The CFO’s Guide to Building a Tax Function That Actually Drives Value
Most CFOs didn’t build their tax department. They inherited it from a predecessor, a transaction, or a period of growth that added complexity faster than it added capability. The team may be competent. The outside advisors may be excellent. The filings go out on time. And still, something nags: is this function actually doing what it should be doing, or is it just keeping up?
That question is worth taking seriously right now. The passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act in July 2025 permanently restructured the domestic tax planning landscape. It introduced 100% bonus depreciation, restored domestic R&D expensing, added a permanent 21% corporate rate, and included an EBITDA-based interest deduction framework that changes capital structure modeling for virtually every company above $50 million in revenue.
Simultaneously, Pillar 2 is now active across more than 55 jurisdictions for multinationals above €750 million in revenue, introducing a global minimum tax framework that requires a level of proactive modeling most compliance-oriented tax teams are not designed to deliver.
These are not regulatory headwinds to manage. They are financial opportunities with defined windows. Whether your company captures them depends almost entirely on whether your CFO tax function is built for strategy or built for compliance.
The Difference Between a Tax Function and a Tax Capability
Every company above a certain size has a tax function. Fewer have a tax capability. The distinction matters more than most CFOs realize, and it is worth defining precisely.
A compliance-oriented tax function does its job well within a narrow definition of the job. It manages the filing calendar, coordinates with outside advisors on specialized issues, maintains the company’s tax positions, and responds to examinations. The team is skilled, but the function is fundamentally reactive. It processes what the business produces rather than shaping what the business decides.
A strategic tax capability is a different animal. A CFO tax function operating as a genuine strategic asset is present at the table when M&A targets are evaluated, when capital deployment plans are structured, when compensation programs are designed, and when entity structures are reconsidered.
The practical markers of a strategic function are specific. The Head of Tax or VP of Tax can quickly articulate the company’s current effective tax rate trajectory and the top three planning opportunities available to the business right now. They present to the board at least annually, not just at audit committee time. They have a point of view on the company’s international structure that goes beyond compliance and into optimization.
A compliance-only function, by contrast, is perpetually in filing mode. The tax leader is stretched thin managing deadlines. Strategic conversations about tax happen with outside advisors on a project basis rather than with internal leadership on an ongoing basis. The company pays for reactive expertise when it could be building proactive capability.
What the Current Tax Environment Demands From Your CFO Tax Function
The OBBBA changes are not theoretical future planning opportunities. They are present-tense decisions with measurable financial consequences, and the window to act is open now.
Permanent 100% bonus depreciation means that capital expenditure planning and tax planning are now the same conversation.
A company investing $50 million in equipment or infrastructure over the next 18 months should be modeling the full deduction implications of that spend against its current effective tax rate and its projected EBITDA. That modeling requires an internal tax leader who understands the business’s capital allocation plan — not an outside advisor who responds to questions after the capital budget is finalized.
Restored domestic R&D expensing creates a material cash flow opportunity for companies with meaningful R&D programs. Under prior law, domestic R&D costs were required to be amortized over five years rather than expensed immediately. The OBBBA’s restoration of immediate expensing changes the cash tax profile of R&D-intensive businesses in ways that should be flowing directly into financial planning conversations — and will only do so if the tax function is proactive enough to put them there.
On the international side, the GILTI-to-NCTI restructuring changes how multinationals model their international effective tax rates. The prior GILTI framework blended high- and low-tax foreign income in ways that penalized certain structures; the NCTI approach introduces country-by-country blending that requires a different analytical framework.
For multinationals approaching the Pillar Two threshold, this intersects with the global minimum tax in ways that only a tax leader with genuine international modeling capability can navigate proactively. The OECD’s Pillar Two framework — now active in over 55 jurisdictions — is not a compliance exercise for affected companies. It is a structural planning challenge.
These opportunities are largely self-executing for companies with proactive in-house tax leadership. They are largely missed by companies relying on reactive outside advisors who respond to what they are asked rather than modeling what the business has not yet thought to ask.
Four Questions to Assess What You Have
CFOs who want an honest read on the strategic readiness of their tax function don’t need a formal audit. Four questions will surface the answer.
First: Can your Head of Tax or VP of Tax explain the company’s top three tax planning opportunities in plain language to a non-tax CFO? This should be a clear articulation of what the company should be doing differently, why it matters financially, and what it would take to execute.
Second: Is tax leadership part of every M&A diligence team from day one? Tax exposure, entity structure, and integration complexity are factors that should shape the deal thesis, not the closing checklist. The companies that get this right have a tax leader who owns the entire diligence process.
Third: Has the tax function proactively modeled the OBBBA implications for your specific business? More specifically, it should align with your capex plan, R&D spend, international structure, and interest expense profile. If the answer is that this modeling happened because you asked an outside advisor about it, that is a data point about where tax planning authority actually sits in your organization.
Fourth: What is the succession plan for your current tax leader? Tax leadership transitions are among the most difficult to manage because the knowledge base is highly concentrated. Companies that have not thought about succession are one retirement announcement away from a significant operational problem. I’ve seen it happen at companies where the tax leader had been in place for fifteen years. The disruption is real and expensive.
What Does the Right Tax Function Look Like?
The right tax function structure depends on business complexity, not just revenue. That said, some general principles hold.
At $250 million to $500 million in revenue with domestic operations and moderate complexity, a strong Director or VP of Tax with defined outside support for specialized matters is typically the right model. The key is that this person has genuine strategic access — they are not simply a sophisticated compliance manager. They are in the room for capital and M&A conversations.
At $500 million to $2 billion, with meaningful state and local exposure, any international presence, or active M&A activity, a VP or Head of Tax with a small internal team and clearly defined outside counsel relationships becomes the appropriate structure. The outside relationships should be managed by the internal leader, not the other way around.
Above $2 billion, or at companies with significant PE complexity, international operations, or specialized structures, a Chief Tax Officer with functional depth below them is the right answer. The Fruitist engagement is a useful reference point here: a global agribusiness with multi-jurisdiction operations, tariff-driven supply chain complexity, and NCTI exposure required a Head of Tax who could own the international structure, not just manage it. The Fruitist Head of Tax placement illustrates what it looks like when a company brings in the right tax leader at a genuine strategic inflection point.
Similarly, the Paradigm Global Head of Tax search, a first-of-kind structure in the crypto and digital asset space, required tax leadership that did not exist as a defined profile in the market. The company needed someone who could build the function, not just staff it. That is the difference between a strategic hire and a compliance hire, and it required a fundamentally different search process to find.
Warning Signs That a Tax Leadership Search Is Overdue
The most effective tax leadership searches happen when CFOs engage before the pressure is acute. A reactive search driven by a resignation, a transaction, or a regulatory deadline compresses the process in ways that narrow the candidate pool and reduce the likelihood of the right outcome.
Cowen Partners Executive Search’s tax recruiting practice exists specifically to help finance leaders make these decisions proactively, before the situation demands it.
The CFO tax function is a lever. Whether it is pulled depends on who is holding it and whether the organization built a function capable of holding it in the first place. The regulatory environment right now makes this question more consequential than it has been in at least a decade. The CFOs who answer it honestly, and act on what they find, will have a measurable advantage.
Nationally Recognized Tax Executive Search Firm | Cowen Partners
Our hands-on finance executive recruiters have experience working with both public, pre-IPO, and private tax clients.
Cowen Partners delivers 3X more qualified candidates than the competition. Through our proven retained executive search process, we find, vet, and deliver the top 1% of candidates for positions across the C-suite. Our process works for all industries, including technology, healthcare, manufacturing, retail, real estate, financial services, credit unions, private equity, and more.
Cowen Partners is the nation’s leading CFO search firm with extensive tax recruiting experience, driven to create value for our clients. Read more of our retained search resources to see why Cowen Partners is a leading tax executive search firm in New York City, Chicago, Seattle, Anchorage, Atlanta, Dallas, Los Angeles, and beyond.
Schedule a Call.
Fill out the email request form to learn more about our approach.