Tuesday, December 11, 2012

CLIFF NOTES -- 2012 Year-end Tax Planning for the Firm

Parsley Sage Rosemary & Ginsburg llp
“always a reasonable result for a reasonable fee, always”

Mike Marget
December 11, 2012
Cliff Notes – 2012 Year-end Tax Planning for the Firm

           Year-end tax planning is a mindboggling concept in the best of times.  As the end of 2012 approaches, “uncertainty” is the operative word due to a combination of upcoming events, including the likely expiration of the 2001-era tax rates and a new Medicare tax levied on the high income earners.    

          I recently conducted a brief, informal and very unscientific survey of tax accountant friends who advise high income individuals, including a number of partners (shareholders) in law firms.  Their advice:  law firms should accelerate revenue and defer expenses this year in anticipation of higher tax rates in 2013.

1.  Why Accelerate Income and/or Defer Expenses?
          In most years, taxpayers prefer to defer revenue and accelerate expenses in order to minimize taxable income.  This year is different.  Absent agreement in Washington to the contrary, the highest marginal tax bracket automatically increases to 39.6% from the current 35% on January 1, 2013.  In addition, a new 0.9% Medicare contribution tax on earned income takes effect for 2013 for married taxpayers with modified adjusted gross income over $250,000 and over $200,000 for taxpayers filing single.  Taken together, the tax rate applicable to most law firm partners will increase by 5.5% on their law firm income earned next year.[i]

          With these likely 2013 rates, partners will owe 5.5% more in federal income tax on every dollar earned next year at the highest marginal rate as compared to the 2012 rates.  Accordingly, the partners will save $5,500 on every $100,000 of taxable income which can be “shifted” into 2012 from 2013. 

          Generally speaking, the idea of deferring income/accelerating expenses is a good idea when tax rates remain the same or are likely to decline year-to-year.  Conversely, if rates are likely to increase in the succeeding year (i.e., the likely 2012/2013 scenario), the opposite is true.  However, there are some caveats:

A.   Law firm compensation percentages are not static.  Partner A may be entitled to 30% of the profits for 2012.  Shifting $100,000 of income from 2013 to 2012 to take advantage of lower rates could result in a $5,000 windfall if Partner A’s profit percentage in 2013 falls from 30% to 25%. 

B.   For every action there is an opposite and equal income or not-income reaction for someone else.  Assume you pay your tax accountant every December for the advice and service provided during the year – including the suggestion this year to defer expenses in 2013 to maximize taxable 2012 taxable income.  If you decide to defer the accountant’s payment to January 2013, your law firm wins, and your CPA loses.  Because of your decision to defer the regular December payment to January, you have shifted taxable income from the lower rates of 2012 to the higher 2013 rates for your CPA.  Talk about being hoisted on your own petard!

C.   It is often difficult to “go back” in time.  Should your firm decide to defer associate and staff bonuses from December 2012 to January 2013, later reverting to a December bonus payday becomes problematic.  Switching back will mean 2 bonus payments in a single calendar year – one in January for the prior work year and a second in December for the concurrent work year.  Such moves should not be taken lightly since they impact issues raised in both A and B above.

D.   Not all partners are created equal from a tax perspective.  Whatever your firm decides to do – take your CPA’s advice and accelerate income/defer expenses for 2012 or simply maintain business as usual – discuss it with all the partners.  Don’t assume every partner has the same individual tax goals and will benefit from the same strategies.  Moreover, a dramatic income shift may subject certain partners to penalties and interest for underpayment of quarterly federal and state income tax estimates for 2012.

2.  Deferring 2012 Expenses to 2013
          The following is a partial list of things to consider if your firm wants to defer 2012 expenses into 2013:

A.   Vendor Payments.  Most law firms pay their vendors on a 30-day (possibly longer) payment schedule.  In prior years, your firm likely accelerated items scheduled for payment in early January in order to take the tax deduction in the current year.  If your firm decides to maximize 2012 taxable income, you will want to defer as many expense payments as possible.

B.   Year-end Bonuses.  If your firm typically pays bonuses to associates, staff and non-equity partners in December, you may want to consider postponing those payments to January 2013.  Be mindful, however, that the deferral of bonus payments may subject the receipients to higher tax liabilities at 2013 rates.

C.   Delay 4th Quarter Nonresident State Composite Filing.  If your firm processes 4th quarter composite filings in December (so partners can deduct the state income tax payments on their personal returns), deferring those filings and payments to January will shift the personal deduction from 2012 to 2013.

D.   Depreciation Elections.  Consider electing out of 50% bonus depreciation for qualifying assets placed in service in 2012 tax year. 

E.    Qualified Retirement Plan Contributions.  Generally, contributions to a qualified retirement plan for 2012 are deductible in 2012 if contributed in 2013 before the extended due date of the law firm’s tax return for 2012.  Firms wishing to maximize partner income for 2012 may want to consider taking a 2013 tax deduction for the 2012 plan year contributions, rather than electing to take the deduction for tax year 2012.

3.  Accelerating Income into 2012
          Law firms seeking to accelerate revenue can consider the following:

A.   Accelerate billable hours and progress bill clients for December time and soft costs and collect before December 31, 2012.

B.   Collect non-refundable retainer payments in December for work to be performed next year.

C.   Collect on outstanding accounts receivable, giving discounts were appropriate in order to save on the tax differential.

D.   Advise partners that they may want to consider converting their 401(k) account balances to Roth 401(k) balances before year-end – and pay the taxes this year at current rates as opposed to the then-prevailing rate applicable to future withdrawals.  (One nice feature of the Roth IRA conversion is it comes with a “reversal feature.”  If a taxpayer converts a regular IRA to a Roth IRA before year-end and it turns out to be a bad idea, the conversion carries with it a “re-characterization” feature.  Up until the due date of your tax return in 2013, you can reverse a Roth conversion.)

          Regardless of whether the President and Congress reach a compromise on “the fiscal cliff,” it is a safe bet that tax rates – for married taxpayers who earn over $250,000 ($200,000 if single) are going to be higher in 2013.  As a result, law firm managers should work with their outside accountants to make a plan and then involve the partners (and other stakeholders) in the 2012 year-end tax planning effort.  Doing nothing is a perfectly viable option – but only after all other alternatives are thoroughly explored and discussed.  Effectively, it may come down to something this simple – as to each thing which can be accelerated or deferred – should the partners pay the tax now or later?

OBLIGATORY DISCLAIMER:  This presentation was prepared for general guidance and discussion purposes and does not constitute professional advice.  Readers should not act upon the information contained herein without obtaining specific professional advice.  No representation or warranty (express or implied) is made as to completeness or accuracy of the matters discussed herein.

[i] For purposes of this memo, I’m assuming all partners are in the highest marginal tax rate – currently 35%.

Tuesday, December 4, 2012

Standard Mileage Rate Increases $0.01 in 2013

Parsley Sage Rosemary & Ginsburg llp
“always a reasonable result for a reasonable fee, always”

All Partners, Associates and Staff
Mike Marget
December 4, 2012
Standard Mileage Rate Increases $0.01 in 2013

The IRS standard mileage rate for use of a vehicle in a business will increase by a penny per mile for miles driven in 2013.  (IRS Notice 2012-72)  For business use of an automobile, the 2013 rate will be 56.5 cents per mile.[i]  Driving for medical or moving purposes similarly increases to 24 cents per mile.  Both rates are one cent higher than for 2012.

These rates are based on annual studies of the costs of operating an automobile.  The business mileage rate factors in the increased fixed and variable costs of operating an automobile, while the medical/moving rate is based solely on increased variable costs.

Since most law firms reimburse partners and employees for business use of personal automobiles based on the IRS standard rate and, where permitted, pass those amounts through as costs to clients, it is important for firm managers to plan for this upcoming change. 

Beginning January 1, 2013, it will be important to distinguish between whether the miles driven occurred in calendar year 2012 or 2013.  The one cent increase applies only to travel occurring after December 31, 2012, regardless of whether the reimbursement or client billing occurs in 2013.

I’m fairly certain those outfits who audit legal bills for insurance companies will modify their software to look for this penny-per-mile difference by travel date.  My advice is to get it right when you process the reimbursements. 

[i] Notwithstanding IRS standard mileage rates, taxpayers always have the option of calculating the actual cost of using their vehicle for tax purposes.  However, extremely accurate records are required to substantiate such deductions.  Seek advice from your professional tax preparer before traveling this route.

Top 10 Signs You Have a Lame Computer Virus

Parsley Sage Rosemary & Ginsburg LLP
“always a reasonable result for a reasonable fee, always”

Top 10 File
Mike Marget
December 4, 2012
Top 10 Signs You Have a Lame Computer Virus

10. – You type today’s date; PC converts it to Stardate 54868.49.

9. – Only music you can download: William Shatner’s Greatest Hits.

 8. – Tech support tells you to simply give your PC rest and plenty of fluids.

 7. – Google Maps will only give you directions to the nearest Starbucks.

 6. – Hit the F7 key, you get an ad for Sham-Wow.

 5. – PC signs itself on to EBay and places bids on Commodore 64 software.

 4. – When you start up your computer, instead of the Intel jingle, you hear the opening notes to Row, Row, Row Your Boat. 

 3. – PC randomly inserts semicolons into text; where; no rational; person would ever insert a semi;colon.

2. –;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;.

1. – Your PC replaces hilarious Top 10 entries on this website with unfunny ones.

Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Outsourcing -- How it Works in Practice

Parsley Sage Rosemary & Ginsburg llp
“always a reasonable result for a reasonable fee, always”

All Partners and Senior Admin Staff
Mike Marget
October 31, 2012
Outsourcing – How it Works in Practice

“Who wants to manage the accounts payable clerks, and the billings?”  Thus spoke practice management consultant Peter Zeughauser as he predicted that large law firms eventually will outsource most of their back office functions.  The quote appeared in a Wall Street Journal article discussing the many ways large firms are trying to reduce their back office costs.  I think Peter is correct.[i]  Outsourcing makes business sense – it reduces costs, increases efficiency and frees up management time for more important things.  Not just for large firms, it makes sense for small and midsize firms, too.  Let me explain.

The purpose of this memo is to make the business case for small/midsize firms outsourcing their accounting and billing functions to an experienced, qualified outsourcing service provider (“OSP”) – someone like 4L Law Firm Services LLC (“4L”).

This is the third of three memos inspired an article appearing in the  Wall Street Journal article on October 7.  The others:  WSJ—Big Firms Wring Costs from Back Office Tasks and Outsourcing—How it Works in Theory.

Is it even Possible to Outsource a Law Firm’s Accounting & Billing?
Before making the business case, let’s first discuss whether outsourcing is even possible?  The answer is “yes.”  Advances in Internet connectivity and desktop virtualization make outsourcing not only possible, but practical for small and midsize firms.

With today’s technology, a law firm’s back office no longer needs to be located in the same building or even same city as the firm’s lawyers.  Big firms discovered this long ago and resisted duplicating accounting staff in every office. 

The same technology which permits big firms to centralize their accounting enables small and midsize firms to outsource.  Regardless of where the software resides, back office and front office personnel in different locations can utilize the same applications.  This allows billing and general ledger accounting tasks to be assigned to individuals in one city and for lawyers in another to enter time, initiate disbursements (with the checks printing to any designated printer in the lawyers’ office) and have real-time online access to a myriad of actionable financial data to manage their practice, their client work and the firm.

Outsourcing Lowers Costs for the Law Firm
The primary promise of outsourcing is quality back office services at a lower cost than the law firm can provide with internal resources.

Quality service and lower cost are made possible through a combination of economies of scale and process improvement.  Because it services multiple firms, 4L handles a higher volume of accounting and billing transactions each month.  With this greater volume, 4L is able to leverage its accounting workforce more efficiently than any single law firm with lower volume could hope to accomplish on its own.

In addition, because the accounting and billing operations constitute 4L’s front office, 4L has invested in superior accounting software – from OrionLaw Management Systems, Inc. – and assembled an experienced law firm accounting staff capable of handling the workflow more efficiently and productively than any single firm could duplicate with internal resources.

Through a combination of higher volume, improved technology, experienced talent and process improvement, 4L provides the accounting and billing services to law firms at lower cost and passes along significant savings to its client law firms.

The following chart illustrates the potential cost difference to law firms using internal resources versus outsourcing its accounting and billing tasks:

Law firms with 11-to-20 lawyers spend on average $7,005 per lawyer annually on accounting and billing staff salaries and benefits.  This data is from the 2011 Small Law Firm Economic Survey.[ii] 

Using the Survey census data, I applied 4L’s service fee pricing model to the participating firms.  The outsourcing option would cost those firms an average of $4,614 per lawyer annually[iii] – as compared to $7,005.  The savings is $2,391 per-lawyer or 34% annually.

The Collateral Benefits of Outsourcing
If lowering accounting and billing support costs by 30%-to-40% is not enough, outsourcing provides other collateral benefits.  Outsourcing:

·         eliminates future capital expenditures;
·         fosters greater efficiency and productivity for the front office;
·         introduces best practices and stronger internal controls; and
·         frees up firm leadership time to focus on other practice management challenges.

Law firms who work with 4L never have to worry about capital expenditures for software upgrades or hardware purchases or maintenance.  4L provides the Orion accounting software via the Cloud where each firm’s data resides on a separate private virtual server.  The software and hardware is provided and maintained by 4L without cost to the law firm.    

Use of the Orion accounting software also makes the law firm’s front office more efficient.  There are numerous ways to enter billable time, to lookup client-matter numbers and task codes, and make online inquiries of key financial data such as bank balances, aging of accounts receivable and client status as to last billing, last payment and other information required to manage the firm.

Working with 4L provides a higher degree of internal accounting controls than smaller firms generally implement.  The 4L staff performs monthly bank reconciliations on all firm and trust accounts and balances the detailed monthly accounting summaries to the general ledger accounts to ensure accuracy of the numbers.

Outsourcing also improves existing internal procedures.  4L works with its law firm clients to implement the best practices to streamline billing and collection processing.  We recommended changes to billing procedures at one firm which increased their cash flow by nearly $140,000 this year.  With another firm, we identified and corrected flaws in produces used to collect documentation needed to bill client advances which increased billing and reduced expenses by more than $150,000.

But perhaps the most significant collateral benefit of outsourcing is it makes firm management more effective.  The Peter Zeughauser quote at the top of this memo sums it up nicely.  Is the law firm best served when senior management is spending time on accounting and billing processes?  I think not.  Freed from the day-to-day oversight of these back office tasks, firm management can devote increased attention to the things which matter most:

·         Representing current clients;
·         Supervising, training and developing junior lawyers;
·         Seeking ways to become more profitable by reducing the direct costs of providing client service; and
·         Engaging in activities needed to attract future clients to the firm.

Outsourcing Makes Business Sense
A central precept of business management is to purchase goods and services from responsible suppliers who can provide the requisite quality at the lowest reasonable price.  A make-versus-buy decision should be a “no-brainer” when purchasing produces equal or better quality and is less expensive than doing it yourself.  In this way, outsourcing has become a $500 billion-a-year business.  Big business has embraced it in a big way and big law firms are turning to outsourcing with greater frequency – even though they already enjoy significant economies of scale 

Outsourcing makes sense because it reduces costs, improves efficiency and lets management focus on core business issues.  It just makes good business sense to outsource – regardless of the size of your law firm.

[i] I decided to go with the first name reference here because it lets me tell the following story.  I’ve met Peter on a couple occasions.  The first time was about 10 years ago in Chicago.  We were both presenting at the same conference and all the speakers had dinner together the night before.  All I recall about that dinner is there was good wine (French, naturally) and good conversation with Peter regaling stories about his service as a hockey goal judge for Anaheim Ducks’ home games.
[ii] Small Firm Economic Survey, 2011 edition, published by ALM and The National Law Journal.
[iii] It is important to note the projected annual fee per-lawyer includes the cost of the Orion accounting software which 4L provides, without fee to its client law firms.

Monday, October 29, 2012

Outsourcing -- How it Works in Theory

Parsley Sage Rosemary & Ginsburg llp
“always a reasonable result for a reasonable fee, always”

All Partners and Senior Admin Staff
Mike Marget
October 28, 2012
Outsourcing – How it Works in Theory

Outsourcing is a $500 billion-a-year business.  Big business embraces outsourcing in a big way to reduce cost, foster greater efficiency and free management time to focus on core competencies. 

Outsourcing initiatives tend to target back office tasks – HR, payroll, call centers, help desk and accounting/billing activities.  Xerox – who in recent years has become a big outsourcing service provider (“OSP”) – runs a number of TV commercials[i] touting how they perform accounting tasks for Michelin and Marriott and call center management for Virgin Airline. 

The purpose of this memo is to discuss how outsourcing works from the perspective of the OSP and the benefits to the OSP’s business customer.

How Outsourcing Works for the OSP
The OSP’s goal is simple.  Deliver quality services better, cheaper and faster than the business customer can accomplish with internal resources, and do so profitably over the course of an enduring relationship.  In order to grow its business, an OSP works hard to provide excellent service to each business customer in order to secure quality references essential to attracting additional customers.

The outsourcing business model is significantly more complex than simply moving jobs from high cost metropolitan areas to places where salaries are lower.  While wage differentials may be part of the equation, an OSP’s success is primarily dependent upon two other factors: 
       1.       Economies of scale; and
       2.      Technology, talent and process improvement.

Economies of Scale/Leverage
Volume matters.  An OSP with multiple business customers enjoys a higher volume of work.  Higher volume results in more consistent capacity utilization with fewer peaks and valleys in the workflow.  Fewer peaks and valleys permit the OSP to leverage its workforce for higher productivity – and consequently lower operating costs – as compared to a single organization with lower volume. 

In Microeconomics 101, we learned that higher volume generally results in greater productivity.  The higher volume/greater productivity thesis is confirmed in the context of a law firm’s back office with data from a national survey of law firm economies focusing on firms with 20 or fewer lawyers.  According to the survey, firms with 11-to-15 lawyers average 0.12 FTE accounting personnel per lawyer versus a 0.11 FTE per-lawyer ratio among firms with 16-to-20 lawyers. [ii]  So, what does this mean?  Take for example a firm with 13.33 FTE lawyers and 1.6 FTE accounting personnel; then assume the firm increases 50% in size to 20 FTE lawyers.  Will this now-bigger law firm require a corresponding 50% increase in support staff to 2.4 FTE to handle the increased number of accounting and billing transactions?  Not according to the survey.  The now-bigger law firm should require just a 37.5% staff increase (not 50%) – to 2.2 FTE – since the typical 20-lawyer firm is able to manage its accounting and billing operations with 2.2 FTE, rather than 2.4.  The 0.2 FTE difference illustrates the workforce economies of scale available in a higher volume environment.  A high volume OSP is able to further maximize the economies of scale when leveraging the work effort supporting dozens or even hundreds of lawyers.

Investment in Technology, Talent and Supervision
Whether you work in a law firm or a Fortune 500 company, it is infinitely easier to justify capital spending on front office activities – the things which attract clients, generate higher revenue or reduce direct costs – than on measures aimed at improving back office functions or reducing indirect costs.  Granted, if a particular back office system is broken or on its last legs, you have a shot; short of that, back office capital spending is a tough sell.  An OSP views capital investment on matters related to the business customers’ back office activities through a different lens.

With outsourcing, the business customer’s back office is the OSP’s front office.  As such, OSPs invest heavily in technology, talent and process improvement in order to bring down the OSP’s operating costs.  The OSP requires lower operating costs in order to (a) pass a portion of those savings on to the business customer, (b) recoup marketing and capital investments and (c) make a reasonable profit.  It is standard practice for OSPs to upgrade the business customer’s (former) back office technology and implement “best practices” in order to streamline and standardize operations. 

From a staffing perspective, OSPs generally engage better talent than the business customer is able to attract and retain in a on its own.  Recruiting and retention is easier for a larger, focused OSP who can provide a career path and greater responsibilities and opportunities than can the business customer on its own.  This is particularly true when the OSP’s business customer operates in an environment where mobility from the back office to the front office is limited, if not impossible, due to training, experience or licensure, as it is with law firms.

Finally, a high volume OSP has greater flexibility and management depth to utilize part-time workers and provide 24/7 services than a single organization trying to operate hard-to-supervise second and graveyard shifts. 

How Outsourcing Works for the Customer Firm
From the business customer’s perspective, the primary motivation to outsource is to save money.  Outsourcing permits businesses to reduce their indirect costs and either realize higher profit or pass the savings on to their customers in the form of lower prices.  However, cost is only one of three motivating factors when businesses evaluate outsourcing.

Cost Savings
Obviously, each situation is different, but proponents of outsourcing trumpet 30%-to-40% cost savings when businesses outsource.

In addition, outsourcing generally relieves business customers from ever again having to make capital expenditures to support the outsourced tasks.  From the business customer’s perspective this conserves capital for expanding front office activities and converts back office fixed costs into variable costs.

Improved Internal Services
As a result of its ongoing investments in technology, talent and supervision, OSPs support business customers as change agents.  They tend to document and clarify back office procedures leading to continuous process improvement and error reduction associated with back office activities.  Time-saving technologies are introduced and the OSP staff brings new ideas and perspective to back office tasks. 

The back office procedural improvements collaterally enhance front office operations as well.  For example, reducing the back office time needed to process invoices can lead to saving time and resources in the front office.  Similarly, the new technology implemented to reduce the billing process may provide more meaningful financial data to improve management supervision over sales, billing and collection efforts.

Reduced Management Distraction on Non-Core Activities
Perhaps the most important collateral benefit derived from outsourcing involves liberating management time to focus on core competencies.  Outsourcing avoids management headaches such as finding, recruiting and evaluating back office staff, supervisory oversight and problem-solving.  It permits management personnel to focus on their “highest and best use” – those things directly associated with revenue generation – customers, delivery of goods and services, attracting new customers and increasing profit margins by reducing direct costs.

A $500 billion-a-year industry isn’t going away anytime soon.  I believe it is here to stay because a big part of management involves managing the costs of running the business.  Goods and services are generally purchased from the supplier who offers the requisite quality for the lowest reasonable price.  If an OSP can provide back office services of comparable (if not better) quality for a lower price, shouldn’t such offers be entertained?  If not, isn’t management letting down the business’ shareholder owners?  Moreover, what happens when the business’ direct competitors make the move to outsourcing and thereby obtain a competitive advantage? 

Today most OSPs focus on big business – where there are bigger contracts and bigger profits to be made.  Eventually, outsourcing will expand further among middle market companies and make inroads into small business as well.  It’s inevitable.  It just makes business sense.

[i] Xerox has a really coolwebsite devoted to their outsourcing prowess.  The TV commercials tend to run during Notre Dame football games on NBC.  GO IRISH!
[ii] Small Law Firm Economic Survey, 2011 Edition, p. 179.  This survey is published annually by ALM and The National Law Journal.

Wednesday, October 24, 2012

WSJ: Big Firm's Outsource Back Office Work to Reduce Costs

Parsley Sage Rosemary & Ginsburg llp
“always a reasonable result for a reasonable fee, always”

All Partners
Mike Marget
October 24, 2012
WSJ: "Law Firms Wring Costs from Back Office Tasks"

Amonth ago, I commented on two articles from Law.com reporting declining profits among Legal Industrial Complex law firms due to rising operating costs.  The website cited a couple surveys published by big banks who lend to the largest US firms.  The Wall Street Journal jumped on the story on Oct. 7, publishing its own piece describing strategies[i] adopted by 5 big firms to stem the tide of rising operating costs and bolster PPP.[ii]  The two strategies:

·         Relocating back office jobs to less expensive cities; and/or
·         Outsourcing administrative tasks to third party providers capable of performing the tasks just as well (if not better), faster and cheaper.

I’m usually critical of the Journal for its eponymous, laser-like focus on Wall Street – and consequently Wall Street law firms – while feigning interest in Main Street, the middle class and the small/midsize firms who serve them.  However, Rupert gets a pass this time.  Admittedly, a 15-lawyer firm in Atlanta is unlikely to reap any significant savings by moving its 1.8 FTE accounting and billing staff[iii] to Tampa.  However, [BSP alert][iv] the same 15-lawyer firm will be able to reduce its operating costs and realize other benefits by outsourcing those  accounting and billing tasks to an experienced service provider like Tampa-based 4L Law Firm Services LLC.

My next two memos/postings will deal with how outsourcing works in theory and in practice.

[i] I haven’t really been tracking these developments, but here is a partial list of firms who have made significant changes to their back office operations:
# attys
Akin Gump
Outsourced most accounting tasks to Deloitte
Baker & McKenzie
Established back office center in Manila, PI
Orrick Herrington
Set up back office center in Wheeling, WV; 350 employed there, some outsourced to Williams Lea
CMS Cameron McKenna (London)
Outsourced all back office jobs to Integreon; 10-year contract valued at $933 million
Wilmer Hale
Moved 187 accounting, HR jobs to Dayton, OH
O’Melveny & Myers
Outsourced 75 admin jobs to Williams Lea
Pillsbury Winthrop
Moving 160 accounting and other jobs to Nashville, TN
Bingham McCutchen
Budgeting $22.5 million to relocate 250 jobs to Lexington, KY
Foley Lardner
Outsourced 37 records mgmt. jobs to Williams Lea
[ii] PPP is short for “Profits per Partner.”
[iii]According to the Small Law Firm Economic Survey, 2011 Edition (ALM Intelligence and The National Law Journal), p. 179, a firm with 11-15 lawyers will employ .12 “finance/accounting” staffers per lawyer: 15 lawyers x .12 = 1.8 FTE.
[iv] BPS is short for “Blatant Self Promotion.”