Big Four Fear in New Jersey: Not Now or Not Ever?
The picture in the U.S. is different from overseas, but that doesn't mean that the relationship between lawyers and accountants in the state hasn't evolved over the years—and that more evolution couldn't be in store.
February 21, 2019 at 02:37 PM
8 minute read
The market to provide legal services is a competitive one, and law firms are not competing only with one another. That's a familiar refrain as reports come steadily about the Big Four accounting firms' exploits overseas.
In the U.S. generally, and in New Jersey specifically, the picture is much different. Laws and ethics rules—chiefly those prohibiting the practice of law by nonlawyers and barring legal fee-sharing with nonlawyers—are major impediments to the sort of market-shifting moves happening in Europe and Asia.
But that doesn't mean that the relationship between lawyers and accountants in the state hasn't evolved over the years—and that much more evolution couldn't be in store.
In some areas of work, accounting firms “are as much of a competitor as another law firm would be,” said Frank Cannone, chair of the corporate department at Newark-based Gibbons, who regularly works deals, including cross-border and overseas transactions, involving accounting firms. “I do think this dynamic of accounting firms migrating into the practice of law is happening and will continue to happen because there's demand for it overseas.”
“In the end, they're going to be disruptors,” Cannone said. “Right now the industry is getting disrupted on a very small scale.”
He added, “it's certainly an aggressive evolution overseas.”
Indeed. Earlier this year, for example, KPMG's legal services arm made moves or announced plans for moves in the U.K., France and Hong Kong, and reported large revenue gains. (KPMG has upward of 2,300 legal professionals in 76 countries, Law Journal affiliate the American Lawyer reported). Also in 2019, Deloitte became the last of the Big Four to launch a law firm in Hong Kong, as EY and PwC already had done so, in 2015 and 2017, respectively.
In the U.S., meanwhile, it's common for accounting or consulting firms to employ lawyers, though the lawyers may not provide legal counsel.
A Big Four invasion might not be imminent stateside, but according to New Jersey lawyers and accountants, competition does occur, including with some work that has traditionally been the province of lawyers but doesn't amount to legal services per se.
“They're passing us by, and they're better businesspeople,” one law firm leader said of accounting firms providing consulting services.
The lawyer, who asked not to be named because of relationships with accounting firms, said numerous common tasks can be done—or mostly done, pending only legal review—by accountants or nonlawyer professionals: Among them, drafting wills, estate plans, employee benefits documents or executive compensation documents.
“What the accounting firms do is say, 'we're not your lawyer. … So we're going to give you these documents, and you take them to your lawyer,'” the lawyer said. “It's a very polished product, and … [usually] the lawyer isn't going to have much to say.” The revenue difference to the law firm is “a couple of hours of review rather than dozens of hours” of billable work, the lawyer said, adding that there is “as much as 80 percent less legal work … when you're reviewing rather that creating documents.” What might have been a $25,000 fee might be a $2,500 fee, the lawyer said.
Hubert Klein, a partner in the Iselin office of accounting firm EisnerAmper heading the firm's
financial advisory services group, said the dynamic of accountants taking on more work goes back decades.
“A lot of times you see this in the estate and gift tax arena,” Klein said. “There was a period of time when only the lawyers were doing the estate tax returns.”
He said EisnerAmper has “a measured approach” in terms of what work it takes on, and the firm employs lawyers, but those lawyers work on tax compliance matters, not as legal advisers.
“In my experience, accountants generally don't draft the agreements,” Klein noted. “While accountants can be well-versed and knowledgeable on what the law may be, I think it's always safe to refer to the attorney.”
The best teams consist of both accountants and lawyers doing legal work, but when it comes to clients, “everyone is budget conscious,” he said.
“We work with legal counsel a lot,” he said. “Accountants and lawyers should work together. At the end of the day, it's about what's best for the client, not what's best for the respective firms.”
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 All'Insults and Curses': Yelp Review Demonstrates How Courts Struggle With Common Disputes
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Friday Newspaper
- 2Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 3Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 4NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 5A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
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