Transactions & Assets

The standard transaction advisory model is built around a straightforward proposition: structure the deal to optimize financial returns, manage the legal risk, and close. In domestic markets with stable institutions, that model is sufficient.

In cross-border transactions involving Latin American jurisdictions, it is not. The gap between a technically correct transaction structure and one that will actually function in the institutional environment it must operate in can be significant — and that gap is rarely visible to teams whose expertise is financial or purely legal.

We work with companies on both sides of the deal.

For the U.S. multinational acquiring or partnering with a Latin American business: the asset is not only a set of financial statements. It is an institutional position — licenses, regulatory relationships, government contracts, customs authorizations, and market standing built over years through interactions with institutions that the acquirer has never dealt with directly. Understanding what that position is worth, what it depends on, and what happens to it in a change of control is the analysis that conventional due diligence consistently misses.

For the Latin American family business engaging with an international counterparty for the first time at scale: the American partner’s internal process — its compliance requirements, its approval timelines, its financial model assumptions — is a negotiating environment in itself. Understanding how that process works, where the real decision authority sits, and how to present the business’s institutional value in terms the counterparty can evaluate is leverage. Most family businesses arrive at the negotiating table without it.

We work alongside transaction counsel and financial advisors, not in place of them. Our contribution is the institutional layer:

The regulatory history of the asset — how it obtained its authorizations, what those authorizations depend on, and whether they survive the transaction structure being proposed.

The pressure point map — every point of contact between the business and the state, classified by frequency, discretion, and the compliance exposure that the acquiring partner will inherit.

The governance architecture — the structural design that isolates institutional risk, protects operational continuity, and ensures that the JV or acquired entity functions in the regulatory environment it will actually face, not a theoretical version of it.

The sequencing model — the optimal order of regulatory filings, institutional interactions, and approval processes, designed around the real timelines and dependencies of the relevant authorities.

Cross-border acquisitions in energy, infrastructure, industrial, and manufacturing sectors across Mexico, Colombia, and Ecuador.

Joint venture formation between U.S. multinationals and Latin American family businesses — from first contact through governance design.

Divestitures and restructuring in regulated sectors requiring regulatory approval or institutional engagement as a condition to closing.

Asset-level transactions where the value of the asset is materially dependent on authorizations, concessions, or regulatory standing that must be analyzed, protected, and transferred correctly.