Â鶹¹ÙÍø

This post uses hypothetical scenarios for illustrative purposes only. It does not describe any actual client, transaction, or representation, and is not legal advice.

A Jacksonville-based software founder I have worked with for several years surfaces in February about a buyer’s first markup of the merger agreement. The deal was tracking, the buyer was a credible mid-market PE platform, and the markup was reasonable on the commercial points. But buried in the closing conditions section was a paragraph that took the founder by surprise: “The Company shall have converted from a Florida limited liability company to a Delaware limited liability company, in accordance with the procedures of the Florida Revised Limited Liability Company Act and the Delaware Limited Liability Company Act, prior to the Closing.” The founder wanted to know what the buyer was asking for and why.

The buyer was asking for an outbound statutory conversion — a single corporate act that changes the company’s state of formation without disturbing its existence as a legal entity, its contracts, its bank accounts, its EIN, or its operating history. The reason was governance. The PE buyer’s investment committee, the buyer’s deal counsel, and the syndicate of lenders financing the transaction all preferred to acquire a Delaware-formed entity rather than a Florida-formed one. That preference is not unique to this buyer. It has become close to a market default for institutional buyers acquiring Florida-formed LLCs in 2026, and the request lands at a moment in the deal when most founders have not thought about state of formation since their formation lawyer set up the original Articles in 2014.

The request is straightforward to execute and, in most cases, the right answer for a deal that is closing. But the founder considerations are not what most founders assume, and the timing — when to do it, who pays for it, what diligence consequences flow from it — is worth thinking through before the buyer’s markup arrives.

What the conversion actually is, mechanically

The Florida Revised Limited Liability Company Act, codified at Chapter 605 of the Florida Statutes, contemplates statutory conversion as one of several end-of-entity-life or entity-restructuring mechanics — alongside merger, domestication, and dissolution. The outbound conversion mechanic, in particular, allows a Florida-formed LLC to convert into a Delaware-formed LLC by adopting a plan of conversion, securing the requisite member consent under the operating agreement, filing Articles of Conversion with the Florida Department of State, and simultaneously filing a Delaware Certificate of Conversion and Certificate of Formation with the Delaware Secretary of State. The 2025 amendments to Chapter 605 streamlined several procedural points — most notably the consent threshold defaults and the mechanics of the filing simultaneity — but the basic architecture is the same as it has been since 2013. and repays direct reading.

The result of the conversion is a Delaware-formed LLC that is the same legal entity as the prior Florida LLC. Same EIN. Same bank accounts. Same contracts. Same employment relationships. Same outstanding indebtedness. Same membership interests held by the same members. The conversion is not a sale, not a merger, not an asset transfer; it is a change of formation jurisdiction. The federal tax treatment, for an LLC taxed as a partnership or as a disregarded entity, is non-event — no recognition, no basis reset, no holding-period interruption. For an LLC taxed as an S corporation, the analysis is slightly more involved but generally also a non-event, provided the conversion is structured correctly.

Why buyers ask for it, and why their reasons are not all the same

Three categories of reasoning drive the buyer’s ask, and they have different weights in different deals.

The first reason is corporate governance familiarity. The buyer’s deal team, the buyer’s counsel, and the buyer’s portfolio CFO have all worked with Delaware LLC documents many times. The Delaware Limited Liability Company Act is the governance framework they know. The Florida Revised LLC Act is similar in many respects but different in others, and the cost of having to learn the differences — or to ask outside counsel to learn them on the deal clock — is one the buyer prefers not to pay. This is the weakest of the three reasons and the one that is most negotiable, because it is essentially a convenience preference.

The second reason is the litigation forum and the case law. Delaware Chancery has decades of accumulated case law on LLC fiduciary duties, on derivative claims, on indemnification of managers, on the enforceability of operating agreement provisions that waive default fiduciary obligations. Florida case law on the equivalent questions is thinner, less predictable, and — particularly on the question of whether the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing can be contracted around in an LLC operating agreement — more contested. Buyers who anticipate any litigation risk over the holding period prefer the more developed body of Delaware authority. This is a stronger reason and harder to negotiate against.

The third reason is exit optionality. The buyer’s exit strategy, in most institutional acquisitions, contemplates either a sale to a strategic in three to five years or an IPO in five to seven. Both exit paths prefer Delaware-formed entities. A strategic buyer at the exit will ask the same conversion question the current buyer is asking now, and converting at the current sale closing is much cheaper than converting later in the holding period when the entity is operating across more states and has more contracts to review. An IPO underwriter will require Delaware. The buyer is, in effect, doing the conversion now because it has to happen sometime before exit and now is the cheapest moment. This is the strongest reason and the one founders should accept without much pushback.

The founder considerations that are not in the buyer’s first markup

The first founder consideration is timing. The buyer’s markup will typically structure the conversion as a closing condition — something the founder agrees to deliver before the deal closes. That structure is fine in most cases, but it has a subtle implication. If the conversion is a closing condition, the buyer’s diligence team will continue working off the Florida-formed LLC’s documents during the period between signing and closing, and the conversion itself becomes an item on the closing checklist that must be confirmed before funds flow. The alternative — converting before signing, so the merger agreement is signed by the already-converted Delaware LLC — is cleaner from a deal-mechanics standpoint but requires the founder to commit to the conversion before the deal is fully certain. My preference, for most founders, is to negotiate the conversion as a pre-signing matter once the deal terms are commercially agreed, so that the founder is not running two parallel paperwork tracks during the closing week.

The second founder consideration is cost. The buyer’s first markup will be silent on who pays the legal and filing costs of the conversion. The founder should not assume the buyer is paying. Florida’s filing fee for Articles of Conversion is modest, and Delaware’s is similarly modest, but the legal work — drafting the plan of conversion, securing member consents, coordinating the filings, updating the operating agreement to track Delaware default rules — is real lawyer time. In most deals, this cost runs through the founder’s transaction expenses, which means it comes out of the founder’s net proceeds. A founder who wants the buyer to bear the cost should negotiate that point expressly, and the better moment to negotiate it is when the conversion request first appears in the markup.

The third founder consideration, and the one founders consistently underestimate, is the operating-agreement update. The post-conversion LLC will be governed by a new operating agreement that the buyer’s counsel drafts. That operating agreement will track the Delaware LLC Act’s default rules — which differ in several substantive respects from the Florida default rules that the founder has been operating under. The buyer’s draft will, almost certainly, include provisions that the founder did not have in the prior agreement: heightened management rights for the buyer post-closing, modified distribution mechanics, modified transfer restrictions, and tighter information-rights for minority members in the case of a founder rollover. The founder who treats the conversion as a clerical act and does not engage with the new operating agreement will be signing up for governance terms they did not negotiate. This is a substantive negotiation that deserves real attention. The corporate governance terms of the post-closing entity are where the founder’s rollover position lives, and the conversion is the moment those terms are set.

The Florida-specific points that affect the conversion

Several Florida-specific points are worth flagging for any deal where the converting entity has meaningful Florida operations.

The first is the documentary stamp tax analysis. A statutory conversion does not, in itself, trigger Florida documentary stamp tax. But the conversion sometimes happens in conjunction with other restructuring steps — a pre-sale F-reorganization, a sale of partnership interests, a contribution to a new entity — and some of those steps do have doc-stamp consequences. The founder’s counsel should walk through the full pre-closing restructuring sequence with state-tax counsel to confirm that the conversion itself is not triggering a tax that the Florida Department of Revenue will later assess.

The second is Florida sales-tax registration. If the converting LLC holds a Florida sales-tax registration, the registration travels with the entity through the conversion — the LLC is the same taxpayer before and after, with the same federal EIN. But the buyer’s diligence team will sometimes treat the conversion as a triggering event and will ask for confirmation that the Florida Department of Revenue has been notified. The notification is generally not legally required for a statutory conversion of this kind, but providing it preempts a diligence question and is cheap to do.

The third is Florida real property. If the converting LLC owns real property in Florida, the conversion does not trigger documentary stamp tax on the conveyance of that property — because there is no conveyance; the same legal entity continues to own it. But the title insurer, when issuing a policy on the post-closing buyer’s mortgage or on a refinancing, will want to see the conversion documents and will want an endorsement confirming the chain of ownership. The Florida-formed LLC’s deed remains valid; nothing has changed substantively. The title insurer’s process is procedural rather than substantive, but the founder should plan for it.

When the conversion is the wrong answer

Conversion is not the right answer in every Florida-formed-LLC deal. Two scenarios in particular argue against it.

The first is when the converting LLC holds Florida real property and the buyer’s structure contemplates a 1031 exchange. The conversion itself does not disturb the 1031 mechanics, but the diligence overhead and the operating-agreement update can complicate the timing of the exchange. In a deal where the 1031 timeline is tight, the buyer is often willing to acquire the Florida-formed entity and convert post-closing — which the buyer can do unilaterally after acquiring 100 percent of the membership interests.

The second is when the converting LLC has a contract that is voided or modified on a change of state of formation. This is rare but it happens — particularly with certain government contracts, with some legacy lender agreements, and with some long-tenured customer contracts that have anti-assignment provisions reading on “change of identity.” The founder’s counsel should run a key-contract review against the conversion specifically, separate from the merger-agreement-driven anti-assignment review, to confirm that no material contract reads on the change of formation as a triggering event.

The practical recommendation

For most Florida-formed LLC founders facing a sale to an institutional buyer in 2026, the conversion is going to be in the deal documents and will, on balance, be the right thing to do. The negotiations worth running are around timing (pre-signing if achievable, otherwise as a clean closing condition), cost (push for the buyer to bear it, expect to split it), and the post-conversion operating agreement (engage substantively, do not treat as boilerplate). The buyer’s request is not unreasonable. The founder’s preparation for it should not be improvised in the markup cycle.

For related M&A reading on this site, see our posts on Florida’s Revised LLC Act and the Pre-Sale Member-Consent Threshold That Do, Asset Sale vs. Stock Sale in Florida, and The Florida Alternative to a Bankruptcy Sale.

If you are a Florida-formed LLC founder considering a sale and want to think through a pre-sale conversion before the buyer’s markup forces the conversation, feel free to reach out to my firm manager, Magda, at Magda@montague.law, or fill out our contact form. Mention you read this post.