<p>What do you guys think of this combination right here?</p>
<p>It’s good if you’re going into tax consulting/international tax. Law firms don’t really care as much about the CPA designation, but if you want to be a tax lawyer for the Big Four, it might help. Either way, you really can’t go wrong with a CPA and JD. There are many tax attorneys and even non-tax lawyers who started out as CPAs.</p>
<p>Big Four lawyers make less than their law firm counterparts, and making the move from the Big Four to a law firm is harder than the other way around.</p>
<p>So are you saying that the cpa might hurt me working at an actual law firm, post JD? My goal isnt really to work as a big 4 lawyer.</p>
<p>It won’t hurt you, but law firms won’t give you as much credit as the Big Four will.</p>
<p>Also, are you planning on getting your MAcc? It might not be worth it to get your MAcc (an extra year) to take the CPA exam just to go to law school right after and become a lawyer. You might as well have gone straight to law school without worrying about the CPA designation. Many CPAs who became tax attorneys are those who practiced accounting and THEN decided to move into tax law. Most don’t decide to use the CPA just as an intermediate step to just look good.</p>
<p>The bottom line: Getting a CPA designation will NOT hurt, even for law firms. If anything, a tax attorney who knows the financial side of things and can do tax compliance is obviously good. But think about what you really want it for and weigh the costs and benefits (including the opportunity cost of time).</p>
<p>What do I think?</p>
<p>Sounds like a lot of work!</p>
<p>Getting your CPA certification (is that redundant lol) isn’t easy, and of course the JD…</p>
<p>My H has a friend who is a CPA and JD and he does a lot of estate work.</p>
<p>Well i dun have to wrry bout the MAcc because I’m going to take care of my 150 during 4 years of undergrad. The reasons why I want my CPA along with my JD are:
1)Since the majority of first year law students have work experience anyways, why not get a CPA to complement my JD if I were to get into tax/corporate law
2)Maybe when Im older and decide to devote time to my family, I could work 40hrs instead of 80hrs as a CPA and still make a decent salary
3)A little prestige;)</p>
<p>red hare why are u opposed to MAcc? 120 credits = 4 years need 20 more credits so why not get the MS? it will take a little longer but an applicant with a MS is more attractive to firms than someone with a BS degree am i wrong?</p>
<p>CPA absolutely won’t hurt you especially if you’re planning to go into estate or tax law. Get the JD and CPA, work in a law firm for about 4 years, make a zillion dollars, then go inhouse for big four or whatever.</p>
<p>Well, first of all, it’s 30 more credits, not 20. </p>
<p>I actually think the MAcc is a great degree in general because you can get in-depth knowledge of accounting, finance, and sometimes even law in just one year. It can be a good value. However, I was just trying to tell the OP that if he knows he wants to go to law school without considering a career in public accounting, it’s better to skip the MAcc so that he can go directly to law school. Yes, a MAcc will be more attractive for employers, but again, the OP probably wants to go to a top law school, and work experience, although very common, is not necessary. The MAcc is great for most people, but someone like the OP, who needs to go to law school, should think hard about how much the MAcc will help in the long run as opposed to completing 150 credits during undergrad. There are costs of time, and the MAcc usually isn’t cheap. Then you have to do law school.</p>
<p>oh ok it seemed to me like u thoguht MS was useless and since im doing BS/MS in accounting i asked u why</p>
<p>blah clicked enter too quickly, btw u say that it costs quite a bit and so is law school but if lets just say hypothetically u dont get into any of the law school u apply too, ure screwed but if u have CPA u have a back up plan</p>
<p>That is true, but what if one fails the CPA exam (happens all the time) or doesn’t get into a MAcc program? We can go on and on about stuff like that, and obviously there is no clear answer. It all depends on what the OP decides to do. Of course, you can make any kind of education serve you well, so a MAcc can be a valuable investment. No argument there. It depends on what you want to do of course.</p>
<p>Macc is best for those without an accounting background that want to go into accounting or obviously as a last ditch effort to show motivation for big 4. Remember you need at least a year of work experience as an accountant to qualify for your CPA.</p>
<p>It’s deja-vu. I just had this conversation with my son.</p>
<p>If you are seriously considering practicing law, practicing in the tax field or even considering forensic work ( criminal), a law degree would be very useful. However, for most other occupations, there are better and cheaper alternatives.</p>
<p>CPA/tax or any kind of specialization is highly recommend for anyone entering into legal profession. Unless you graduated from top 14 law schools with top 15% class standing, or have strong connection in the legal industry, you are not likely to get the type of salary range you thought that lawyers are suppose to get… in many cases, you may not even be able to find a job.</p>
<p>The truth is, there are about 1,000,000 lawyers in the United States as of 2007, the more specialities you have the more likely you may find the job you want…</p>
<p>Unless you really, really just want to do estate law or be a country esquire, or you’re independently wealthy and can afford a dilatory ramble through your early career years, you need to go to a top 20ish law school if you desire to eat after graduation. CPA is, at least, a good backup plan. Plus, a lot of the low-level law work is horrible, horrible doc review crap.</p>
<p>The thing about CPA JD is that you can’t combine both practices into one very easily – CPA has an obligation to protect the public interest, whereas JD has an obligation to pretect the client’s confidentiality. You run into conflicts between those two competing objectives, so you can’t easily set yourself up to be a one stop accounting/legal supermarket without a complex corporate structure (and even then it gets dicey from what I understand).</p>
<p>If you’re gung ho about tax law though, I figure it must be a good combo.</p>