The Myth of Living Together

Welcome back.

Here’s hoping you and your families had an enjoyable holiday.

As it turns out, my birthday falls on the week of Thanksgiving and this year, I received a Fitbit as a gift. You know that gadget that monitors, and chronicles your exercise activity? Considering the tractor trailer of food consumed at Chez Carlino over the long weekend, I’m wondering if someone was trying to tell me something.

I’ll let you know the next time I try on my suit pants.

But I digress.

Today’s missive focuses on tearing down a myth, that to my dismay I’m encountering more often. The best way I can explain it, is it’s the CPA version of a couple living together prior to marriage. 

Now as a father whose eldest daughter is planning on doing the same thing post New Years, I’m sort of ambivalent about it. I’m neither condoning nor prohibiting it. But at last report, I’ve never seen any statistic where cohabitating prior to marriage did anything to lower the divorce rate.

But back to the topic de jour.

As you can imagine ours can be an incredibly frustrating business. CPAs by nature are glacial in their decision-making process and that inbred reticence increases exponentially when it comes to the prospect of entering into a merger.

So as a result, I’m often approached by firms we’re working with as to the possibility of a work-sharing arrangement for a stipulated period of time (usually six months to a year) before signing on the dotted line.

“We just want to see if we’re compatible,” is usually the argument to promote the concept.

To which I simply tell them “no.”

While I could take more space and time than I’m sure anyone can afford to run through a checklist of why not, I’ll give you two reasons right here and now.

1. Like living together without the marriage license, there’s always the thought in the back of your head that it may not work out. Therefore, you’re not fully committed. One foot will linger dangerously close to the back door in search of an emergency exit.
2. Our client engagement letter specifically states that our success fee is triggered by any “affiliation.” So I usually explain to both parties that it would be far more cost-efficient to pay us for a successful merger than for two firms sharing 1040 or audit work on a part-time basis.

Not surprisingly, the second reason usually serves as a deterrent.

After 15 years either covering or working as a consultant in the accounting profession, I’ve learned that when attempting to convince a stubborn CPA, cost as opposed to logic or reason, is always easier to judge.