Top Law Schools

24 years old. Wife plus a 14 month old little girl. 3.8 GPA from undergrad in Finance (fall 2018). Worked as paralegal at 2 PI firms (a year each, 2nd firm was full time plus school). Teaching Assistant for a year for upper division courses. Tax advisor since Oct 2018. IRS Enrolled Agent. On track to complete over 700 tax returns next tax season and become senior tax advisor during 2020. Lots of small business clients (SMLLC’s, MMLLC’s, S-Corp’s, a handful of C-Corps).

Main question: is getting a MACC in Tax + law school worth my time or should I just work for the next year and a half as an enrolled agent and then go to law school?

Want to work in tax law or business litigation afterwards and don’t want to waste time and money getting a MACC if it won’t make much of a difference. I don’t plan on becoming a CPA. I’m not sure which option is likely to help more in the long run. I’d rather get a MACC starting fall 2020 than an LLM after law school.

Thoughts?

Welcome to TLS!

If you want to become a lawyer and do not want/intend to become a CPA, don't waste time/energy/money pursuing a MACC (especially when you already have the EA credential to demonstrate your tax law bona fides).

But, what particular kind of "tax law or business litigation" do you envision practicing? it sounds like you're currently on a great career trajectory as an EA/tax advisor, and I'd hate to see you give that up for law school if it won't actually help you with your goals.

TommyJ wrote:24 years old. Wife plus a 14 month old little girl. 3.8 GPA from undergrad in Finance (fall 2018). Worked as paralegal at 2 PI firms (a year each, 2nd firm was full time plus school). Teaching Assistant for a year for upper division courses. Tax advisor since Oct 2018. IRS Enrolled Agent. On track to complete over 700 tax returns next tax season and become senior tax advisor during 2020. Lots of small business clients (SMLLC’s, MMLLC’s, S-Corp’s, a handful of C-Corps).

Main question: is getting a MACC in Tax + law school worth my time or should I just work for the next year and a half as an enrolled agent and then go to law school?

Want to work in tax law or business litigation afterwards and don’t want to waste time and money getting a MACC if it won’t make much of a difference. I don’t plan on becoming a CPA. I’m not sure which option is likely to help more in the long run. I’d rather get a MACC starting fall 2020 than an LLM after law school.

Thoughts?

Tax lawyer here:

If you are going to go through the trouble getting a MACC, and are already working as an EA, you might as well get your CPA credential. If you don't want to do the CPA thing, you might as well just go to law school now. A CPA credential can be a nice plus for a tax lawyer looking to work in-house, but it's far from necessary. Much of what is covered by the CPA exam and in a MACC program is irrelevant to what tax lawyers do.

Keep in mind that tax law can be a bit of a "go big or go home" type of field. Individuals (other than very high net worth individuals) rarely hire tax attorneys. Smaller businesses and individuals will generally hire an EA or CPA, who are generally cheaper and whose practices are much better aligned with what their tax needs (more compliance and fact-focused controversy issues). Tax law tends to be dominated by large institutional clients. What that means to you is you need to be set up for Biglaw or Big4 to really get into the game. It would behoove you to go to a T14 school if at all possible to make those options a strong possibility.

As for LLMs, they are a nice plus, but fairly superfluous if you already have a tax law job lined up. However, it's fairly common to do them part time as you practice, and many firms will pay for them. No need to plan on an LLM in advance.

"Business litigation" is a totally different career path for lawyers, though it likewise helps to get the best credentials you can.

Maybe this is a question for a different forum, but one of the reasons I don't really want to pursue CPA accreditation is because the tax firm I work at doesn't have any CPA's. They're EA's for 10+ years and former IRS auditors but not CPA's. Going forward, I'm not sure how I could meet the experience requirements of a CPA without switching firms to work directly under a CPA?

Tax attorney without a CPA here. I think of EA as a bit of a “dirty word,” since you get lumped in with all the shady EITC operators that file false returns.

I think a MACC will give you good knowledge, but a worse impression when viewed alongside an LLM. Happy to answer more specific questions, just shoot me a message.

RMFT12 wrote:Tax attorney without a CPA here. I think of EA as a bit of a “dirty word,” since you get lumped in with all the shady EITC operators that file false returns.

I think a MACC will give you good knowledge, but a worse impression when viewed alongside an LLM. Happy to answer more specific questions, just shoot me a message.

So what is the best use of my time over the next year and a half? I've thought that 20 years from now a MACC would be more beneficial than another year of work experience. It would also give me the option to become a CPA. But that might not matter or be helpful. That's what I'm trying to figure out.

TommyJ wrote:So what is the best use of my time over the next year and a half? I've thought that 20 years from now a MACC would be more beneficial than another year of work experience. It would also give me the option to become a CPA. But that might not matter or be helpful. That's what I'm trying to figure out.

Neither the MACC nor the work experience is going to make much difference in 20 years -- which is precisely why you should do the one that makes money instead of the one that costs money, especially with an infant child.

TommyJ wrote:

RMFT12 wrote:Tax attorney without a CPA here. I think of EA as a bit of a “dirty word,” since you get lumped in with all the shady EITC operators that file false returns.

I think a MACC will give you good knowledge, but a worse impression when viewed alongside an LLM. Happy to answer more specific questions, just shoot me a message.

So what is the best use of my time over the next year and a half? I've thought that 20 years from now a MACC would be more beneficial than another year of work experience. It would also give me the option to become a CPA. But that might not matter or be helpful. That's what I'm trying to figure out.

If you can't get the work experience required for your state's CPA exam, just make money and forget about adding to your credentials. Focus on getting into the best law school you can. MACC doesn't do much for a lawyer, especially if you are already an EA. All either does is tell a prospective employer you have some tax background.