[Anonymous]

I am a recent CPA and today I have a phone interview with a big law firm to work on their estate tax team (high net worth individuals, partnerships, trusts.) My experience now is 3 years at a small firm doing the same thing. I was wondering if anybody has had any experience working on one of these teams at a law firm, and if so, what their experience was like. My biggest concern is what are the hours like, and how it looks on a resume compared to a big 4.

[Anonymous]

The only problem I'd have with taking a job like that is that you can never be partner and could get treated like a second class citizen.

[Anonymous]

If I was reviewing a resume and someone had worked at a law firm as a tax CPA, I would view it similarly to any other tax job, though perhaps slightly higher since I would assume you'd been exposed to the law side of things as well. Not sure if that helps any…but thought I'd contribute what I could. 🙂

Personally, I think the job sounds interesting. I'd debated between studying law and accounting, and I'm really glad I chose accounting, but something like that with a touch of law at least in water cooler talk if not leaking into my work – that would be interesting, I think. 🙂

[fsugirl2005]

@ cpanow415

I second Lilla. If I saw your resume, I would be impressed but maybe that is in the eye of the beholder of your resume. If a person hates law or anything legal, they probably won't really care. But if they are neutral or like it, they will probably be interested in speaking with you. Do some research on the firm and see what you can find out about their tax team. If you have the guts, see if you can find someone on LinkedIn who is not in management and ask them what they think without sounding like you're digging for dirt.

@ Lilla

If accounting hadn't been my chosen field, I would have been a law enforcement officer. So, my hope is to find a way to fuse my years of accounting knowledge with law. Since I already have a public accounting practice(non-attest, non-tax), I will slowly start adding forensic accounting services to my practice after I become a CPA. I was a criminology major in college in addition to the accounting and it was the coolest thing ever. Aaaah, memories! =)

REG - 78
FAR - 79
AUD - 76
BEC - 75

I have been on this journey off and on for over 10 years. I think it's about time that I wrap this up.

AUD - 10/21/16 (75----07/2010 expired)
FAR - 10/28/16
BEC - 11/2016
REG - 01/2017

Using Gleim CPA Review, Ninja Audio, Ninja Book

[Anonymous]

Take the job and make fun of the lawyers because their test is much easier than ours 😉

[jstay]

// angelwatch, is it that much easier? i think pass rate is around 60% for the BAR. however, i read online that some states (very few) dont require law school for you to actually sit for the BAR, some just require experience. I know in NY (where i live) doesn't you to graduate law school, just attend it for one year and wokr under an attorney for 3/4 years.

[Anonymous]

Jstay: It's “different” but most people who have done both say the CPA is more difficult overall.

I could be wrong but from what I understand the BAR exam is made up of 3 portions (to our 4). 2 of those pieces are on the same level as a typical section of the CPA exam. The last piece is an ethics portion and is much easier. So based on that, the CPA would be more difficult since we have 4 tough exams and they have 2 tough exams.

With that being said, one of the big differences between the CPA exam and the BAR exam is what you can do without passing them. An accountant without a CPA license can do accounting and audit work. It just needs to be reviewed and signed off on by a CPA. Therefore a CPA firm can make money off of someone without their license. However if you haven't passed the BAR, you are not able to go into the court room basically. Therefore a law firm has a much more difficult time making money off of someone who hasn't passed the BAR yet but wants to practice law.

That's been my interpretation.

[Anonymous]

My interpretation is that people think their own field's exam process is more difficult than the other field's, regardless of which field is which. If the BAR and the CPA both cover the same amount of material, then having 2 exams instead of 4 would be harder; if the BAR exams cover the same amount of material per exam, then having 2 instead of 4 would be easier. Someone who takes both but has more of an “accounting mind” might say the BAR is harder, whereas someone who takes both with more of a “law oriented mind” might say the CPA is harder. Pass rates are also somewhat useless for this – I took and passed on the first try a Natural Sciences CLEP exam that had around a 10% pass rate, but I only studied for it about 2 weeks and it was easy; BEC with a 50+% pass rate was definitely harder than it. The main difference was the preparedness of the candidates. There's too many variables to really say which is harder. I'm just happy I passed the CPA exams and my aunt passed the BAR and we're both employed.

[chgarcia24]

People can debate all day long which is harder, bottom line is that unless you take both you can't really say which one is harder for you. My wife is highly intelligent (Harvard Grad and Stanford Law) she sees me studying and what I study and she thinks FAR and REG are hard but AUD and BEC not so much.

One thing for sure, you need to go to Law School to actually take the BAR (unless you are in NY and CA), there is a separate method that does not require Law School but you won't be employed at a real firm and it takes several years to go this route. By the sole fact that you need to go to Law School to be an Attorney, I would say that takes more dedication than a CPA but either or could be very difficult.

There is a reason Attorney's can make $300 plus an hour while Accountants can only wish to sniff half as much.

[chgarcia24]

To the OP, wife says take the gig if you can, as someone posted above, prestigious law firms might see you as a second class citizen but you could gain very valuable experience and work as an “Expert Witness”. She has been on major cases where Expert Witnesses in Tax are being paid $1000 per hour or straight 30k contracts per case to offer their opinion on tax matters. Who is the second class citizen now?

[Anonymous]

chgarcia24-

No law firm will retain their in house accountants as an expert witness. They hire consultants for that. It's far too messy to put a related party on the stand (if you even can). It just doesn't happen.

The OP could; however, retain his law firm contacts and try to leverage them into forensic consulting. You're correct- it's not uncommon to get $1k/hr.

[mhueycpa]

@ chgarcia24 may I ask where you live? I've worked for CPA's that bill well over $300/hr in NYC. To accountants “can only wish to sniff half as much” must be related to location of work. That said I know and have worked with attorney's that bill at $1,500/hr. So while I agree with the premise Good, Corporate, Attorney's make way more than CPA's. That does not mean good CPA's make crap pay. Its like comparing someone worth $5mm to someone worth $1mm, they're both millionaires, just to a different degree.

@CPAnow415 do you have a choice between Big 4 and Law Firm? Your post seems to be your small firm position vs. Big Law Firm, where does Big 4 come in? If your interested in law as well as accounting, go for it. I can't stand the praise that almost ALL CPA candidates give to Big 4. Regional firms and some small firms can offer way more experience, with a better work life balance, and about the same compensation.

To the Bar Vs. CPA exam. I say what can an Attorney do that no one else can? Unless I'm mistaken anyone can represent themselves in any given case. Wheres only CPA's can sign off on Audit Reports. That said CPA's have a monopoly on something that Lawyers don't.

THE 300 CLUB WILL DO JUST FINE!

[chgarcia24]

@bill

Yes, you are right about in house, I was implying that he could gain experience there, and move on to other firms as a consultant.

@mhueycpa

I live in Southern Ca (LA), I really can't comment on who makes more or less in NYC but the data is out there. Big Law Associates start at $160-$180k out of Law School, 7 year Associates can top out at around $350k before being partner. I am sorry but entry Level CPA cannot make that much. Sure a CPA can bill $300 and hour but he won't be billing the same amount of hours that a Attorney can. Everyone has different backgrounds, I am confident in what I say because I have direct knowledge thru my wife (she works in NYC and now LA) out of Law School you make huge money at Big Law Firms but of course that comes with a price (working many hours). I also have several friends that went to Law School and same experiences. I am not talking about your typical Law Grad, these people went to top schools that could get Big Law jobs.

I also work in the Finance Sector and Auditing ( I speak with many CPA's in this region because I have to review their books and I know how much they can make on average) Of course some make more but most are hardly making 150k per year or billing $300 an hour on a regular basis. You may disagree but the data is out there, don't take my word for it (even though it is firsthand knowledge). I am not a CPA yet and I make more than most entry level CPA's. You have to sell yourself and if you put in enough effort, you can make a lot of money in most jobs.

You can represent yourself and surely lose. There is a reason they call it BAR (because you become license to be behind the BAR). Yes, a CPA can only sign off on Audited Financials but even then, you can have other CPA's do the work and you review. You don't need every CPA to have the Audited hours under their belt. EA can represent against the IRS as well. Not all businesses are publically traded or require Audited financials.

It seems the OP will have a great future either way, we all have different experiences and I am only sharing mine because I think he has a unique opportunity to take a Law Firm gig and go from there.

[Author]

Replies