M&A 2026: value at 2.8 trillion dollars (+48%), but fewer deals. Omaizat (Taxfix) explains why the big players are winning.
Summary
IMG1
The global mergers and acquisitions market records 48% growth in the first half of the year, but the number of deals drops to the lowest level in the last six years. Mohamed Omaizat, Group CFO of Taxfix, explains why consolidation favors large companies, how AI is changing valuations, and what opportunities exist for European startups.
The global mergers and acquisitions (M&A) market is experiencing a new phase of expansion, but not all companies are benefiting equally from the recovery.
In the first half of 2026, the total value of deals reached about $2.8 trillion, with 48% growth compared to the same period of the previous year. Yet the number of transactions fell by 9%, stopping at around 24,000 deals: the lowest level in the last six years.
This is the paradox highlighted during a panel at Web Summit, in a discussion with Mohamed Omaizat, Group CFO of Taxfix, the European tax return platform that uses artificial intelligence.
The snapshot of the market shows a growing concentration of deals: the total value is increasing, but dealmaking is increasingly dominated by large-scale transactions. This trend raises an important question: are we seeing a broad-based acquisition boom, or a market in which only the biggest players are really able to close deals?
M&A in 2026: almost half of the value comes from mega-deals
According to LSEG data cited in the debate, 47 deals above $10 billion were completed in the first half of the year, for a total value of more than $1.3 trillion. These transactions account for almost half of the entire value of the global market.
Among the most significant deals are those involving SpaceX and the tech sector, along with major consolidation moves among industrial and media groups.
For Omaizat, however, it would be wrong to interpret these numbers as a sign of a uniform recovery.
The market is indeed active even for mid-sized and smaller deals, but these take longer to reach completion. Buyers have become more selective, conduct deeper due diligence, and apply especially strict valuation and underwriting criteria.
Another change concerns the role of industrial companies and listed groups, which are increasing their weight as buyers. The availability of shares to use as currency in extraordinary transactions gives listed companies a competitive advantage over other potential acquirers.
By contrast, private equity is going through a more complex phase, partly due to the difficulties it has faced in recent years in returning capital to its investors.
The result is a market in which large strategic deals are moving ahead, while for smaller and mid-sized companies the sale process can be longer and more selective.
Taxfix: better to build internally or acquire other companies?
An important part of the talk focused on Taxfix’s growth strategy and the balance between internal development and acquisitions.
The group has built its European presence through a combination of organic growth and M&A deals. Among its most important acquisitions are Steuerbot, a German platform acquired in 2023, and TaxScouts, a deal announced in July 2024 that enabled Taxfix to enter the UK market.
With TaxScouts, the group also expanded its offering through digital tax-return services supported by professionals, strengthening its presence in Germany, the UK, Spain, and Italy.
Omaizat explains that for Taxfix, acquisitions are not just a tool to increase the company’s size, but above all a way to create partnerships with other entrepreneurs.
The priority remains investing in in-house capabilities and developing products that meet customer needs. Acquisitions become attractive when they make it possible to accelerate this journey along three main vectors:
– Geographical expansion: entering new markets or strengthening presence in existing ones.
– Broader offering: integrating new products and services into the platform.
– Access to new customer segments: reaching users with different needs and expanding the potential market.
The decision between acquiring and building internally depends mainly on available resources and strategic priorities. If a new project risks drawing too much expertise or operational capacity away from existing initiatives, an external partnership may be the best solution.
AI is also changing this balance, because it enables companies to develop internally products and features that in the past would have required greater investment or external expertise.
For Omaizat, acquisitions should therefore be seen as an opportunity to invite other entrepreneurs to join a broader platform, while maintaining a shared vision of the product and the customers.
Expanding in Europe: the decisive factor is customer trust
The tax sector poses particular complexity for companies that want to expand internationally.
Although there are many similarities among European tax systems, each market has different rules, procedures, and user behavior.
For this reason, according to Omaizat, the success of an international acquisition depends first and foremost on the ability to integrate local expertise.
The first element is keeping within the project the people who truly know the market, including regulatory specifics and consumer habits.
The second is trust.
Tax returns involve extremely personal and sensitive information. Users must know how their data is handled and must be able to rely on an experience built around their needs.
The third element is technology. A product that works perfectly in Germany is not necessarily ready to be used in Portugal or Spain.
This also applies to artificial intelligence: a model trained on data from a given country may not be effective enough in another market. It must therefore be adapted and trained using data and information relevant to the local context.
International growth, in other words, is not just about translating an app or porting a technology platform. It requires an integration of local expertise, customer knowledge, and digital infrastructure.
AI and valuations: are native companies worth three times more?
One of the most interesting parts of the panel concerned the valuations of software companies that use artificial intelligence.
In the first quarter of 2026, according to data cited by the moderator, AI-native software companies reached a median multiple of 11.5 times revenue in acquisition deals, compared to 3.8 times for traditional SaaS companies.
The figure comes from SaasRise’s 2026 AI Software Valuation Report and concerns EV/Revenue multiples in M&A transactions. It is therefore a significant difference, but it refers to specific categories of companies and a sample of deals, not a rule that applies to the entire software market.
The question is inevitable: are these valuations justified, or is it enough to bolt on a few AI features to get a higher valuation?
For Omaizat, the difference does not lie in the use of a tool, but in the overall transformation of the operating model.
A company cannot truly call itself AI-native just because it uses artificial intelligence tools to generate content, automate certain tasks, or improve employee productivity.
AI must deliver measurable outcomes and have a direct impact on the business.
In particular, it must help increase revenue, improve efficiency, reduce operating costs, or enable the company to do more with the same resources.
An interesting indicator is revenue generated per employee, which can show how much artificial intelligence is truly changing an organization’s productivity.
If AI integration does not produce tangible improvements in financial results, simply using the technology does not automatically justify a higher valuation.
Who will buy companies in the near future? Corporate M&A returns to center stage
Another issue addressed was the identity of potential buyers in the coming years.
Private equity, traditionally one of the main players in the acquisitions market, may retain a more selective approach, at least in the short term.
According to Omaizat, many funds accumulated holdings in previous years and still have to generate significant returns for their limited partners, the investors who have committed capital to the funds.
This could limit their ability to make new acquisitions, especially when sellers’ valuation expectations are high.
Consequently, industrial companies and corporate groups could take on an even more important role.
Strategic acquisitions allow companies to gain technologies, capabilities, products, and access to new market segments that would be more difficult to develop independently.
Omaizat also foresees possible growth in small and mid-sized transactions, especially for the most profitable European companies.
The European market has less depth than North America in terms of available capital and exit opportunities via public markets. In this context, a sale to an industrial group can be a particularly important alternative for entrepreneurs.
Europe wants to encourage startup acquisitions with the Innovation Shield
The discussion then moved to new European regulatory initiatives and their potential impact on the acquisitions market.
In particular, it addressed the Innovation Shield, a mechanism included in the revision of the European merger-control guidelines, designed to give greater weight to the innovation benefits of certain deals involving startups and R&D projects.
Omaizat expressed a positive view of the European approach.
The goal is to allow smaller companies to grow through acquisitions and partnerships, preventing them from being bought too early by large groups before they have reached a sufficient scale to compete independently.
This aspect is particularly important for the European market, where the lower availability of growth capital often makes it harder for startups to reach a scale comparable to their US competitors.
A more predictable regulatory framework could therefore support consolidation among European companies, allowing them to achieve greater scale before becoming potential acquisition targets for large international groups.
The issue remains delicate, however: deals still need to protect competition and must not turn into a tool to eliminate potential competitors.
The risk of acqui-hire: when you buy talent and not the company
Omaizat also raised an issue of particular interest to the tech sector: the phenomenon of so-called acqui-hires.
These are transactions in which the buyer’s real interest is not so much the company’s product or revenue, but the people and technological skills working inside it.
In the United States, the debate has intensified around an alternative practice: instead of acquiring an entire company, some large groups may try to hire its talent directly, leaving the corporate structure essentially idle.
This approach raises important questions.
If an innovative company is stripped of its capabilities and its project is abandoned, what happens to the early investors? And above all, what space remains for new competitors to emerge?
The risk is that the market ends up rewarding the acquisition of people rather than the growth of businesses, reducing incentives to build new tech companies.
This issue also directly concerns Europe, where consolidation in the tech sector is seen as one of the tools to increase international competitiveness.
Acquisitions fail when a shared vision is missing
In the final part of the discussion, the Taxfix CFO shared some thoughts on what makes an acquisition truly effective.
The first element to assess is not necessarily the price, but the compatibility between people.
When he meets the founders of a company that could become a partner or strategic acquisition, Omaizat first tries to understand whether there is a shared vision.
A lack of chemistry between teams is often an early sign of incompatibility.
Another risk concerns overestimating synergies. Companies may be attracted by the economic and strategic benefits of an acquisition, but these advantages do not materialize automatically.
It is necessary to find the right balance between central governance and local autonomy, especially when acquiring companies that operate in different markets.
Imposing an overly centralized organizational model can undermine the very local expertise and knowledge that made the acquisition attractive in the first place.
But what is the most important question to ask during due diligence?
For Omaizat, the answer is simple: why do customers love your product? And why do other customers, instead, not use it?
The answer reveals much more than financial figures alone. It reveals the company’s competitive positioning, product quality, market needs, and relationship with users.
Finally, the main risk factor in integration remains culture. If founders and employees are only interested in cashing out their stake and no longer share a common growth vision, even an economically attractive acquisition can quickly lose value.
The future of M&A depends on the ability to build together
The message that emerges from Mohamed Omaizat’s talk is that the acquisitions market is undergoing a profound transformation.
Large deals continue to drive the overall value of transactions, but for smaller companies the path to an acquisition has become more selective. Artificial intelligence is changing valuations and operating models, while the return of corporate buyers could open up new opportunities for the strongest startups.
For European companies, the challenge is to grow enough to compete internationally without losing the skills and identity that make them innovative.
And for buyers, the value of a deal is not measured solely through revenue, synergies, or acquired technology.
As the Taxfix CFO’s reflections show, the real success of an acquisition depends on the ability to build something together, maintaining a shared vision between the people who created the company and those who will take it to the next stage.
