the right decision. The venture business is built on power laws, but in our view a founder's personal net worth should not be built the same way. Selling just enough to secure a family's finances changes nothing about a founder's commitment to the business. The founders who come to regret their equity decisions are typically the ones who sold nothing, or who paid taxes they had years of warning to plan for, rather than the ones who sold a sensible slice.

The window

A founder's window opens long before the tax does. That window is when the problem is cheapest to address. It is also when diversifying away from a single concentrated position matters most. The strategy compounds with time, so beginning to build a loss base when a liquidity event starts looking probable, rather than when the proceeds are scheduled, can be a smart decision. One that few founders are aware of today.

For the mechanics and the research in full, see our full research primer.

Notes
  1. The 37% combined rate reflects 23.8% federal (20% long-term capital gains rate plus 3.8% Net Investment Income Tax) and approximately 13% for a high-income taxpayer in a high-tax state such as California or New York.
  2. Section 1202. For stock issued on or before July 4, 2025, up to $10 million of gain per issuer (or ten times basis, if greater) can be excluded after a five-year hold. Stock issued after that date gets a $15 million cap and a tiered exclusion that starts at three years, under the 2025 tax act. The qualification rules are detailed enough that founders should raise them with a tax advisor early.
  3. The common structures are labeled 130/30 or 150/50. A 150/50 portfolio holds $150 long and $50 short per $100 of capital, keeping net market exposure at 100%.
  4. NinePointTwo simulations of tax-aware long/short portfolios run at 4% to 6% tracking error to the Russell 1000, January 2016 through June 2026. Loss generation scales with active risk, so lower-risk implementations harvest more slowly. Simulated results have inherent limitations and do not reflect actual trading; actual outcomes vary with market conditions, portfolio size, and implementation.
Important
Disclosures

Regulatory status

NinePointTwo Capital LLC (“NPT”) is a registered investment adviser with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and is registered with the National Futures Association (NFA) as a Commodity Trading Advisor (CTA) and Commodity Pool Operator (CPO). Registration does not imply a certain level of skill or training.

Trading in futures contracts and other leveraged derivatives carries a high degree of risk. The risk of loss in trading futures and derivatives is substantial; leverage inherent in these instruments can magnify trading losses as well as gains. Investors should only consider investing in such strategies when the gearing effect of leverage and the risks of loss are fully understood. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

About this essay

This essay is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy any security, fund, or investment vehicle. Such offers are made only via a formal Private Placement Memorandum or Investment Management Agreement. Nothing contained herein constitutes investment, legal, tax, or other advice, nor should it be relied upon in making an investment or other decision. NPT is not a law firm or a public accounting firm.

No tax or legal advice

While NPT's tax-aware strategies are designed to generate realized losses for tax-mitigation purposes, the effectiveness of these strategies depends on individual taxpayer circumstances and evolving tax laws. NPT does not guarantee any specific tax outcome or amount of loss harvesting. Clients and prospective clients should consult with their personal tax and legal professionals regarding their specific situation before implementing any strategy discussed herein.

Hypothetical and simulated results

The loss-generation figures in this essay are derived from NinePointTwo simulations of tax-aware long/short portfolios managed to 4% and 6% tracking error against the Russell 1000 index, covering January 2016 through June 2026 and including modeled transaction and financing costs. Loss figures represent net realized losses (realized losses net of realized gains) as a percentage of simulated portfolio value, aggregated from monthly data. These are simulated results, not the performance of any actual client account.

HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS HAVE MANY INHERENT LIMITATIONS, SOME OF WHICH, BUT NOT ALL, ARE DESCRIBED HEREIN. NO REPRESENTATION IS BEING MADE THAT ANY FUND OR ACCOUNT WILL OR IS LIKELY TO ACHIEVE PROFITS OR LOSSES SIMILAR TO THOSE SHOWN HEREIN. IN FACT, THERE ARE FREQUENTLY SHARP DIFFERENCES BETWEEN HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS AND THE ACTUAL RESULTS SUBSEQUENTLY REALIZED BY ANY PARTICULAR TRADING PROGRAM. ONE OF THE LIMITATIONS OF HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS IS THAT THEY ARE GENERALLY PREPARED WITH THE BENEFIT OF HINDSIGHT. IN ADDITION, HYPOTHETICAL TRADING DOES NOT INVOLVE FINANCIAL RISK, AND NO HYPOTHETICAL TRADING RECORD CAN COMPLETELY ACCOUNT FOR THE IMPACT OF FINANCIAL RISK IN ACTUAL TRADING. THERE ARE NUMEROUS OTHER FACTORS RELATED TO THE MARKETS IN GENERAL OR TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ANY SPECIFIC TRADING PROGRAM WHICH CANNOT BE FULLY ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE PREPARATION OF HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS, ALL OF WHICH CAN ADVERSELY AFFECT ACTUAL TRADING RESULTS.

Risks of tax-aware strategies (not exhaustive)

Pre-tax returns of a tax-aware strategy may meaningfully underperform expectations. Realized losses may be smaller than expected, and their value depends on an individual investor's circumstances, including marginal tax rates and the availability of capital gains to offset. Capital losses offset capital gains, not ordinary income beyond a small annual allowance. Gain deferral is not gain forgiveness, and deferred gains may be recognized on liquidation or withdrawal, even after pre-tax losses. Long/short portfolios involve leverage, shorting, and financing costs that index funds do not. The potential tax benefit of any strategy may be lessened or eliminated prospectively by changes in tax law, or retrospectively by an IRS challenge under current law.

Data and forward-looking statements

The data and analysis contained herein are based in part on theoretical and model portfolios derived from internal and third-party academic research. The information has been obtained or derived from sources believed to be reliable; however, NPT does not make any representation or warranty, express or implied, as to the information's accuracy or completeness. There can be no assurance that an investment strategy will be successful. Historic market trends are not reliable indicators of actual future market behavior or future performance of any particular investment, which may differ materially. The views expressed reflect the current views as of the date hereof, and NPT does not undertake to advise you of any changes in the views expressed. It should not be assumed that NPT will make investment recommendations in the future that are consistent with the views expressed herein. Charts, graphs, and illustrative examples provided herein are for illustrative purposes only and should not be relied upon as the primary basis for any investment decision. Forward-looking statements and projections are subject to change without notice.

Geographic availability

This essay is intended only for qualified investors and interested parties residing in jurisdictions in which NPT is qualified to provide investment advisory services. NPT and its affiliates may hold positions (long or short) or engage in securities transactions that are not consistent with the information and views expressed herein.

NinePointTwo Capital

A Los Angeles-based investment management firm. NPT Research publishes periodically and is distributed to clients and qualified prospective investors.

NPT Research
Published · July 2026
© 2026 NinePointTwo Capital LLC