LLC or C-Corp? Choosing the Right US Entity Structure
Written by Cindy Gui, Senior Tax Manager in Sydney Australia
For international founders expanding into the US, choosing the right entity structure is one of the first and most consequential decisions you’ll make.
It’s also one of the most misunderstood.
We see it all the time: a business makes early traction in the US, sets up an entity quickly to “get things moving,” and only later realizes that the structure they chose is now working against them. Fixing it can be expensive, disruptive, and sometimes avoidable with the right planning upfront.
If you’re deciding between a US LLC and a C-Corporation, here’s what you actually need to know.
Why Entity Choice Matters
Your US entity structure affects more than your tax return.
It impacts:
How and where you’re taxed
Whether investors will engage with you
How easily you can issue equity to employees
How US customers, vendors, and partners perceive your business
How painful (or smooth) future restructuring will be
Entity choice is a foundational decision that should reflect how you plan to operate, grow, and exit in the US.
LLCs: Fast, Flexible, and Frequently Misunderstood
LLCs are often the default choice for international founders for understandable reasons.
They sound familiar.
They’re quick to set up.
They feel flexible and low-commitment.
In many home countries, LLC-style entities (like a Pty Ltd in Australia or a Ltd in New Zealand or the UK) work well for both operations and growth. The problem is that US LLCs don’t behave the same way, especially for foreign owners.
Texas: A Closer Look at the Numbers
Let me focus on what I know best: the tax and operational cost analysis. And when I run the numbers for my clients, Texas often presents an interesting alternative.
No State Income Tax
This is significant, especially when you compare it to the states where many companies initially consider establishing operations in:
Texas: 0% state corporate income tax
Delaware: 8.7% corporate income tax (though many Delaware corporations don't have actual operations there)
California: 8.84% (plus additional complexity)
Texas does have a franchise tax (essentially a gross receipts tax with deductions), but for many of my clients, the effective rate is considerably lower than what they'd pay in corporate income tax elsewhere.
This is significant:
Texas: 0% state corporate income tax
Delaware: 8.7% corporate income tax (though many Delaware corporations don't have actual operations there)
California: 8.84% (plus additional complexity)
Texas does have a franchise tax (essentially a gross receipts tax with deductions), but for many of my clients, the effective rate is considerably lower than what they'd pay in corporate income tax elsewhere.
Franchise Tax Comparison: Delaware vs. Texas
Delaware:
Complex calculation based on authorized shares or assumed par value
Can run $200,000+ annually for large corporations
No revenue-based threshold—you pay regardless of profitability
However, can be structured to be just $225 per year if shares issued can be nominal - e.g., 1,000.
Additional consideration: If you incorporate in Delaware but operate in Texas, you'll also need to register as a foreign entity in Texas (~$750) and maintain compliance in both states.
Texas:
0.375% of taxable margin for most businesses (0.75% for certain industries)
$2.47 million revenue threshold—no tax if below this
Deductions available that can significantly reduce taxable margin
For many mid-market companies, Texas's franchise tax burden should actually be lower than Delaware's, even before considering the income tax.
The Operational Cost Factor
Here's where the analysis gets interesting. It's the norm for companies to incorporate in Delaware while their operations are in other states or spread across multiple locations. This has always been standard practice because the incorporation decision was primarily about legal framework, not operational presence.
But this separation between legal domicile and operational reality is exactly why the tax analysis deserves some attention.
A Typical Scenario: A company is incorporated in Delaware, but as they scale, they need to decide where to locate their headquarters and/or hire employees. From a tax perspective, this is where real costs can accumulate over time.
If establishing operations in California:
State corporate income tax: 8.84%
Higher employer payroll taxes
Employees face high state income tax (impacts compensation requirements)
Additional state tax compliance complexity
If establishing operations in Texas:
State corporate income tax: 0%
No state income tax for employees = higher take-home pay at same gross salary
Simpler state tax compliance
Lower overall tax burden for both company and employees
When you're scaling a business and building a team, these tax differences compound significantly. And here's the question I pose to clients: If you're choosing Texas for your operational base because of the tax advantages, does it make sense to keep your legal incorporation in Delaware—or should both decisions align?
After all, you're paying Delaware's franchise tax and maintaining compliance there, while also managing tax compliance in your operational state(s). If Texas can offer competitive legal protections alongside the tax benefits, it's worth analyzing whether a consolidated approach makes sense.
When Does Delaware Still Make Sense?
This isn't about declaring one state "better" than another. It's about matching the structure to the specific business situation.
Delaware may be the right choice if:
You're planning an IPO and investors expect it;
You're in M&A situations with complex governance needs;
You have minimal physical operations (holding company structure);
Your cap table includes institutional investors with Delaware preferences;
You're already incorporated there and the costs of change outweigh the benefits.
Texas may be worth considering if:
You're forming a new entity;
You have or plan substantial operations in low-tax states;
You're a mid-market company where cost optimization matters;
You're a pass-through entity (LLC, S-corp) where state choice impacts owner taxation;
Your business model prioritizes operational efficiency.
The Analysis That Matters
As tax advisors working alongside legal counsel, we can add value by ensuring the economic analysis gets an appropriate weight in the decision.
Questions Worth Discussing:
Where will your actual operations be? (This drives tax nexus regardless of incorporation state)
What's your 5-year growth plan? (Will you need office space? Where will you hire?)
What's your operational cost sensitivity? (Especially relevant for startups and mid-market companies)
Do you have the infrastructure to manage multi-state compliance? (You'll need to maintain good standing in multiple states)
What are your total carrying costs over 5-10 years? (Franchise taxes, registered agent fees, annual reports)
My Current Approach
Here's how I'm thinking about this:
Delaware has historically made sense because the legal benefits were clear and well-established. For many businesses, particularly those with sophisticated investors or planning to go public, those benefits remain compelling.
Texas offers a different value proposition: meaningful tax savings, lower operational costs, and an evolving legal framework that's becoming increasingly competitive.
The key is doing a thorough analysis for your specific situation rather than defaulting to any one answer.
