Why Indian startups still incorporate abroad — even as some return home

India’s startup story has entered a new phase.

The earlier narrative was simple:
Indian founders-built companies at home and incorporated abroad.

The new narrative is stranger — and more revealing.

Some startups are now returning to India, yet the logic that drove them offshore remains largely intact.

This is no longer a story of flight.
It is a story of institutional competition.

The new reality: Reverse-flipping is rising — but not for the reasons we think

From 2024 onward, a visible group of unicorns — including large consumer tech and fintech firms — began shifting holding structures back to India, often in preparation for domestic IPOs. 

High-profile companies have either completed or initiated such moves, signalling renewed confidence in Indian capital markets. 

But reverse flipping is not a repudiation of offshore incorporation.
It is a late-stage correction.

Founders go offshore to scale.
They return only when domestic markets become viable exit venues.

This distinction is critical.

Offshore incorporation remains the default growth strategy.
India is becoming a viable harvest market.

India’s IPO markets have quietly become the strongest pull factor

India’s public markets have transformed dramatically.

• 18 startups listed in 2025, raising over Rs 41,000 crore. 
• Over 20 more companies have already filed IPO papers for 2026. 
• Domestic listings increasingly reward profitability and governance discipline. 

For the first time, founders can plausibly build offshore but exit domestically.

This creates a hybrid model:

Incorporate where capital flows easiest.
List where valuation signals strongest.

India’s IPO renaissance does not eliminate the offshore incentive.
It simply shifts the timeline of when incorporation matters.

Policy momentum exists — but it’s incomplete

India has taken meaningful steps:

Positive signals

• Fast-track merger rules and inbound restructuring pathways have shortened reverse-flip timelines. 
• Share swaps under FEMA rules are easier in many cases. 
• Angel tax abolition reduced early-stage capital friction. 
• SEBI eased ESOP rules for founders going public. 
• Government-supported funds and AIF investments continue expanding capital availability. 

These are not cosmetic reforms.
They signal institutional willingness to compete.

But the system still stops halfway.

Persistent gaps (as of Budget 2026)

• No meaningful ESOP tax overhaul for most startups
• No decisive clarity on legacy angel tax disputes
• No targeted incentives for reverse-flipping
• No major startup-specific tax concessions

Industry leaders explicitly described the 2026 budget as offering no major relief on ESOPs or restructuring friction. 

This mixed policy environment explains the paradox:

India is improving — but not yet predictably.

The offshore decision is still driven by early-stage logic

Reverse flipping gets headlines, but incorporation decisions happen much earlier.

At formation stage, founders still evaluate:

• access to global venture capital
• investor familiarity with legal structures
• enforceability of shareholder protections
• stock option usability for talent

Foreign jurisdictions still offer clearer answers on all four fronts.

This is why offshore incorporation remains rational at inception — even for founders who later intend to return.

India is becoming exit-friendly.
It is not yet formation-friendly at scale.

The hidden cost: Governance migration

When startups incorporate abroad:

• IP ownership often migrates
• strategic decisions shift jurisdictionally
• shareholder disputes exit Indian courts
• taxation of value creation fragments

India hosts the labour and consumption.
Foreign jurisdictions host the legal citizenship.

Reverse flipping partially corrects this — but only late in the lifecycle.

The governance learning India loses in early years cannot be retroactively reclaimed.

Investor behaviour is quietly changing

The most under-discussed shift is not policy — it is investor psychology.

Domestic investors are becoming more comfortable funding India-domiciled companies, especially with IPO depth improving. 

But global venture capital still prefers internationally standardised holding structures.

Thus, founders face a dual expectation:

• domestic markets reward Indian incorporation
• global capital rewards offshore incorporation

This is not a policy failure alone.
It is a coordination failure between markets.

The real insight: India is moving from exporting startups to negotiating with them

The old system forced founders offshore.

The new system tries to lure them back.

But the ultimate goal should be different:

India must become the place where founders never need to leave in the first place.

That requires:

• liquidity-based ESOP taxation across the board
• predictable capital movement rules
• enforceable investor protections at global standards
• listing neutrality across jurisdictions

Until formation, scaling, and exit can all occur comfortably within India’s legal framework, offshore incorporation will remain rational.

Reverse flipping will remain a corrective, not a cure.

Final reflection

India’s startup ecosystem in 2026 sits at an inflection point.

It no longer suffers from lack of capital, talent, or ambition.
Its challenge is institutional sequencing.

Today, founders still offshore to scale.
Tomorrow, they may never need to.

The paradox is not yet resolved.
But for the first time, it is genuinely being negotiated.

END OF ARTICLE