Top Law Schools

...

depends on what you want but assuming prestige rather than a career etc,

skadden
kirkland



fenwick
baker
STB

wilson
latham

JohannDeMann wrote:depends on what you want but assuming prestige rather than a career etc,

skadden
kirkland



fenwick
baker
STB

wilson
latham

Goals are to stay for 5 years and then go in house.
1. I'm a little surprised that Wilson is so low. Any particular reason?
2. Is Latham being at the bottom because of the whole Lathaming thing?
3. I'm turned off by Baker because they seem to be more of a controversy shop. Are they well regarded on the transactional side?
4. I'm also a little hesitant about Kirkland based on what I have heard about them. Also, they seem to have a pretty limited practice area.

id move latham up then to the top tier. go with your gut. youre not going to go wrong with any of these in tax.

JohannDeMann wrote:id move latham up then to the top tier. go with your gut. youre not going to go wrong with any of these in tax.

Thanks, is the lathaming thing a consideration? Do tax groups tend to get liquidated when the economy goes into the shitter?

Anonymous User wrote:

JohannDeMann wrote:id move latham up then to the top tier. go with your gut. youre not going to go wrong with any of these in tax.

Thanks, is the lathaming thing a consideration? Do tax groups tend to get liquidated when the economy goes into the shitter?

id say tax is one of the more secure groups. most will latham you though if times get desperate.

JohannDeMann wrote:depends on what you want but assuming prestige rather than a career etc,

skadden
kirkland



fenwick
baker
STB

wilson
latham

this is completely wrong. as a transactional tax lawyer in the bay, i would rate as:

Fenwick (does quite a bit of controversy, but also plenty of transactional work)

Baker Mckenzie (does tons of controversy, so beware)

Wilson Sonsini
Latham Silicon Valley
STB Palo Alto
Skadden Palo Alto
Kirkland & Ellis SF
(all of these are such small tax outposts that there's no basis for differentiating "prestige")


ETA: as far as the "Lathaming" consideration - tax groups who work with large/mature clients still have work during downturns thanks to COD issues, bankruptcies, etc. i have no idea what happens in groups that focus on startups (Wilson) that simply evaporate.

For substantial tax work in the Bay Area there's really only Fenwick Skadden and B&M. While the rest do have tax groups they are small compared to the corporate group, which mean tax is likely all corporate-support and little variety. For example, emerging company practice naturally doesn't yield a lot of tax issues, so firms like WSGR with a top notch EC group probably isn't the best place for tax. Fenwick's tax practice is well regarded but it's totallt separate from its corporate group (different clients, independent revenue, etc.). Skadden also has independent tax work but somewhat more integrated with corporate due to th nature of its corporate clients.

Tax at LW, STB, and KE mostly support their corporate work.

Thanks for the responses guys. Isn't transactional tax by its very nature m&a support? If we are talking about "independent" tax work aren't we going to be looking mostly at controversy and transfer pricing?

Anonymous User wrote:Thanks for the responses guys. Isn't transactional tax by its very nature m&a support? If we are talking about "independent" tax work aren't we going to be looking mostly at controversy and transfer pricing?

Often, but not always. Sometimes tax controls the structure or motive behind a transaction to such an extent that clients will either select counsel based on the tax group, or they will specifically farm out the tax work to a separate firm. Tax equity comes to mind as an example, although it's becoming more commoditized.

all of these firms are great shops to work, so picking based on personality and interview fit would be fine and you cant go wrong, but to get into the gritty:

STB specializes in private equity. Latham specializes in REITs. Skadden is the deal king. All of those specialities have high quality partners the west coast currently. You will not get better PE, REIT, or M&A tax experience anywhere (can get equal, but no one does it better).

Fenwick and Baker do loads of tax controversy and transfer pricing.

None of these groups are corporate support tax practices. All of the partners heading these groups are rainmakers that could leave tomorrow and start a boutique with Fortune 100 companies from day 1.

if youve got offers from all these places though, just ask them what differentiates their practices. no better source to hear it from than the people doing it day in and day out.

Did you get an offer from Fenwick's tax group or Fenwick in general? Fenwick's tax group hires directly and does not pick associates from the corporate side.

only did callback with FW so far. With tax.

...

bump

Bump, and please feel free to pm!

For the people voting Skadden: is it because of the V5 preftige or because of their broader tax offerings? I guess I'm struggling because I didn't feel like I clicked very well with the people I interviewed with.

Not sure if tax is guaranteed from any of the firms you've gotten offers from. Those firms usually only hire tax associate on a as-needed basis.

sumaznboi12 wrote:Not sure if tax is guaranteed from any of the firms you've gotten offers from. Those firms usually only hire tax associate on a as-needed basis.

PMed.

I would go STB here because I'd rather shoot myself than end up in corporate at any of these firms. That assurance is worth a lot (to some people). Also, it kind of sounds like you actually want to go there because you liked the people, but you're not weighting that very heavily in the decision making process.