Connect with us

Accounting

Art of Accounting: Top 100 10-year comparison

Published

on

Complimentary Access Pill

Enjoy complimentary access to top ideas and insights — selected by our editors.

Public accounting is a growing profession. The growth from 2015 to 2025 in revenues was 125% and in total personnel 113%. These are real numbers and vitiate what the naysayers claim about the doom and gloom of the profession.

Last week I provided an analysis of the Top 100 numbers that appeared in the March 2025 issue. What I did was actually simple and was typical of what I do for clients and teach my students. Rather than accepting the aggregate numbers, I look beneath them. In this situation I did a few things. I broke the total amounts into three groups based on revenues and used that to analyze the relative performance of the three groups, and I think I came up with some reasonable conclusions. You can look at last week’s issue to see what they were.

This week I looked at the changes over the last 10 years and will discuss some of my observations here. The revenue growth was impressive, but it came primarily from the group of 12 and then the other 84, with the lowest percentage increase from the Big Four. Also the growth of employees was the lowest for the Big Four and greatest for the group of 12. To see what this means, I looked at the revenue per employee. The Big Four’s revenue per employee was virtually flat, indicating no growth, which I translate as stagnant efficiency or effectiveness. That would seem to retard profit growth. Running a business with a growing top line and presumably a large growth in technology usage but flat revenues per employee does not make sense. 

Top 100 Firms – 2025 compared to 2015 selected data
Data from Accounting Today 2025 and 2015 Top 100 Firms issues
Data compiled by Edward Mendlowitz, CPA
Partner %
$ revenues Total to total
2025 millions Offices Partners employees employees
Big Four 91,046 389 17,172 352,620 4.87%
Next 12 23,918 718 8,309 95,374 8.71%
Remaining 84 16,165 1,043 7,578 70,914 10.69%
Total 131,130 2,150 33,059 518,908 6.37%
% of Big Four to total 69.43% 18.09% 51.94% 67.95%
% of Next 12 to total 18.24% 33.40% 25.13% 18.38%
% of Other 84 to total 12.33% 48.51% 22.92% 13.67%
2015
Big Four 43,402 360 10,234 167,557 6.11%
Next 12 8,315 491 3,786 40,201 9.42%
Remaining 84 6,519 626 3,749 35,331 10.61%
Total 58,236 1,477 17,769 243,089 7.31%
% of Big Four to total 74.53% 24.37% 57.59% 68.93%
% of Next 12 to total 14.28% 33.24% 21.31% 16.54%
% of Other 84 to total 11.19% 42.38% 21.10% 14.53%
10-year change
Big Four 47,644 29 6,938 185,063 -1.24%
Next 12 15,603 227 4,523 55,173 -0.71%
Remaining 84 9,646 417 3,829 35,583 0.08%
Total 72,893 673 15,290 275,819 -0.94%
% of Big Four to total 109.77% 8.06% 67.79% 110.45%
% of Next 12 to total 187.65% 46.23% 119.47% 137.24%
% of Other 84 to total 147.96% 66.61% 102.13% 100.71%
% of Total change 125.17% 45.57% 86.05% 113.46%
2025 Percentages of services
A&A Tax MAS/Other
Big Four 28.50% 24.00% 47.75%
Next 12 33.50% 35.67% 30.75%
Remaining 84 30.25% 37.17% 32.58%
2015
Big Four 35.00% 25.75% 39.25%
Next 12 42.67% 31.92% 25.42%
Remaining 84 38.23% 35.13% 26.64%
10-year change
Big Four -6.50% -1.75% 8.50%
Next 12 -9.17% 3.75% 5.33%
Remaining 84 -7.98% 2.04% 5.95%
Revenue Revenue
per per
2025 partner employee
Big Four 5,302,003 258,199
Next 12 2,878,609 250,785
Remaining 84 2,133,179 227,955
Total 3,966,532 252,703
2015
Big Four 4,240,962 259,028
Next 12 2,196,241 206,835
Remaining 84 1,738,968 184,523
Total 3,277,413 239,568
10-year change
Big Four 1,061,042 -830
Next 12 682,367 43,950
Remaining 84 394,211 43,432

However, there was significant growth in revenues per employee in the other groups. I did not use percentages, but dollars of growth. Both of the other groups had similar growth of about $43,000 annual revenue per employee. Looking at the overall total of $13,000 per employee does not provide any insights other than macro growth for the Top 100. If I were managing a Big Four firm, I would seriously look at this. I did not look at each of the Big Four separately. I could have but do not want to make a career out of this as my aim is to provide insights and comparative data to readers. 

Another thing I want to point out is a reiteration of what I wrote last week about the MAS grouping of the Group of 12 being closer to the remaining 84 than the Big Four. Looking at this from 2015 indicates that the MAS group grew similarly to the two smaller groups, while the Big Four grew significantly. Also the A&A for all three declined as a percentage of revenues, while the taxes grew for the group of 12.

I also want to point out that using aggregate data doesn’t usually provide the information clients need. And my “teaching” self wants to inject a lesson here that what I did here can be done for every one of your clients. I do it, and so can you.

A final observation. Last week I provided the average revenues and staffing of the bottom five firms. That was 64.5 million revenues and 312 total employees. Ten years ago, these were $33.2 million and 201 total employees. Revenues almost doubled and headcount grew 50%. This indicates growth with much more efficiency and effectiveness or better pricing. The revenue growth was below each of the three groups, but the lower headcount growth is very impressive. Better numbers could be obtained by segmenting into more groups. Do that if you want. This is a column for accountants with the purpose of providing a method of looking at data more effectively. When I advise my clients, I work out the right data to advise them with. One suggestion for those running an accounting practice in the Top 100 is to look at the five firms above and below you and see how you are doing. Then look further above and consider setting that as a goal.

There is a lot more to do. There always is a lot more to do. Use this and last week’s charts and the Top 100 list and figure out what works for you. Use my process to look beyond the primary chart and come up with helpful observations. And this process should be applied to your business clients.

Do not hesitate to contact me at [email protected] with your practice management questions or about engagements you might not be able to perform. 

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Accounting

Eide Bailly merges in Traner Smith

Published

on

Eide Bailly, a Top 25 Firm based in Fargo, North Dakota, is growing its presence in the Pacific Northwest by adding Traner Smith, based in Edmonds, Washington, effective June 2, 2025. 

Traner Smith’s team includes two partners and 16 staff members and specializes in tax compliance and advisory services. Financial terms of the deal were not disclosed. Eide Bailly ranked No. 19 on Accounting Today‘s 2025 list of the Top 100 Firms, with $704.98 million in annual revenue, approximately 387 partners and over 3,500 employees. 

Eide Bailly already has offices in Seattle, but hopes to grow further in the Pacific Northwest. “We’re pleased to welcome the talented team at Traner Smith to Eide Bailly,” said Eide Bailly managing partner and CEO Jeremy Hauk in a statement Monday. “Their expertise with high-net-worth individuals, real estate and privately held businesses aligns well with our strengths, and their client-centric approach is a perfect cultural fit. Having an office in Edmonds, Washington, is a great complement to our existing presence in Seattle. Together, we’re poised to deliver even greater value to families and businesses in the Seattle metro area.” 

“Joining Eide Bailly is a natural next step for us — it provides access to deeper technical resources in areas like state and local tax, national tax, succession planning and international tax while allowing us to continue the personalized service our clients value,” said Kevin Smith, a partner at Traner Smith, in a statement. 

“With this expanded support and platform, we’re excited to grow our reach, elevate what we do best, and help more clients than ever before,” said Shane Summer, another partner at Traner Smith, in a statement.

Eide Bailly has announced several other mergers in recent weeks. Earlier this month, it added Hamilton Tharp, a firm based in Solana Beach, California, and Roycon, a Salesforce consulting firm in Austin, Texas. In late April, it merged in Volpe Brown & Co., in North Canton, Ohio. Eide Bailly expanded to Ohio last year by merging in Apple Growth Partners. Last year, Eide Bailly also sold its wealth management practice to Sequoia Financial Group. The deal with Sequoia appears to be fueling the recent M&A activity. As part of the deal, Eide Bailly Advisors became part of Sequoia Financial, while Eide Bailly received an equity investment in Sequoia.

In 2023, Eide Bailly added Secore & Niedzialek PC in Phoenix, Raimondo Pettit Group in Southern California, Bessolo Haworth in California and Washington State, Spectrum Health Partners in Franklin, Tennessee, and King & Oliason in Seattle. In 2022, it merged in Seim Johnson in Omaha, Nebraska, and in 2021, PWB CPAs & Advisors in Minnesota. In 2020, it added Mukai, Greenlee & Co. in Phoenix, HMWC CPAs in Tustin, California, and Platinum Consulting in Fullerton.

Continue Reading

Accounting

BMSS announces investment, collaboration with Knuula

Published

on

Top 100 firm BMSS announced an investment in Knuula, an engagement letter and client documents software provider. The investment from BMSS came after successfully implementing Knuula over the past year to streamline its engagement letter process. It was after doing so that the firm’s leadership came to believe that Knuula could create complex client documents at an enormous scale, which was a huge need for the broader accounting industry. BMSS thought this presented a great opportunity to guide Knuula and help facilitate its growth. 

“We began working with Knuula in Spring 2024 to streamline our engagement letter process,” said Don Murphy, Managing Member of BMSS. “It quickly became clear that Knuula was not only a strong solution for us, but also an ideal partner in advancing industry-wide automation.”

While the specific terms of the deal were not disclosed, a spokesperson with Knuula said that, after this investment, BMSS and a collection of 21 of their partners now own 13% of the company. The investment represents not some passive revenue deal but an active collaboration between the two companies, with the spokesperson saying they will be working closely together on things like product development, new features, improvements, and networking.

The deal comes about a year after Knuula integrated with QuickFee, a receivables management platform for professional service providers, which allowed users to have engagement letters directly connecting to their QuickFee billing platform, tying the execution of the letter directly to the billing process. 

“We’ve long sought to partner with a firm focused on strategic innovation in the accounting space,” said Jamie Peebles, founder of Knuula. “To develop a perfect solution for large firms, it is ideal to have a partner that is willing to work closely together and iterate quickly. This requires constant feedback between our two teams. The IT team from BMSS worked with our development team constantly and helped us iterate rapidly. We also had consistent input from partners, manager, and administrative staff to help us make valuable changes to Knuula. BMSS was a perfect partner for us.”

Continue Reading

Accounting

AICPA urges firms to contact Congress over tax changes

Published

on

The American Institute of CPAs is asking accountants to reach out to their congressional representatives and protest the proposed elimination of the ability of pass-through entities such as accounting firms to deduct state and local taxes.

The AICPA sent out a call to action on Friday urging CPAs to contact their members of Congress and voice their opposition to the “unfair targeting” of pass-through businesses in the tax reconciliation bill moving through Congress, such as those of accountants, dentists, doctors, lawyers and pharmacists, through the elimination of the Pass-through Entity Tax SALT deduction. 

“This would increase taxes on the partners/owners of many service-based businesses, such as accounting firms, discourage the creation and growth of such businesses, and further expand the disparity between C corporations and pass-through entities,” the AICPA warned.

On Sunday night, the bill advanced through a key House committee after several Republicans who had blocked the bill in the House Budget Committee on Friday agreed to let it proceed after winning promises of faster cuts in Medicaid health coverage. But the AICPA warned last week about several provisions in the bill, including the change in the SALT deduction rules, while praising others. 

The AICPA is concerned about language in the legislation, named after President Trump’s description, “One Big, Beautiful Bill,” that would eliminate the ability of certain pass-through entities, including accounting firms, to take advantage of the state and local tax deduction for pass-throughs. 

“This legislation would not only have an impact on the accounting profession, but also on many of their clients,” the AICPA pointed out. “Under this legislation, accounting firms will be worse off than they were after the application of the SALT cap under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) and before the IRS-approved deductions were authorized. Specifically, the proposal newly subjects local entity level taxes to the individual SALT cap.”

The SALT cap for individual taxpayers has also been a bone of contention for Republican lawmakers in blue states like New York, New Jersey and California, who have been pushing for an expansion of the $10,000 limit in the TCJA. Under the current bill, the SALT cap would increase to $30,000, but some lawmakers would like to see it increase to $80,000 or higher. However, the cap would now be imposed on pass-through businesses under the bill.

“The proposed tax legislation unfairly subjects specified service trades or businesses (SSTBs), such as accountants, doctors, lawyers, dentists, veterinarians, etc., to the individual cap on state and local income tax deductions at the federal level, regardless of partners’/owners’ income level or the state in which they live,” said the AICPA.

“When comparing the tax treatment of state and local taxes for pass-through entities between the TCJA and this proposed bill, the sole change is the targeting of pass-through service providers, who were already substantially limited under the qualified business income (QBI) deduction for SSTBs,” the AICPA pointed out.

The TCJA excluded many firms from claiming the full 20% QBI deduction, which would increase to 23% under the bill.

The AICPA is encouraging accountants to call or email their senators and representatives by Wednesday, May 21, using this link to find and contact their members of Congress. It provided a sample email blurb to send to them:

“I urge you to oppose provisions included in the House Ways and Means Committee’s tax reform legislation that unfairly target the ability of service businesses structured as pass-through entities to deduct their state and local taxes (SALT) from their federal tax liability while providing no such limit to other businesses. This legislation effectively discriminates against particular pass-through businesses by indirectly raising taxes on those entities that are considered the backbone of the American economy. These provisions greatly widen the disparity in treatment between pass-through entities and other kinds of businesses, and I strongly urge you to oppose these provisions of the bill.”

Continue Reading

Trending