Expert in planning and executing infrastructure transactions and major projects
Deep knowledge of energy transition investments
15+ years of M&A tax experience
Melbourne
@alvarezmarsal
LinkedIn
Copied!
Edward Consett is a Managing Director with Alvarez & Marsal Tax in Melbourne, and leads the firm's Infrastructure Tax team in Australia. He specialises in the planning and execution of core, core plus and value add infrastructure transactions and major projects, with a particular focus on the investments required to effect Australia’s energy transition.
Mr. Consett’s primary areas of concentration are public and private market infrastructure M&A (planning, diligence, execution), greenfield project structuring and financing, brownfield asset restructuring and refinancing, privatisations and capital management.
With nearly 20 years of experience, Mr. Consett has advised on $25+ billion of public market M&A, hundreds of private market transactions, more than 11 GW of energy transition projects and most of the public-private partnerships that have come to market in the past 10 years.
Prior to joining A&M, Mr. Consett spent seven years with EY in Melbourne, where he most recently served as Partner in the International Tax and Transaction Services team. He also spent six years in the tax practice of a top-tier law firm, where he was heavily involved in the structuring and documentation of transactions and large-scale infrastructure projects.
Mr. Consett earned bachelor’s degrees in commerce and law (honors) and an LLM from the University of Melbourne. He is a member of the Chartered Accountants Australia & New Zealand; a practising solicitor in Victoria; and is a sessional lecturer at the University of Melbourne.
On 20 March 2024, the Federal Court of Australia (FCA) found in favour of the taxpayer in Mylan Australia Holding Pty Ltd (MAHPL) v Commissioner of Taxation (Commissioner) (No 2) [2024] FCA 253. What are the key observations and takeaways?
In Minerva Financial Group Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation [2024] FCAFC 28, the Full Federal Court reversed the Federal Court’s decision in finding that Australia's general anti-avoidance rules (Part IVA) did not apply to income distributions made by a trust within a stapled group structure. What rationale did the Federal Court provide for their decision?
The Australian Taxation Office (ATO) issued Taxation Determination TD 2024/1 on 13 March 2024, which provides guidance on how certain concepts in the hybrid mismatch rules under Division 832 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 should be interpreted. How does the ATO view these concepts and what are some of the key questions posed?
Latest insightsThe latest insights from Edward Consett's team
In today's competitive job market, offering comprehensive benefits to employees is more important than ever. One benefit that can make a significant difference is providing childcare services.
