Discussion:Why can't Accountants charge like Lawyers do?

From TaxAlmanac, A Free Online Resource
Note: You are using this website at your own risk, subject to our Disclaimer and Website Use and Contribution Terms.

From TaxAlmanac

Jump to: navigation, search

Discussion Forum Index --> General Chat --> Why can't Accountants charge like Lawyers do?

Kokomo (talk|edits) said:

18 April 2008
I got charged $50 for an email from a lawyer. The sole objective of her email was to explain to me why she screwed up.

OK. may be this is not normal but my point is that we do know that the general public is more willing to pay lawyers. And they think lawyers charge for "everything". So, why can't accountants be treated the same? Doesn't "everything" refer to the professional's time? Where did we go wrong?

I do charge my clients for consultation by the hour and accounting/payroll work as a flat fee which covers my cost of emails etc. But, I can't imagine putting the word "emails" or "phone calls" in an invoice.

CrowJD (talk|edits) said:

18 April 2008
Charging to explain why she screwed up? No, no, no....tell her politely what she can do with her bill for that Email.

I think on the accounting/audit side, CPA's are really going to be able to raise their fees over the next 5 years or so.

As far as tax return preparation goes: at present, no license is required in my state. Of course, CA requires a license. I have been charging flat fees per schedule, and I am going to change that. Those that require extra research are going to pay for that by the hour.

Part of it is that new people enter the profession, and actually lose money for a while to get clients. They undercut the rest of us, and keep fees low. And, as Kevin points out through his posts, you have to think of yourself as a professional to be treated as one. Including the education component. However, I am taking both Continuing Legal Ed. and CPE, and it can get rather expensive. I am not required to take CPE, but I do since I belong to NSA.

P.S. The rate that lawyers ask may be high, but anyone should feel free to negotiate the rate with a lawyer in advance (don't be shy), and should also feel free to question excessive billing.

Natalie (talk|edits) said:

April 18, 2008
The owner of the first public accounting firm I worked for handed me an article during my first year there. It explained how attorneys do their billing. The biggest thing my boss wanted to get across to me was that 1 hour = 50 minutes not 1 hour, so in that respect, the bills from that firm were similar to attorneys.

I frequently hear complaints about attorneys' bills, so I'm not sure I would actually want to be in that same category. I do think, however, many times we (that's for all of us in general) aren't charging enough for the value provided.

ImBillingTime (talk|edits) said:

18 April 2008
A-hem. Don't make me post that youtube link again. Natalie can't get that song out of her head everytime she sees me as it is.

RoyDaleOne (talk|edits) said:

19 April 2008
I got charge for a file review for the monthly firm meeting to go over the work load. Yep, that what the bill said.

Natalie (talk|edits) said:

April 19, 2008
Too late IBT -- it's in my head now and will probably remain there for the rest of the day.

Roy, that's just too much.

CrowJD (talk|edits) said:

19 April 2008
RDO: did you pay it? No way, to go over the workload? How is that a legal service specifically to the client? How did they bury that in the fee contract? I'm not even sure the State Bar would go along with that.

As you folks already know, try to avoid the downtown, big city, firms and lawyers. Go to the next city out or two. One city out from Atlanta going East is Decatur, GA, in Dekalb County. So, I'd do a search for Dekalb County, or Decatur Bar Association. Check some of those lawyers out, they will have the same education, same skills. Many sole practitioners are excellent, they just don't want the pressures and early slavery required in the big firms.

The bigger picture is that lawyers are shooting themselves in the foot when they pull these stunts. Many middle class clients will just decide to DIY, go to some internet site, or buy a Nolo book. Everyone loses when that happens. Already I've had new clients tell me, "Well, I'm sorry I let XYZ problem get so big, but I figured I could never afford a lawyer, so I didn't even try until it got this bad." Shame on the legal profession for creating this kind of perception. The truth is the client could have afforded to come see me, but his perception is that he can't afford it.

ImBillingTime (talk|edits) said:

19 April 2008
In Natalie's head for the rest of the day. Eat your heart out, Fred.

Kokomo (talk|edits) said:

19 April 2008
ImBillingTime, that's a very funny video =:)

CrowJD, I agree that if one thinks of oneself as a professional giving value to the client the fee will reflect that.

You are right Natalie that we don't look at the value we provide. I have switched over from a pure cost-based pricing to a combination of cost-value pricing.

Now the problem occurs when I try to purchase tax practices. Apparently, the prices that the CPAs have been charging in my area are much lower than mine. And I doubt a seller - unless desparate - would go for a doubling of prices eventhough he/she would most likely end up with the same revenue if not more.

By the way, I fired the lawyer (I did pay her the $50).

Natalie (talk|edits) said:

April 19, 2008
Crow, in Hawaii the attorneys are actually trying to make it so that they get all the work except for the pure DIYs. They want to make it illegal for anyone other than an attorney can complete any contract. That means that paralegals would not be able to do simple wills. CPAs and others would no longer be able to assist with incorporations (there was something in the bill about providing advice). I'm not sure what the status is of the bill, but I sure hope it doesn't pass.

IBT - I see you've joined the club. I hope I don't need to get a special dictionary for you, too!

ImBillingTime (talk|edits) said:

19 April 2008
Nope. Reading that heavy tome on the short bus would only make my lips tired and I'm too busy eating library paste to be bothered.

CrowJD (talk|edits) said:

20 April 2008
We need to go back to the day when the accountant knew the lawyer, and the lawyer knew the accountant. They both made more money that way. It was better for the client too.

Wwtaxes (talk|edits) said:

21 April 2008
CrowJD - I agree. I've been trying to find a lawyer to sort of partner with for entity decisions. Someone that knows enough to determine how many to form (eg in the case of multiple rentals), and thinks like related owners (eg, can't form a second company to give benefits to the owners, and not give them to the other employees of the first company). I feel I have a long way to go on this, and would just as soon refer clients to someone else for this. However, the one I work with in general doesn't seem to know a lot more than I do (and perhaps less), and didn't seem anxious to learn more.

CrowJD (talk|edits) said:

29 April 2008
When I started practicing law in my town, there were 13 pages of lawyers in the Yellow Pages, now there are like 40 pages last time I looked.

However, the one area of speciality that has shrunk in the Yellow Pages is corporate law. Why? Well the big firms are still doing corporate, business formation etc. BUT the small firms have largely gotten out of it because so many people are using the net, or DIY. This becomes a vicious circle, with fewer real world lawyers gaining experience as the perception is that there is no money in it.

This is very bad because more lawyers work in small firms than big ones, and there is a whole generation of young lawyers that just don't know anything about business entitities other than what they can copy from the simplest form books. There are some solo and small firms lawyers that really do know their stuff with business entities, but they are not as easy to find as in the old days.

Natalie (talk|edits) said:

April 29, 2008
Well, maybe that's why they want the DIYs out of the picture in Hawaii -- they're just trying to revive the niche!

CrowJD (talk|edits) said:

29 April 2008
It could be. A lot of people forget that there are state securities laws also, and it's easy to trip up on them. These are so called "Blue Sky" laws. Who knows what's going on out there these days. One thing I know for sure, they will pay me dearly to clean something up.

Natalie (talk|edits) said:

April 29, 2008
I don't remember all of the details, Crow, but as I recall, this bill not only took away the right for non-lawyers to prepare wills and other documents, it also took away their rights to even advise on such things. It would have affected real estate agents, insurance brokers, CPAs and others who give advice as part of their normal business practice.

CrowJD (talk|edits) said:

30 April 2008
I would suggest a state law requiring our offices to be next to each other. lol. Maybe then the communication would be better, and the clients' needs would be served. Seriously, the doctors are actually trying to do something like that by putting all kinds of specialists in one building, so the client/patient does not feel like a ping pong ball (or at least is not driving all over town).

Wwtaxes (talk|edits) said:

5 May 2008
Crow - Funny you mention that. I'm trying to put together a business center that focuses on small business concerns. A lawyer, tax prep, computer support, web site design, graphic design, benefit specialist, insurance agent. I figure it is a win-win where each office's clients will feed client's into the other offices. I even want to publish a monthly newsletter that would feature each office and go out to everyone's clients for more cross-fertilization. It seems like a no-brainer, but finding the key people and getting the timing right is tough. I'm actually thinking of doing this as a virtual office so that no one actually has to move locations.

CrowJD (talk|edits) said:

6 May 2008
Sometimes these things can arise naturally if you have some space to rent out. People come in and rent, and you have time to get to know them before any referrals take place. In fact, the best people are the people that move in not expecting anything, if you know what I mean. The chemistry is important and it more or less comes with time.

Stockguy (talk|edits) said:

12 May 2008
I've often wondered who is able to legally establish (or "set up," for lack of a better term) the variety of business entities for business owners--lawyers, CPAs or both?

Natalie (talk|edits) said:

May 12, 2008
Stockguy, given what is being proposed for Hawaii, I would say that is a question that is answered on a state-by-state basis.

CrowJD (talk|edits) said:

13 May 2008
I agree, try to check your state law (not always easy as it's scattered around).

An owner can always do his own legal work, medical work, and accounting work. lol. And I just love to charge them dearly to straigten the legal work out.

I had a hard lesson to learn myself recently on the drawbacks of DIY. Cinnamon is good for diabetes and people with risk factors for getting diabetes. Your tax dollars discovered this through the USDA.

So Crow decides he will start taking about two grams of cinnamon spice a day, just the spice. BUT, guess what? I find out two years after starting this that siliva deactivates a lot of the beneift, hence, the cinnamon ideally needs to be extracted/encapsulated. A pharmacist would know of this possibility thru training, a doctor might know it, but I knew nothing of this type of complexity. There are tricks to every trade, and people go to school and/or get years of experience for a reason.

Again, I am not a bit shy about charging DIY people a fortune for clean up activity.

Marcilio (talk|edits) said:

13 May 2008
Isn't it interesting, DIY people are proliferating and at the same 1) time tax laws are becoming more complex while 2)compliance is ramping up and 3) the IRS retirement tsunami will hit in about 3-4 years - A perfect storm?

TheTinCook (talk|edits) said:

13 May 2008
") the IRS retirement tsunami will hit in about 3-4 years"

I hadn't heard about that one. I'm not even sure what you mean.

Marcilio (talk|edits) said:

13 May 2008
I was talking to an IRS appeals officer the other day, and he said that department at it's height had 104 employees. It now has 51 with no reduction in case load. A significant number of the remaining employees there are over age 60. Many of the other IRS departments are the same. When they retire, in his words, "There's going to be a retirement tsunami that is that is going to have profound effects throughout the service." New people aren't being trained like the old ones were. There is going to be a severe drop in the number of people who really know tax policy.

In my words, we're going to have to spend even more time than before in training IRS auditors. The fights will be tougher because the new staff doesn't know the people aspects of the job.

To join in on this discussion, you must first log in.
Personal tools

Discussion Forums