joeschmoe wrote:Thanks for the reply. To give more specifics, the offer isn't with a firm that most people on here would consider "BigLaw." The firm (100-200 attorneys) offer is for an associate position in their transactional practice. Probably some tax here and there but not solely tax. Market size is more like Tulsa; think Reno, Boise, Spokane, SLC, Billings. There are a handful of large companies headquartered in my desired city. I would love to go from Big4 to in-house. Is it possible/likely to go from Big4 (say 2-5 years) and then go directly in-house in a legal role instead of a tax role? One of the Big4 I am interviewing for is for M&A while the other (EY) is for a diversified group aka they make you do a handful of different types of tax for the first 2 years.
I'm in house at a f500. One of my co-workers in tax legal came over from Big4, so it's certainly doable. I think the key is figuring out what type of practice you want and what type of practice the jobs are offering. I will offer some pros and cons:
Big 4 Pros:
Bigger upside potential if you stay with them
Access to more high-end public company work
Likely more sophisticated transactions to work on
Better name recognition for lateral moves
May be able to transfer between offices- and they have offices all over the place
Big4 Cons:
Work-life balance likely inferior
May get pigeonholed doing drudgery- things like reviewing invoices for sales tax audits
May not get good legal training- they may push you into a more accounting-focused role
Practice may not align with any practices in your desired market
Firm Pros:
Practice closer to what is likely common in your desired market
Likely better work-life balance
Better legal training
Likely less hierarchical,
Likely better partnership prospects
Firm Cons
Potentially poor name recognition outside home market
Likely less sophisticated transactions
Less focused practice- may not be able to develop focused tax expertise