Tanya Pahwa is a New York-based corporate attorney with over a decade of experience advising on high-value cross-border transactions across the U.S. and India. She is a Senior Associate at FBT Gibbons LLP, focusing on mergers and acquisitions and private equity in energy and digital infrastructure. She previously held senior roles at top Indian law firms, advising private equity sponsors, sovereign funds, and multinationals on complex transactions. A Columbia Law School LL.M. graduate and dual-qualified in New York and India, she also contributes to leading legal publications and the American Bar Association.
This interview has been published by Anshi Mudgal and The SuperLawyer Team
You have held key roles at India’s leading corporate law firms, advising on high-value, high-impact transactions early in your career. What strengths or accomplishments positioned you as a recognized expert in the field at such an early stage?
Early in my career, I had the opportunity to work alongside some of the sharpest and most creative minds in the profession. That environment was both demanding and formative. It exposed me early to high-value, high-impact transactions and set a very high bar for analytical rigor.
What helped me build credibility was not simply delivering strong work under tight timelines, but also approaching each matter with a broader lens. I paid close attention to the risks clients were navigating, the commercial drivers shaping the transaction, and the strategic posture of counterparties across the table.
I learned to view my role as going beyond risk identification. It was incumbent upon me to present solutions that were legally sound, commercially aligned, and sustainable over the long term. Over time, that consistency built trust, internally with partners and externally with clients. That trust, more than anything else, positioned me to take on increasing responsibility early in my career.
Your transition from India to Columbia Law School, followed by practicing corporate law in the U.S., reflects a truly global legal journey. What inspired this shift, and how has it strengthened your ability to lead on cross-border, high-value matters?
My transition to the U.S. was driven by a clear market reality. As the U.S.-India investment corridor expands, I see a critical gap in bilingual legal strategy. While I regularly advised international clients from India, I witnessed significant deal friction because U.S. capital and Indian regulation often speak different languages. For instance, director liability under India’s Companies Act carries significant compliance obligations and potential criminal exposure. For foreign investors, particularly those accustomed to their local governance norms and fiduciary standards, these risks could feel unfamiliar and, at times, disproportionate. The contrast between regulatory environments often influenced how transactions were structured, negotiated, and ultimately executed.
Observing these differences motivated me to develop direct fluency in the U.S. legal system so I could advise clients across both markets with greater depth. I wanted to understand the legal and regulatory framework from within the ecosystem itself — not just academically, but through active practice. Gaining that experience in the United States has allowed me to build a more integrated perspective and better advise clients operating across both markets.
You have developed recognized expertise in M&A and private equity. What drew you to these areas, and was there a particularly complex or high-profile transaction that confirmed your long-term commitment to this specialization?
I was drawn to M&A and private equity because I genuinely enjoyed the subjects. In law school, I gravitated toward company law, contract law, and securities regulation. They felt practical and dynamic, and I could see how directly they connected to real transactions and business decisions. Over time, it became clear that this was where both my interest and aptitude lay, so I actively sought out transactional work from the beginning of my career.
Very early on, I was staffed on a complex corporate dispute involving foreign investors and Indian promoters in a heavily regulated sector. It was not a transaction, but it proved far more instructive than one. The matter progressed through multiple judicial forums in India and ultimately international arbitration. Governance issues evolved rapidly, and the underlying transaction documents were picked apart and stress-tested in contentious settings.
Watching that dispute unfold shaped how I approach transactional work. I saw how control provisions, exit rights, covenants, and risk-allocation mechanisms operate when relationships deteriorate. It reinforced that transactional practice is not simply about execution or timelines; it is about structuring rights and allocating risk in a way that can withstand judicial scrutiny, regulatory pressure, commercial strain, and adversarial dynamics over time. After that experience, I was certain this was the field I wanted to develop as my core practice.
The M&A landscape is demanding and highly competitive. As a woman excelling in this space, how have you demonstrated resilience and leadership, and what challenges have you had to navigate while building your reputation?
The primary challenge of a cross-border career is that professional capital does not transfer seamlessly. Moving to New York meant recalibrating a decade of subject-matter knowledge while proving that my foreign experience was an asset, not a deficit. I have demonstrated resilience not through self-assertion, but through sustained performance in high-friction environments that are not always immediately validating for a woman of color or a foreign-trained attorney.
Leadership, to me, is about being the person a partner or client turns to when judgment matters as much as technical skill. In practice, this has meant being relied upon to anticipate issues early, align commercial and legal objectives, and provide clear, actionable recommendations in a timely manner. It has also meant creating space for junior lawyers to take ownership of substantive work, delegating responsibility with accountability, and mentoring them as they develop into independent decision-makers. Over time, this consistency has allowed me to move from execution to influence, with trust compounding across teams and transactions.
You have advised across two major legal systems, India and the U.S. How has this cross-border experience enhanced your strategic value on complex deals, and how do clients benefit from your dual-jurisdictional expertise?
Advising across both Indian and U.S. legal systems has materially shaped how I approach cross-border transactions. The U.S. market benefits from deep capital markets and relatively flexible structuring. India, by contrast, often operates within layered regulatory frameworks, particularly around exchange controls, pricing constraints, sectoral restrictions, and multi-agency approvals. I have seen multiple transactions and commercial plans fall apart due to this regulatory and jurisdictional mismatch.
Understanding both environments is increasingly important as U.S. investors deepen their focus on India. Cross-border deals frequently require anticipating regulatory sensitivities that may not be intuitive to foreign stakeholders, while Indian companies accessing U.S. markets must adapt to different disclosure and governance standards.
Dual-jurisdictional expertise functions as a form of risk mitigation for such clients. Having practiced within both systems, I am able to anticipate friction points early and advise clients with those realities in mind from the outset, rather than trying to retrofit the approach as issues arise.
Of the many high-stakes matters you have handled, which transaction best demonstrates your leadership or critical role, and how did you contribute to its successful resolution?
One transaction that stands out was the merger of a private-sector bank with a leading housing finance company, creating one of India’s largest rural and semi-urban lending platforms. The transaction was significant not only for its scale but also for the breadth of regulatory issues it addressed. The bank was required by the central banking regulator to dilute promoter shareholding under private-sector banking norms, and the merger provided a structured pathway to achieve compliance while diversifying the bank’s asset base and geographic footprint.
The deal was particularly complex because there was no clear precedent for merging a newly licensed bank with a housing finance institution while satisfying banking and non-banking financial services regulations, securities law requirements, and addressing the promoter cross-holding restrictions when a major financial services group was involved.
My role in this particular deal included leading the regulatory analysis that informed the transaction structure and coordinating legal strategy across multiple regulators. The structuring decisions were central to enabling promoter-stake dilution, securing regulatory approvals, and facilitating long-term business integration. It remains one of the most complex and consequential transactions I have worked on, given its regulatory sensitivity, market visibility, and broader implications for India’s banking sector.
What are some of the most complex or high-impact corporate transactions you have advised on in the U.S. recently? How do these deals present unique legal or strategic challenges, and in what ways have you delivered value through your expertise?
Over the past year, I have been advising on energy infrastructure transactions tied to the growth of artificial intelligence (AI) and hyperscale data centers. What makes this work unusual is the speed and scale at which these projects are moving. The demand for power is immediate, and the capital being deployed is significant.
The data centers driving AI computing require enormous amounts of electricity. Developers are no longer relying solely on traditional grid supply or short-term arrangements. They are securing dedicated generation capacity, including renewable sources and next-generation nuclear power, often through multi-billion-dollar, long-duration commitments.
I have been closely involved in structuring these projects, including new nuclear development initiatives. The work requires bringing together federal and state energy regulation, permitting and licensing requirements, construction and financing structures, and long-term risk allocation, all within a framework that must hold up for decades. These are not discrete transactions that close and move on. These are infrastructure commitments that will influence how the country’s digital economy is powered for decades to come.
Get in touch with Tanya Pahwa –
