Why PwC and Deloitte are betting on immigration law
Said one law firm managing partner: "I think they're going to go after everything eventually."
September 24, 2018 at 06:26 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The American Lawyer
As they search for ways to expand their legal services business inside the US, there are good reasons for the major accounting firms to focus on immigration law.
Yesterday ( 25 September), PwC became the second Big Four firm in four months to announce an alliance with a US-based immigration law firm, following a similar deal by Deloitte in June. Facilitating global mobility is becoming an increasingly important business offering for these massive companies, and immigration law is a key component.
"There's a lot about the immigration practice that makes sense: the ability to think about efficiencies, technology and high volume," said J. Stephen Poor, chair emeritus of Seyfarth Shaw. "Those are characteristics that play right to the Big Four's strengths."
The alliance between PwC's UK arm and New York-based Fragomen promises clients joint immigration teams featuring professionals from both organisations, while both will continue to grow their independent practices.
From the perspective of PwC and its peers, immigration law – and mobility expertise more generally – is a product they can sell to significant institutions, not just small and medium-sized businesses. And it's more likely than not part of an integrated offering that they're providing to clients on an ongoing basis.
"They are not adverse to doing standalone legal work, but what they're offering is not going in from the general counsel but through the COO, the CFO, through the director of operations," said Jomati Consultants principal Tony Williams, who led Arthur Andersen's legal arm two decades ago after serving as global managing partner of Clifford Chance.
Like other core Big Four practices – tax, for example – immigration law is heavy on process and lends itself to application of technology. Traditional law firms – even immigration specialists – don't necessarily have the same resources to invest. PwC reported $37.7bn (£28.7bn) in gross revenues in 2017. That's more than 10 times what Kirkland & Ellis, the top firm in the Am Law 100, raked in last year.
Specialists like Fragomen, in addition to lacking the deep pockets of the Big Four, also can't match their complementary practices, making an alliance a smart move.
"There are services that the Big Four offer" – global movement of employees, tax, human resources – "that the single-focus immigration firms don't have in their shops," Poor said.
The PwC-Fragomen alliance follows the June tie-up between Deloitte and US immigration firm Berry Appleman & Leiden (BAL), in which Deloitte's UK arm acquired BAL's international offices while allying with its US operations. Deloitte entered a similar alliance in 2014 with Canadian immigration law firm Guberman Garson.
"The Big Four has always been more willing to explore joint ventures, alliances and different structures than Big Law," Poor said.
It's an open question whether KPMG and EY will look to find immigration partners of their own – if they aren't already in the midst of negotiations.
But few expect the accounting firms' aspirations to end with immigration firms. Robert Tannous, managing partner of Columbus, Ohio-based Porter Wright Morris & Arthur, has been watching the Big Four warily for some time. Even though the full-service firm has an immigration practice, its focus on inbound immigration for smaller businesses doesn't necessarily put it in conflict with these heavyweights yet.
"I think they're going to go after everything eventually," he said.
Poor expressed the same sentiment: "The big elephants are continuing to stomp along."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllClifford Chance Under Fire for Human Rights Assessment of Saudi Arabia World Cup Bid
5 minute readTrump Win Ignites Global Legal Market: Lawyers Prepare for High Demand & Uncertainty
Trending Stories
- 1Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
- 2Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 3Climate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
- 4Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 5Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]
- 6How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250