partner

minimizing self-employment taxes is desirable but tricky.

by marc rosenberg
retirements & buyouts

the income tax aspect of practice management issues is an area of my consulting practice in which i have knowledge, but i wouldn’t call it “expertise.” so i sought the counsel of an expert – jeff arnol, cpa, managing partner of kessler, orlean, silver & company in chicago. the information presented here is based on my 20+ years of experience of working with cpa firms on partner retirement plans, liberally supplemented by arnol’s input.

more on partner retirements: two ways to retire, and one’s not pretty | mandatory retirement varies by firm size | mandatory retirement? 4 reasons the firm comes first | how to transition clients from retiring partners | you want goodwill payments? give proper retirement notice | retirement vesting: the devil’s in the details | compromise is in order for some goodwill payouts | three ways to calculate goodwill payable in partner buyouts, none of them great | 5 points to consider when paying out goodwill | how to set terms and limits for goodwill payouts | partners may balk at guaranteeing retirement obligations

read more →

the graceful way to slow down and phase out.

by marc rosenberg
retirements & buyouts

there are two ways that partners slow down as they approach traditional retirement age:

announced – the “cooperative” way to slow down. the partner openly and willingly informs the partners that she wishes to slow down. this change in status is usually related to the retirement process, but some partners who are not retirement-minded may wish to work less than full time in order to pursue other life goals.

more on retirement: mandatory retirement varies by firm size | how to transition clients from retiring partners | retirement plan funding? what funding? | retirement vesting: the devil’s in the details | when retiring partners take a specialty with them | three ways to calculate goodwill payable in partner buyouts, none of them great | the multiple of compensation method, fully explained | clients leaving? time to reduce retirement benefits | partners may balk at guaranteeing retirement obligations

exclusively for pro members. log in here or 2022世界杯足球排名 today.

unannounced – the “uncooperative” way to slow down. in these instances, the partner is either unwilling to cooperate with his partners in working out a sensible, fair phase-down period or is unaware that he needs to phase out of the firm.

read more →

practices between “large” firms and smaller firms diverge.

by marc rosenberg
retirements & buyouts

as is the case with many aspects of practice management, mandatory retirement is addressed quite differently depending on the size of the firm. here is data from a recent rosenberg map survey:

percent of firms having mandatory retirement policies for partners:

• 83 percent for firms with annual fees greater than $20 million.
• 77 percent for firms in the $10 million-20 million range.
• 56 percent for firms in the $2 million-10 million range.
• 21 percent for firms with fees less than $2 million.

more on retirement: mandatory retirement? 4 reasons the firm comes first | how to transition clients from retiring partners | you want goodwill payments? give proper retirement notice | retirement plan funding? what funding? | vesting can cover part-timers, too | retirement vesting: the devil’s in the details | compromise is in order for some goodwill payouts | when retiring partners take a specialty with them | if clients leave, do you reduce retirement benefits?

read more →

and 6 reasons that firms struggle.

by marc rosenberg
retirements & buyouts

at cpa firms, the concept of requiring partners to retire at a certain age has been around for decades. the mandatory requirement policy has its roots in the “one-firm” concept of managing a firm: the interests of the firm should always be more important than the interests of any individual partner.

more on retirement: you want goodwill payments? give proper retirement notice | retirement plan funding? what funding? | compromise is in order for some goodwill payouts | when retiring partners take a specialty with them | if clients leave, do you reduce retirement benefits? | the multiple of compensation method, fully explained | the ins and outs of aav for goodwill | 5 points to consider when paying out goodwill | how to set terms and limits for goodwill payouts | 4 ways to decide how to pay out capital | partners may balk at guaranteeing retirement obligations

why a mandatory retirement policy is good for the firm: read more →

no transition – no goodwill.

by marc rosenberg
retirements & buyouts

if there is one takeaway in retirement planning, it would be this: “no transition – no goodwill.” here’s what i mean.

more on retirement: retirement plan funding? what funding? | vesting can cover part-timers, too | compromise is in order for some goodwill payouts | when retiring partners take a specialty with them | if clients leave, do you reduce retirement benefits? | three ways to calculate goodwill payable in partner buyouts, none of them great | eat what you kill? then maybe ‘book of business’ is for you | the ins and outs of aav for goodwill | 5 points to consider when paying out goodwill | clients leaving? time to reduce retirement benefits | 4 ways to decide how to pay out capital | partners may balk at guaranteeing retirement obligations

the best of times and the worst of times…

with apologies to charles dickens, who famously opened his classic “a tale of two cities” with the above, here are two real experiences i had regarding transition, one of which was the best example of retiring partner transition i’ve ever seen and one the worst.

read more →

two ways to deal with the loss of a major client.

by marc rosenberg
retirements & buyouts

sometimes you need a creative compromise for dealing with the issue of linking client retention with goodwill benefits.

situations that could cause a firm to factor in lost clients in calculating goodwill benefits include:

1. client loss, regardless of who is at fault.
2. non-traditional services that were not institutionalized and hence, left the firm with the lead partner.
3. loss of a significant client.

read more →