Page 137 - Leaders in Legal Business - PDF - Final 2018
P. 137
appear to the clients as global firms when in fact they are not.13 In the United States, the alleged
cases of conflicts of interest of Norton Rose Fulbright14 and Dentons,15 both organised as Swiss
Vereins, underline the problem of alleged appearance of impropriety.
Multidisciplinary networks and associations are basically those organisations, or TOPS,
that consist of both law firms and accounting firms, together as member firms of the coordinating
entity. Multidisciplinarity exists in some countries on a national level. It is common practice, for
example, to find in Germany or in Italy professional service firms consisting of both statutory
auditors and lawyers admitted to the bar.
Commonly, the most prominent level 4 networks, the “Big Four,” are identified as
accounting firms or accounting firm networks; however, they comprise considerable numbers of
lawyers and are therefore also ranked as leading law firms in several countries, for example in
Spain.
When accounting firm networks expanded their reach by also adding legal services, there
was initially much controversy.16 The dissolution of Arthur Andersen after the Enron scandal
seemed to temporarily put an end to the multidisciplinary ambitions of the large accounting
TOPS, but the fact is that, today, the “Big Four” comprise large single-branded law firm
networks in each of their organisations outside of the United States, since the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act does not prevent them from providing non-audit and non-accounting services outside of the
United States.17
Today, the multidisciplinary structure of the “Big Four” is evident: PwC comprises more
than 2,500 lawyers in 85 countries; KPMG Legal counts more than 1,200 lawyers in more than
50 jurisdictions; Deloitte’s legal network employs more than 1,700 lawyers in 73 countries; and
EY comprises more than 1,800 lawyers in 75 countries.
Professional magazines such as the IAB (International Accounting Bulletin) usually take
into account in their rankings the total revenue of accounting networks like the “Big Four,” and
this also includes the revenue generated by their law firm departments. Multidisciplinary
associations of independent firms like GGI Geneva Group International, MSI Global Alliance,
and Alliott Group are obliged to exclude the revenue generated by law firms affiliated to their
organisation for the global rankings.18
Generally, multidisciplinary networks or associations are considered networks or
associations of accounting firms for regulatory purposes.
Conclusions
The legal profession and the accounting profession cannot be compared without stressing
the clear and evident differences. Both professions are consultants or advisors in the broader
sense to their clients. Disciplines cannot strictly be separated, and blurred lines between tax
advice, legal advice, transactional services, consulting, or trust services are part of the daily
reality of dozens of the leading networks or associations of law firms and accounting firms.
13 Michael Siebold, Are Global Law Firms Networks in Disguise? THE LAWYER (Jan. 25, 2016), http://www.thelawyer.com/are-global-law-firms-
networks-in-disguise.
14 John Wayne Enterprises, LLC v. Duke University, et al, No 14 Civ. 1020 (CD Cal).
15 RevoLaze LLP v. Dentons U.S. LLP, Ohio Ct. Common Pleas, Cuyahoga Cnty., No. CV 16 861410 (2016).
16 Stephen McGarry, Multidisciplinary Practices and Partnerships, AMERICAN LAWYER MEDIA (2002); see also C. HANCOCK, MASTERS OF THE
UNIVERSE. A NEW WORLD ORDER IN ACCOUNTING AND CONSULTING (Lafferty Publications Ltd., 1998); see also Benito Arruñada, Non-Audit
Services: Let an Informed Market Decide, 4 ACCT. 63 (1998).
17 William Villanueva v. United States Department of Labor, No 12–60122 (2014).
18 World Survey: Strong Performance in Tough Conditions, 557 INT’L ACCT. BULL. (Feb 2016).
123
cases of conflicts of interest of Norton Rose Fulbright14 and Dentons,15 both organised as Swiss
Vereins, underline the problem of alleged appearance of impropriety.
Multidisciplinary networks and associations are basically those organisations, or TOPS,
that consist of both law firms and accounting firms, together as member firms of the coordinating
entity. Multidisciplinarity exists in some countries on a national level. It is common practice, for
example, to find in Germany or in Italy professional service firms consisting of both statutory
auditors and lawyers admitted to the bar.
Commonly, the most prominent level 4 networks, the “Big Four,” are identified as
accounting firms or accounting firm networks; however, they comprise considerable numbers of
lawyers and are therefore also ranked as leading law firms in several countries, for example in
Spain.
When accounting firm networks expanded their reach by also adding legal services, there
was initially much controversy.16 The dissolution of Arthur Andersen after the Enron scandal
seemed to temporarily put an end to the multidisciplinary ambitions of the large accounting
TOPS, but the fact is that, today, the “Big Four” comprise large single-branded law firm
networks in each of their organisations outside of the United States, since the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act does not prevent them from providing non-audit and non-accounting services outside of the
United States.17
Today, the multidisciplinary structure of the “Big Four” is evident: PwC comprises more
than 2,500 lawyers in 85 countries; KPMG Legal counts more than 1,200 lawyers in more than
50 jurisdictions; Deloitte’s legal network employs more than 1,700 lawyers in 73 countries; and
EY comprises more than 1,800 lawyers in 75 countries.
Professional magazines such as the IAB (International Accounting Bulletin) usually take
into account in their rankings the total revenue of accounting networks like the “Big Four,” and
this also includes the revenue generated by their law firm departments. Multidisciplinary
associations of independent firms like GGI Geneva Group International, MSI Global Alliance,
and Alliott Group are obliged to exclude the revenue generated by law firms affiliated to their
organisation for the global rankings.18
Generally, multidisciplinary networks or associations are considered networks or
associations of accounting firms for regulatory purposes.
Conclusions
The legal profession and the accounting profession cannot be compared without stressing
the clear and evident differences. Both professions are consultants or advisors in the broader
sense to their clients. Disciplines cannot strictly be separated, and blurred lines between tax
advice, legal advice, transactional services, consulting, or trust services are part of the daily
reality of dozens of the leading networks or associations of law firms and accounting firms.
13 Michael Siebold, Are Global Law Firms Networks in Disguise? THE LAWYER (Jan. 25, 2016), http://www.thelawyer.com/are-global-law-firms-
networks-in-disguise.
14 John Wayne Enterprises, LLC v. Duke University, et al, No 14 Civ. 1020 (CD Cal).
15 RevoLaze LLP v. Dentons U.S. LLP, Ohio Ct. Common Pleas, Cuyahoga Cnty., No. CV 16 861410 (2016).
16 Stephen McGarry, Multidisciplinary Practices and Partnerships, AMERICAN LAWYER MEDIA (2002); see also C. HANCOCK, MASTERS OF THE
UNIVERSE. A NEW WORLD ORDER IN ACCOUNTING AND CONSULTING (Lafferty Publications Ltd., 1998); see also Benito Arruñada, Non-Audit
Services: Let an Informed Market Decide, 4 ACCT. 63 (1998).
17 William Villanueva v. United States Department of Labor, No 12–60122 (2014).
18 World Survey: Strong Performance in Tough Conditions, 557 INT’L ACCT. BULL. (Feb 2016).
123
