Cross-Border M&A in Technology: A Layered Risk Map for Acquirers Navigating Regulation, Data, and Control in 2025

For much of the past decade, cross-border M&A in technology was treated as comparatively frictionless. Software scaled globally, customers operated across jurisdictions, and capital often moved faster than regulation. Acquirers underwrote growth, talent, and product differentiation with limited concern for where value physically or legally resided. In 2025, that framing is no longer viable. Cross-border technology transactions are now shaped less by innovation velocity and more by how multiple forms of risk stack across jurisdictions. Data sovereignty, national security review, export controls, platform concentration, and customer sensitivity increasingly determine whether value can be preserved after closing. Buyers who continue to treat technology acquisitions as light-asset commercial transactions are routinely surprised by constraints that emerge only once ownership changes. Cross-border advisory exists to help acquirers understand where risk actually sits and how it compounds when layered incorrectly.

‍

Sophisticated buyers now approach cross-border technology M&A through a layered underwriting lens rather than a single growth narrative. Weakness at any one layer can neutralize strengths elsewhere, regardless of product quality or revenue momentum. This approach reflects experience rather than theory. Transactions fail not because one risk exists, but because multiple risks interact in ways that undermine control, scalability, or customer confidence simultaneously. Understanding this interaction has become central to investment committee decision-making in 2025.

‍

At the top of this risk stack sits regulatory and national security approval, which remains the least negotiable variable. Cross-border technology transactions increasingly trigger foreign investment review even when assets appear purely commercial. Governments are scrutinizing control over digital infrastructure, communications platforms, artificial intelligence capabilities, cybersecurity tools, semiconductors, and cloud-based systems with growing intensity. Reviews extend beyond ownership percentages to access rights, governance influence, and data visibility. Even minority investments can fall within scope if they confer insight into sensitive systems or datasets. Approval timelines are longer, outcomes less predictable, and mitigation measures more restrictive. Where regulatory confidence is weak, valuation arguments carry limited weight. In 2025, permission to own does not equate to permission to operate freely.

‍

Data ownership, residency, and control form the next layer of risk and increasingly define what acquirers actually receive. Data is no longer an incidental input to technology businesses. It is a regulated asset governed by privacy regimes, sector-specific rules, and national policy. Buyers must assess who legally owns customer and operational data, where it is stored and processed, whether it can be transferred or mirrored across borders, and how a change in ownership affects consent and compliance obligations. In many jurisdictions, data localization requirements prevent data from moving even when software does. Acquirers often discover post-close that what they acquired was code without the data required to train, improve, or monetize it at scale. This disconnect materially impairs strategic optionality and undermines the assumptions embedded in valuation.

‍

Customer and market acceptance represent a third layer that has become more consequential in cross-border technology transactions. Increasingly, customers evaluate vendors not only on functionality but on ownership, jurisdiction, and perceived geopolitical exposure. This is particularly pronounced among government entities, regulated enterprises, critical infrastructure operators, and defense-adjacent users. In cross-border deals, customers may not terminate contracts outright, but they often slow adoption, defer renewals, or limit expansion. From an acquirer’s perspective, this converts revenue risk from a binary outcome into a gradual erosion that is difficult to model and slow to detect. Cross-border advisory integrates customer reacceptance risk into underwriting and structure rather than assuming continuity based on contractual rights alone.

‍

Control over intellectual property and its exportability introduces further complexity. Technology IP is rarely as portable as buyers assume. Expanding export control regimes now capture encryption technologies, advanced AI models, and other dual-use capabilities. Jurisdictional restrictions can limit how IP is transferred, modified, or deployed globally. Open-source dependencies and licensing obligations may further constrain development or commercialization post-close. In 2025, IP that cannot be exported, adapted, or shared freely loses strategic value regardless of its technical sophistication. Buyers increasingly recognize that IP control must be evaluated in the context of legal and policy constraints, not just ownership documentation.

‍

At the base of the risk stack sits operating and governance control, a question acquirers often address last despite its centrality to value creation. Cross-border technology deals frequently impose governance constraints that limit board authority, restrict integration, segment operations, or constrain hiring, partnerships, and product roadmaps. Data and security requirements may force parallel systems or localized management structures that undermine scale benefits. Even where ownership is clear, acquirers may lack the practical ability to execute their operating plan. In 2025, failed integrations are often less about execution error and more about structural limits that were visible but underweighted during underwriting.

‍

When evaluated through this layered lens, cross-border technology processes tend to narrow quickly. Transactions that appear viable at a high level often become infeasible once regulatory, data, customer, IP, and governance risks are assessed together. Deals that progress without addressing the top layers of the stack frequently collapse at the point where operating control or customer acceptance is required to realize value. The sequence matters, and acquirers that defer hard questions until late in the process often find that structure and valuation can no longer compensate.

‍

Valuation outcomes increasingly reflect this reality. In 2025, dispersion in cross-border technology multiples is pronounced. Buyers are willing to pay premiums for assets located in jurisdictions with predictable regulatory frameworks, clean data ownership and transfer rights, limited customer sensitivity to ownership changes, and clear post-close governance authority. Conversely, assets with similar revenue growth and margins can trade at materially lower valuations when multiple layers of risk constrain scalability or control. Cross-border advisory helps acquirers avoid paying domestic technology multiples for businesses whose value is structurally limited by jurisdictional friction.

‍

Transaction structure has become the primary tool for managing layered risk. Minority investments, staged acquisitions, jurisdictional ring-fencing of data or operations, earn-outs tied to customer retention, dual-holding structures that preserve local control, and seller rollovers that maintain continuity are now common features of successful cross-border technology deals. These structures do not eliminate underlying risk, but they prevent buyers from pricing assets as if those risks do not exist and create mechanisms to validate assumptions over time.

‍

The broader context makes this discipline unavoidable. Expansion of AI and data regulation, heightened geopolitical sensitivity around technology ownership, stricter enforcement of privacy and export controls, and increased customer scrutiny of vendor risk have reshaped the cross-border landscape. Technology M&A remains active in 2025, but it is slower, more conditional, and more structurally complex than in prior cycles.

‍

For buyers and sellers alike, success in cross-border technology M&A now depends on layered thinking. Buyers who underwrite growth without mapping stacked risk routinely overpay. Sellers who understand where constraints exist and address them proactively achieve cleaner execution and stronger outcomes. Advisors who identify, sequence, and de-risk the stack provide tangible value. Cross-border advisory remains essential not to globalize technology indiscriminately, but to ensure that innovation, data, and control endure once a business crosses borders.