Table of Contents

Validating Add-Backs Without Killing the Deal

Nov 24, 2025

Add-backs are where a seller’s story meets your operating reality. Handle them well and you price risk accurately, protect your debt service, and keep goodwill intact. Handle them poorly and you either overpay or turn a cooperative seller defensive. This guide gives you a practical, repeatable way to verify add-backs while keeping the relationship smooth.

What “validating add-backs” actually means

Your goal isn’t to “win” every line item. It’s to separate real, transferable earnings from items that won’t survive post-close—and to do it with documentation, not opinions. The biggest traps: inflated owner-comp add-backs, “one-time” costs that repeat, and cuts to spend (marketing, maintenance) that you’ll reinstate on Day 1.


A simple 4-step process that preserves goodwill

1) Get a seller-prepared schedule—then ask for paper

Have the seller provide a line-by-line add-back schedule with short rationales. For each material item, request source docs: payroll registers for comp, invoices/GL detail for expenses, contracts for canceled services. No doc = provisional at best. This “paper-first” approach keeps the tone objective and avoids circular debates.

2) Reframe each add-back as a run-rate question

Ask: “Will this cost truly disappear under my ownership—or will I replace it?” If an owner’s $150k salary is added back but you’ll hire a GM at $100k, the valid add-back is $50k, not $150k. Same with “non-essential” family employees or slashed marketing you’ll restore to protect revenue. Price the replacement, not the removal.

3) Pattern-check the “one-time” bucket

Scan 3–5 years. If legal fees, consulting, or IT “cleanups” recur, they’re not one-time. Conversely, a true ERP migration or relocation can be legitimate. Tie the story to invoices and timing; recurring items don’t belong in Adjusted EBITDA.

4) Quantify only what moves value

Don’t burn goodwill on $3k line items. Focus on adjustments that move valuation or structure—the ones your lender will care about and your model can’t ignore. A disciplined QoE (even “lite”) helps you separate noise from material impacts.


Evidence menu: what to ask for (by add-back type)

  • Owner comp & perks: Payroll registers (2–3 yrs), job duties/time map, market-comp data for the replacement role. Validate the replacement cost you’ll carry post-close.
  • Family or “non-essential” staff: Org chart, responsibilities, and coverage plan. If you’ll backfill, treat as run-rate expense, not an add-back.
  • One-time legal/consulting/IT: Invoices, engagement letters, and GL extracts across multiple years to spot repeats.
  • Depreciation/non-cash: Tie to capex and asset age. High depreciation add-backs can mask near-term replacement needs.
  • Discretionary cuts (marketing/maintenance): Monthlies showing timing of cuts and revenue/margin effects; your model should normalize spend if it protects revenue.


Keep the relationship smooth: how you present matters

  • Lead with exhibits, not opinions. Show a side-by-side: seller add-backs vs. validated add-backs with citations to invoices/payroll/GL. It’s harder to argue with paper.
  • Prioritize materiality. Open with the top 3–5 items and their valuation impact (e.g., “$180k EBITDA delta at 3.5× = ~$630k EV”). Sellers engage better when the “why it matters” is clear.
  • Offer options, not ultimatums. If you and the seller can’t fully agree, bridge with structure (seller note, targeted earnout, escrow) rather than demanding a blunt headline cut.


Negotiating outcomes that protect both sides

When validation trims Adjusted EBITDA, you have three levers:

  1. Price: Tie the EBITDA delta to EV using the agreed multiple. Keep the math calm and transparent.
  2. Structure:
    • Seller note to share ongoing performance risk and keep the seller engaged.
    • Earnout on simple, auditable metrics (e.g., revenue/gross profit from named accounts) where transfer risk is the issue, not accounting.
    • Escrow/holdback for specific, documentable exposures (e.g., tax, sales tax, contract gaps).
  3. Working capital mechanics: If add-backs were “created” by stretching AP or pulling forward AR, fix it with a TTM peg, collar, and clear true-up in the LOI—don’t argue at the finish line.

Red flags that deserve extra skepticism

  • Adjusted EBITDA way above net income with thin support. Often a sign of stacked add-backs.
  • “One-time” items repeating across years under new labels. Pattern = recurring.
  • Owner-only savings you’ll need to replace (unpaid labor, under-market comp). Calculate the real run-rate.
  • Deferred revenue treated like earned revenue. Separate billings from recognition; avoid paying for work not delivered.
  • Seller resists documentation or access. Lack of transparency is a common reason deals wobble or fail—address early or be ready to walk.


LOI language you can use

  • Adjusted EBITDA basis: “Purchase price is based on QoE-validated Adjusted EBITDA, which assumes (i) market-rate replacement for seller/related-party roles, (ii) exclusion of non-recurring items not supported by documentation, and (iii) normalization of discretionary spend required to sustain revenue.”
  • Working capital mechanics: “WC = AR + Inventory – AP (per historical policy), TTM average peg with ±$[collar] and 60-day true-up. Deferred revenue excluded from peg; any cost-to-fulfill adjustment handled separately.”
  • Risk-sharing tools: “If parties disagree on specific add-backs, consideration to be bridged via seller note/escrow/earnout tied to defined, auditable metrics.”


A quick example

Seller’s claim: $1.2M Adjusted EBITDA, including:

  • $180k “excess” owner comp
  • $60k “one-time” legal
  • $40k marketing cuts during sale prep
  • $50k family payroll

Validation:

  • Replace owner with $120k GM → valid add-back = $60k, not $180k.
  • Legal shows up 3 of last 4 years → disallow $60k.
  • Marketing must return to maintain revenue → disallow $40k.
  • Family role actually runs scheduling; you’ll backfill at $45k → valid add-back = $0.

Revised Adjusted EBITDA: $1.2M – ($120k) = $1.08M.
At 3.5×, EV delta ≈ $420k. Options: reduce price by $420k or keep headline price and shift $300k into a seller note + $120k earnout tied to 12-month gross profit retention on the top cohort. Relationship stays intact; risk is shared where it lives.


Buyer checklist

  • Seller add-back schedule with docs attached (payroll, invoices, GL).
  • Replacement-cost summary for owner/family roles at market comp.
  • Multi-year scan for recurring “one-times.”
  • Normalized spend view for marketing/maintenance that protects revenue.
  • TTM working capital peg, collar, and LOI true-up language.
  • Structure menu ready: note / earnout / escrow mapped to specific risks.


Validating add-backs doesn’t have to turn into a fight. Lead with documents, focus on what moves value, and give the seller choices that swap debate for structure. You’ll protect your downside, keep momentum, and still close a deal both sides feel good about. And if transparency or math won’t cooperate, you’ll know early—before deal fatigue sets in.

Contact us today or book a free consultation and learn how we can be a trusted partner on your next deal!

Get invaluable insights and data we’ve collected after analyzing hundreds of deals:

About Author

Sam Ballard

Sam is a Client Success Manager at Rapid Diligence, advising clients through the initial stages as they transition into the due diligence phase of the deal. With a background in M&A advisory and deal execution, Sam has extensive experience in due diligence, deal structuring, and guiding acquisitions from start to finish.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Posts

Nov 24, 2025
Validating Add-Backs Without Killing the Deal
Add-backs are where a seller’s story meets your operating reality. Handle them well and you price risk accurately, protect your debt service, and keep goodwill intact. Handle them poorly and you either overpay or turn a cooperative seller defensive. This guide gives you a practical, repeatable way t...
Nov 17, 2025
Why So Many SMB Deals Fall Apart Before Closing
If you’re in the SMB trenches long enough, you’ll notice a pattern: getting to an LOI is easy compared to getting to close. Deals die quietly from preventable issues, fuzzy assumptions, timeline drift, mismatched expectations, or lenders uncovering concerns that buyers should have caught. None of th...
Nov 10, 2025
How to Spot a Deal That’s Too Good to Be True
If you stay in SMB deal flow long enough, you’ll meet the unicorn: fast-growing, clean books, loyal customers, easy handoff, “moving for family reasons,” and priced like it’s still 2016. Tempting? Absolutely. Smart? Not without a tighter inspection. In lower middle market M&A, “too good to be tr...

Free access to all the deal data we've collected:

After assessing countless deals, we’ve gained exclusive insight into what buyers are actually paying for businesses, not simply what sellers are asking.

Does longevity of a business affect its valuation more than growth? What’s the primary difference between an eCommerce business that sells at 3x vs. 7x EBIDTA?

We have the answers and the data to back it up. And we’re willing to share it. 😏