Key takeaways:

• • • Ways of achieving growth has changed 鈥� Sustainable growth now depends less on raw revenue and more on improving income per partner through smarter leverage, intentional service mix, and disciplined pricing.

    • Proactive firms will be better positioned 鈥� Firms that adopt data-driven pricing, bundled offerings, and subscription models will be better positioned to communicate value, raise fees confidently, and protect margins.

    • Differentiators are shifting 鈥� Leadership depth, culture, and succession planning are emerging as decisive differentiators as demographics shift, private equity reshapes the tax market, and next-generation partners step into control.

Tax, audit & accounting firms are still growing, but not all that growth is reaching the bottom line 鈥� indeed, 2026 is shaping up as a separate or be separated moment for many tax firm leaders. To sustain income per partner while the market shifts, firm leaders need to be far more intentional about how they grow, price, staff, and position their tax practices.

Here are five important ways that tax firm leaders can ensure their bottom-line growth keep pace with their top-line revenue:

1. Be deliberate about how you grow

Revenue is rising, but margins are under pressure. For example, for firms with revenue of more than $2 million, revenue grew 7.9%, yet income per equity partner (IPP) increased only 3.2%. This may imply that although firms are bringing in more money, the remaining profits available to distribute to equity partners isn鈥檛 growing at the same rate. This could mean that it鈥檚 costing firms more to generate more revenue possibly because expenses are eating into margins.

Meanwhile, 13.9% of total growth for firms whose revenue is more than $2 million now comes from mergers, and for firms with revenue of more than $20 million, more than one-fifth of growth is merger-driven.

For growth strategy, leaders should clarify their organic growth plans in light of this robust M&A drive, deciding when acquisitions are truly about capacity, specialization, or geography and when they are merely propping up lagging organic growth.

Leaders need to protect IPP metrics by focusing relentlessly on revenue per partner and revenue per person as primary levers, rather than chasing top-line growth for its own sake. Leaders also need to build optionality 鈥� with private equity, mega-firm consolidators, and independents all active, factors such as succession, capital, and ownership design have become core strategic decisions that can no longer be left to chance.

2. Treat pricing as a growth discipline

In the 成人VR视频 Institute’s pricing report for tax, audit & accounting firms, 64% of decision-makers said their firms saw revenue increases, but only 45% reported increased profits 鈥� a clear indication of margin compression. Further, just about 1-in-5 professionals said they feel 鈥渉ighly confident鈥� that their firm鈥檚 current pricing reflects the expertise of its professionals.

To be sure, key pricing work now involves moving beyond what the market will bear. While hourly billing still dominates (according to the report firms said over 40% of client engagements are billed on an hourly basis) 鈥� value-aligned methods such as fixed fees, subscriptions, and bundled packages are strongly associated with higher pricing confidence and a firm’s greater ability to raise fees.

To excel in this area, tax firm leaders need to use data rather than their gut. Although only 30% of respondents said their firm regularly benchmark their pricing against competitors, leaders overwhelmingly say better market intelligence would increase pricing confidence. Also, firms should expand subscription and bundle pricing options, since respondents form subscription-billing firms report significantly higher confidence that their pricing reflects value. Indeed, many firms using bundled packages have raised prices 10% to 24% or more over the past two years.

3. Build a capacity model that scales

The Rosenberg data is blunt: The fastest path to higher income per partner is not logging more partner hours 鈥� it is using smart leverage and stronger rates. Elite tax firms (those with IPP above $800,000) generate roughly $3.9 million in revenue per equity partner and maintain staff-to-partner ratios of around 17:1.

Several capacity dynamics matter in practice. Leverage drives profitability, for example, and those firms that have staff-to-partner ratios above 10 report IPP roughly double that of firms with ratios below 3, even though they may carry higher salary percentages.

Further, outsourcing has become mainstream. More than 4-in-10 firms (42%) with more than $2 million in revenue now outsource full-time equivalent (FTEs) employees, a figure that rises to 63% among firms with more than $ 20 million dollars. Interestingly, turnover has eased to about 11%, the lowest for the industry in years, but expectations have shifted as firms intentionally reduce average billable hours per staff member to prioritize sustainable workloads.

In fact, the key growth question is no longer Can we find the work? but rather Can we design a capacity model 鈥� onshore, offshore, AI-enabled 鈥� that supports higher rates without burning out our people?

4. Formalize strategy, marketing & service mix

Firms with written strategic plans earn about 4.5% more IPP than those without, according to the data, and firms with a formal marketing plan enjoy about 9% higher IPP. The most profitable firms are also more intentional about service mix, tilting toward advisory and financial services.

Growth-enabling practices start with written strategic and marketing plans. Firms that document these plans consistently outperform their peers, particularly when navigating private equity interest, AI adoption, and succession decisions. Many leading tax firms are deliberately shifting from compliance to advisory, reducing their reliance on commodity tax compliance and expanding into higher-value advisory work to drive stronger profitability. These firms are also packaging and communicating value more effectively by bundling compliance and advisory services into tiered packages, which in turn gives them greater ability to raise fees and justify premium positioning in the market.

5. Invest in leadership, culture & succession

Growth without leadership depth is fragile, especially in the tax profession in which the average partner age has remained high. Most recently, however, the average partner age has dipped slightly to about 52 years old as more retirements occur. And female partners now account for roughly one-quarter of partner groups overall, showing progress but also a persistent equity gap.

For many firms, succession remains a primary concern, and leadership-related growth priorities begin with treating succession as strategy, not an HR project. More firms are revisiting buy-in levels, which average around $133,000, and are experimenting with non-equity roles and alternative practice structures to create more flexible pathways to ownership. At the same time, leaders must protect and modernize their firm culture, recognizing that poorly managed PE transactions, rigid return-to-office policies, and underinvestment in technology-forward talent can quickly erode the very engines of growth they depend on.

Additionally, firms are elevating the managing partner role. In larger practices, managing partners鈥� chargeable hours are now meaningfully lower, reflecting an intentional shift toward having that role work on the business 鈥� strategy, talent, pricing, and M&A 鈥� rather than in it.

For tax firm leaders, these five considerations form a practical checklist for 2026 planning. Grounding each strategic initiative in data and taking visible action can help ensure that the next wave of growth shows up not just in revenue, but in sustainable, rising income per partner.

You can download a copy of the 成人VR视频 Institute’s pricing report for tax, audit & accounting firms, here

Key takeaways:

• • • Alignment of goals 鈥� Aligning departmental goals with the organization’s overall strategy is crucial for enhancing efficiency, fostering innovation, and driving long-term success.

    • Role of AI 鈥� AI can play a pivotal role in achieving this alignment by helping corporate functions define value and align their goals with the organization’s strategy.

    • Top-down approach needed 鈥� Successful alignment often requires a top-down approach to AI implementation, ensuring that AI strategies are integrated across the broader enterprise.

In today’s fast-paced and ever-evolving corporate landscape, the alignment of departmental goals with the overarching strategy of the organization is more crucial than ever. This alignment ensures that every in-house function is working towards a common objective, thereby enhancing the overall efficiency, innovation, and success of the organization as a whole.

Additionally, aligning departmental goals with the organization’s strategy also can eliminate the perception that certain corporate functions are merely cost centers, according to 成人VR视频 recently published 2025 Future of Professionals report. Indeed, many corporate functions 鈥� especially in areas like legal, risk, tax, and trade 鈥� are often seen as misaligned with the organization’s overall goals, which can lead to inefficiencies and a lack of strategic contribution from these departments.

Today, corporate leaders are under immense pressure to demonstrate how various functions contribute strategically to the value of the business rather than just managing costs. This urgency is also driven by the understanding that companies are navigating unprecedented regulatory and geopolitical complexity in the current environment, which really underscores the need for new ways to address this situation.

In today’s fast-paced and ever-evolving corporate landscape, the alignment of departmental goals with the overarching strategy of the organization is more crucial than ever.

Increasingly, in-house function leaders are looking to AI tools and solutions to find a way to bridge this critical intersection of commerce and compliance.

Yet the Future of Professionals report showed there is a strategic gap in AI usage. While nearly half (48%) of corporate professionals responding to the survey say they expect transformational AI-driven changes within their corporate functions this year, just 19% say that these functions have a departmental AI strategy in place.

In most successful transformations, however, organizations adopt an end-to-end approach that starts at the top and has the AI strategies cascade down directly from overarching enterprise goals to departmental implementation. This ensures that AI is not implemented in isolation but is integrated into the broader organizational strategy, thereby maximizing its potential to drive alignment and strategic contribution.

Empowering corporate functions with AI-driven tech

However, for departments to align their goals with the organization’s strategy, they need to be empowered with advanced technology 鈥� and it鈥檚 up to the C-Suite to drive this empowerment. Corporate management needs to ensure that their in-house functions are equipped with the tools they need to contribute strategically to the organization’s success by enabling new business, driving operational efficiency, and maintaining strict compliance. By leveraging this advanced technology, departments then can move beyond managing costs and demonstrate their strategic value to the overall enterprise.

Not surprisingly, as the report addressed, there are barriers to these efforts, with the two major hurdles being organizational silos and leadership commitments. Silos themselves are a significant challenge to many corporate initiatives that require collaboration and a change of mindset. As our research has shown, when corporate functions implement AI in isolation or without a unified enterprise strategy, they’re going to miss out on the full potential of AI to break down those internal barriers.

As for the commitment from corporate leaders, all of them should first assess where their organizations and key departments sit on their AI adoption journey. The goal should be to craft a custom-tailored AI strategy that will allow each function to secure additional ROI while acting in concert with the organization鈥檚 overall strategy.

All of this serves the greater purpose, because those organizations that can demonstrate a clarity of vision around AI will be the ones reporting better outcomes more quickly. It will be these organizational leaders who foster a culture in which former cost centers are now seen as a growth engine that can drive their professionals and the overall organization forward. For that to happen, however, these leaders must think beyond the technology and focus on how their departments鈥� mindset 鈥� and that of the overall organization 鈥� needs to change.

Achieving mindset shift and cultural change

Not surprisingly, achieving alignment between departmental goals and organizational strategy requires a significant mindset shift and cultural change. Today, there is a growing understanding that in-house functions should not be viewed as cost centers but as strategic business partners 鈥� and this shift in mindset is crucial for fostering a culture in which AI is seen as a growth engine and a tool for achieving strategic goals.

Not surprisingly, achieving alignment between departmental goals and organizational strategy requires a significant mindset shift and cultural change.

In this way, in-house departments can become the type of business partners that can really add value and that can use AI in a manner that will truly empower their ability to achieve these goals. And this mindset shift needs to happen not only among the leaders of the enabling functions, but within the C-Suite itself. If all parts of the organization are focused on how each can create value and how they can leverage AI as a tool to do that, it becomes a powerful accelerator.

AI itself also has a pivotal role to play in aligning departmental goals with organizational strategy by helping corporate functions define value, especially in today’s complex regulatory and geopolitical environment in which departments may have their hands full simply navigating these unprecedented challenges daily.

To demonstrate this, however, departments need to measure their progress as they move away from a focus on cost reduction and towards strategic value creation. Using specific success metrics 鈥� including those that measure a department鈥檚 ability to enhance foresight and prediction and improved decision-making 鈥� departments can demonstrate how each in-house function contributes to the enterprise’s strategic goals.

In fact, many organizations and their in-house functions seem well on their way down this path toward tighter alignment. While there are some corporate executives that are uncertain about AI and the level of change it will bring about, it鈥檚 clear that this is not the time nor the environment to bury your head in the sand.

Looking forward

To aligning departmental goals with the organization’s overall strategy is essential for driving efficiency, fostering innovation, and achieving long-term success. And to make this happen, C-Suite executives need to ensure that each of their corporate functions has its own AI strategy 鈥� one which complements the overall organization鈥檚 key goals. Further, departmental leaders need to develop AI strategies and then encourage collaboration with other function leaders to break down practical barriers and learn from each other.

By empowering functions with advanced technology, adopting a top-down approach to AI implementation, and leveraging success metrics, organizations can ensure that all departments are working towards a common objective and contributing strategically to the overall success of the enterprise.

You can download a copy of the 听here

Key insights:

• • • Seeking cultural clarity 鈥� The satisfaction of lawyers in a firm is not dependent on whether the firm is traditional or innovative, but rather on the clarity and consistency of the firm’s culture across the organization.

    • Achieving strategic alignment 鈥� A firm’s strategy is only effective if it is clearly understood and embraced by its lawyers. This alignment helps avoid the risk of the firm trying to be everything to everyone and ultimately being known for nothing.

    • Ensuring compensation alignment 鈥� Compensation models should align with the firm’s culture and strategy to reinforce desired behaviors. Misalignment can erode trust and engagement, especially in larger law firms.

In a legal market defined by rapid change and rising expectations, law firms are rethinking what it takes to attract and retain top talent. A new research report from the 成人VR视频 Institute, Law Firm Culture: Keys to Unlocking Firm Growth & Lawyer Engagement, offers a clear takeaway: Law firms that align their culture, strategy, and compensation are better positioned to engage lawyers, reduce attrition, and drive long-term performance.

Culture: Clarity over type

The research shows that lawyer satisfaction doesn鈥檛 hinge on whether a firm is traditional or innovative, high-intensity or work-life balanced. Instead, what matters most is cultural clarity 鈥� a shared understanding of what the firm stands for and how that shows up in day-to-day decisions.

The report identifies four common cultural footprints, shaped by two key dimensions: work environment and innovation approach:

• • • Traditional / Work-Life Balance 鈥� Conservative, short-term focused, and opportunistic
    • Innovative / Work-Life Balance 鈥� Collegial, collaborative, and mission-driven
    • Traditional / High-Intensity 鈥� Competitive, performance-driven, and profit-focused
    • Innovative / High-Intensity 鈥� Strategic, formal, and experimental

Satisfaction levels are consistent across all four. The differentiator? Whether lawyers experience the culture consistently across the firm.

Law firm leaders must take deliberate steps to understand their firm鈥檚 culture and how it might support 鈥� or hinder 鈥� long-term strategic goals. This effort involves evaluating whether internal values, behaviors, and norms align with the brand the firm aims to project externally. Structured tools, such as cultural mapping and alignment assessments, can help bring clarity to these elements, which often feel intangible but have a direct impact on client experience, talent retention, and market positioning.

Strategy: From vision to execution

A firm鈥檚 strategy is only as strong as its ability to execute it, and that execution depends on cultural alignment. When lawyers understand and embrace their firm鈥檚 strategic direction, they become its most effective advocates 鈥� both internally and in the market.

Without that alignment, firms risk falling into the trap of trying to be everything to everyone 鈥� and ultimately being known for nothing in particular.

Defining a clear strategic focus and reinforcing it consistently across the firm is essential to avoiding dilution and driving market differentiation.

Compensation: The reinforcer of culture and strategy

Compensation is more than a financial lever 鈥� it鈥檚 a signal of what the firm truly values. Yet, 4-in-10 stand-out lawyers say their firm鈥檚 compensation model is only moderately aligned or is in fact poorly aligned with the firm鈥檚 culture and strategy.

This misalignment can erode trust and engagement, especially in larger firms where complexity increases and consistency becomes harder to maintain. Firms that align all three 鈥� culture, strategy, and compensation 鈥� see a 66% increase in lawyer satisfaction and a significant drop in flight risk, according to our research.

From insight to action

To move from intention to impact, firm leaders should ask themselves several questions, including:

• • • 鈥淎re our lawyers aligned on what makes us different?鈥�
    • 鈥淚s our compensation model reinforcing the behaviors we want to see?鈥�
    • 鈥淚s our strategy clearly understood and consistently communicated?鈥�

These questions aren鈥檛 just reflective 鈥� they鈥檙e foundational to building a law firm in which talent thrives.

The bottom line: Alignment isn鈥檛 a nice-to-have 鈥� it鈥檚 a competitive advantage. Firms that bring culture, strategy, and compensation into sync don鈥檛 just retain talent, they unlock its full potential.

You can download the full report, Law Firm Culture: Keys to Unlocking Firm Growth & Lawyer Engagement, from the 成人VR视频 Institute here.

Key insights:

• • • Digital transformation among top priorities 鈥� C-Suite leaders have identified enabling digital transformation, improving operational efficiency, and exploring the potential of AI as their top priorities for 2025.

    • Challenges for corporate functions 鈥� Corporate functions face significant constraints, including time-consuming compliance tasks, lack of risk alignment, difficulty keeping up with legislative changes, and ineffective data flows.

    • Opportunities for improvement 鈥� To enhance the contribution of corporate functions, C-Suite leaders suggest they focus on simplified compliance and reporting, technology and automation, and risk management and mitigation.

Corporate C-Suite leaders have been pretty clear about their priorities for their businesses. Indeed, business leaders have made digital transformation, improving operational efficiency, and exploring the potential of AI their top priorities for 2025, according to the 2025 C-Suite Survey, published recently by the 成人VR视频 Institute.

Almost two-thirds of these same leaders (62%) identified the rise of AI and generative AI (Gen AI) as the most likely transformational trend for today鈥檚 businesses. However, even with a clear vision of the potential for AI to be transformative, and indeed, a strong desire to drive digital transformation within their businesses, C-Suite leaders are not fully convinced their corporate functions are up to the task and able to contribute strongly to the corporation鈥檚 overall objectives.

The role that corporate functions play today

Corporate functions, sometimes called enabling functions are the support operations that keep businesses running and encompass everything from customer success and supply chain management to tax, audit, and legal departments.

Some of these enabling functions have already begun to play a significant role in driving business objectives.

More than half of C-Suite leaders surveyed said that their customer success, technology, operations, marketing, and finance functions have significantly contributed to overall business objectives. In fact, as one respondent stated: 鈥淥ur support functions, especially in technology and operations, were instrumental in driving a digital shift that improved organizational workflows and overall customer satisfaction.鈥�

Obviously, leaders of every enabling function would love to hear such statements made about the teams or departments they oversee.

A sliding scale of contribution

However, there is a general perception that enabling functions are generally not as effective as they could be, nor able to contribute significantly to the overall objectives of their organization. For example, only 17% of C-Suite leaders said that their internal legal function had played a significant role in attaining overall business objectives; and 42% of C-Suite leaders said that their legal function had contributed to the organization鈥檚 overall objectives only a little (36%), or worse, not at all (6%).

This is concerning, not only for the overall organization and its top-level leaders, but for the leaders of these specific internal functions; and it raises questions about the alignment of priorities and communication within the business.

There is a general perception that enabling functions are generally not as effective as they could be, nor able to contribute significantly to the overall objectives of their organization.

Yet, a few different explanations may exist simultaneously. First, the lack of apparent contribution of any given enabling function to broader business goals may be simply a lack of effective communication. In reality, the function may be completing many of the objectives it needs to do to drive the organization forward, but the function鈥檚 leaders may not be doing a good job of informing top leadership of their efforts.

Alternatively, C-Suite leaders may not be quite as clear about stating their desired objectives as they think they are, leaving function leaders with less guidance than needed for the team or department to otherwise meet their objectives. Another possibility is that there is, in fact, genuine misalignment between functions鈥� priorities and those of the C-Suite.

This is likely far from an exhaustive list of potential reasons why enabling functions may not be doing an effective job of contributing to the organization鈥檚 objectives, and many of these reasons likely exist simultaneously. There is, however, some insight into what might be constraining the effectiveness of these enabling functions.

What is getting in the way?

C-Suite leaders identified four key areas that have either a moderate or significant constraining effect on their enabling functions, including:

• • • Time-consuming compliance and reporting tasks that leave little time for value-add work (with 68% of C-Suite leaders surveyed saying this)
    • Lack of alignment around the organization鈥檚 risk appetite (58%)
    • Difficulty keeping abreast of legislative and regulatory change and emerging risks (54%)
    • Ineffective data and information flows between enabling functions (52%)

Interestingly, that last point was actually the most frequently cited as placing a significant constraint on enabling functions with 21% of respondents saying that a lack of effective data and information flow was hampering their enabling functions.

This is not a new concern. CEOs have long decried the existence of silos within their businesses; however, with the increasing volume of data generated by businesses and the acceleration of the business cycle, the impact of these silos can easily be magnified. For this reason, it is not surprising to see the long-time frustration around information silos rising to the level of the most significant impediment to enabling functions鈥� contributions.

What can be done

C-Suite leaders have identified three key opportunities to improve how their enabling functions contribute to overall business objectives:

• • • Simplified compliance and reporting
    • Technology and automation
    • Risk management and mitigation

These are important goals, to be sure. However, they fail to confront the silos that C-Suite leaders say are the biggest challenge to their enabling functions.

To effectively push toward a digital transformation, C-Suite leaders will need to find effective ways to improve data and information flows. This presents a bit of a double-edged sword. On the one hand, improved technology creates greater opportunities to improve inter-function collaboration and communication. And while all major business software suites have collaboration and sharing functions integrated into them, creating opportunities for teams to interact in ways they have not been able to before is critical.

To effectively push toward a digital transformation, C-Suite leaders will need to find effective ways to improve data and information flows.

On the other hand, those same technologies create even greater volumes of data and information for corporate functions to manage. By simply adopting a technology tool without making meaningful efforts to more successful integrate the new tool into existing team workflows, businesses run a real risk that technology intended to solve a problem could actually exacerbate it.

That word of caution, however, should not be seen as a reason for corporations to avoid pushing toward digital transformation. As discussed, C-Suite leaders see the digitization of their businesses as a key priority, and broader market indicators are proving them correct. The insights shared here around the challenges for enabling functions should not dissuade them of that notion.

Rather, leaders should be keenly aware of the potential pitfalls and incorporate solutions to these existing and potential problems into their tech rollout and adoption plans as they push into a digital future.

Successfully navigating digital transformation requires more than new technology 鈥� it demands intentional change management efforts to break down silos and improve information flow. Leaders who acknowledge these challenges upfront and build solutions into their transformation strategies will be best positioned to unlock their enabling functions’ full potential.

You can download a copy of the 成人VR视频 Institute鈥檚 recent听2025 C-Suite Survey听here

Indeed, the average law firm billing rates have grown by 107% since 2006, while demand for law firm services 鈥� as clocked by total billable hours worked by the average law firm 鈥� has not followed suit, increasing just 5% during the same timeframe.

Jump to 鈫�

Developing a Framework for Law Firm Differentiation and Growth: Introducing the Apex Strategy Model

Clearly, this dynamic is not sustainable, creating an approaching financial pinch point that law firms will have to navigate.

In a new white paper from 成人VR视频’ Jen Dezso, Developing a Framework for Law Firm Differentiation and Growth: Introducing the Apex Strategy Model, the author looks at a new methodology that can help law firms with this navigation by allowing them to achieve the differentiation and sustainable growth they need in a competitive market. 鈥�

The case for a different strategic focus 鈥�

Despite the legal industry being one of the oldest professional service sectors, the paths to success for its participants are varied. There is no one law firm, or even type of firm, that has emerged as a dominant market leader with all the answers on how to most successfully operate within the business of law. In fact, data from the 成人VR视频 Institute shows that over the past decade less than 40% of top law firms have grown their top-of-mind awareness in the market 鈥� how clients call to mind a certain firm for legal matters 鈥� a metric we refer to as market mindshare. During this time, the average law firm actually experienced an erosion in top-of-mind awareness among clients.

This leaves the legal industry at an inflection point with no dominant market leader.

Register now for The Emerging Technology and Generative AI Forum, a cutting-edge conference that will explore the latest advancements in GenAI and their potential to revolutionize legal and tax practices

Further, recent interviews with managing partners also reveal that several market dynamics are driving a significant shift in their strategic thinking which is being driven by diminishing returns from rate increases, growing client sophistication, and technological disruption. What makes the situation even more ripe for significant change is that while previous years were characterized by cautious optimism about market conditions, today’s law firm leaders have shifted more heavily toward caution, expressing heightened concern about their competitive positioning.

Enter the Apex framework

As law firms increasingly find that both their clients and the market have matured, the previous business model that allowed them to be nimble and explore different growth opportunities has become difficult to manage at scale. With many law firm managing partners becoming more focused on profit and return on investment rather than on simply increasing revenue, many firm leaders are quickly realizing that being all things to all clients isn鈥檛 as profitable as having a targeted focus that could potentially drive a true leadership position within the market.

It is here where the Apex Strategy can help by providing a structured approach to differentiation by identifying a firm鈥檚 primary strategic focus while maintaining its balance across all essential business elements. This can work to reinforce the strengths of the firm鈥檚 talent and investments rather than spreading those resources too thin across multiple strategic initiatives.

As the white paper illustrates, the Apex Focus Square helps law firm leaders identify a primary strategic focus among geography, expertise, industry, and client type by allowing them to select one corner as the primary differentiator that ultimately guides all other strategic decisions. 鈥婤y creating this effective differentiation, law firms can appeal not only to prospective clients and matters, but also to prospective lateral attorneys.

Going forward with the Apex Strategy

For most firms, this path forward requires making difficult choices about where to focus limited resources. The Apex Strategy provides a framework for making these decisions coherently and 鈥� most importantly 鈥� strategically rather than pursuing disconnected opportunities that lead to over-diversification.

Today, as the legal industry continues to evolve, those law firms that can create strategic differentiation will be able to wield a key driver of sustainable growth. Indeed, the Apex Strategy framework gives law firm leaders a practical tool to establish meaningful market differentiation, subsequently enabling more focused decisions about where to invest their firms鈥� time, talent, and resources.

You can download

a full copy of the 成人VR视频 Institute “Developing a Framework for Law Firm Differentiation and Growth: Introducing the Apex Strategy Model” by filling out the form below:

Indeed, today鈥檚 tax departments now need to be strategic, data-driven, and be able to provide critical information to the business. In essence, they need to become a modern tax department.

In the 成人VR视频 Institute鈥檚 most recent , corporate tax department leaders said they recognized the need to do more work beyond compliance. Most of the survey respondents said they wished to shift their work balance to focus on doing more strategic and proactive work.

Modern tax teams are focused on this as well, already driving value by being able to influence key business decisions by providing strategic tax planning. This strategic planning includes advising on merger and acquisition activities and unlocking cash flow opportunities based on whether to expand into specific regions or shift jurisdictions. With current tariff concerns taking center stage, tax departments can support the business by providing critical and timely insights.

At the foundation of this move to a modern tax department is its ability to leverage automation for greater efficiency. Indeed, to truly shift from being seen as a cost center to a strategic business partner, corporate tax functions must evolve intentionally in how they operate, communicate, and contribute.

Shifting your tax department away from being seen as a cost center

Today鈥檚 modern tax department can be a value generator for their organization, as long as leaders keep three essential truths in their minds 鈥� and communicate them to management often. These truths include:

Tax strategy creates tangible business value 鈥� At its core, a tax department does far more than file returns. A proactive department can help shape its company鈥檚 financial strategy by reducing the effective tax rate, optimizing tax positions across jurisdictions, and uncovering opportunities for savings.

Tax expertise fuels business growth 鈥� From market expansions and mergers to new product launches, tax considerations can often determine whether a business initiative succeeds. Modern tax departments should make sure they are embedded early in strategic projects, ensuring optimal legal structures, tax incentives, and pricing models that enable their organizations鈥� sustainable and profitable growth.

Technology and automation drive tax department efficiency 鈥� Even with the best intentions of wanting to be a strategic business partner, tax departments must adopt advanced tax technology 鈥� such as automation tools, data analytics, and real-time reporting. These tools and solutions enable corporate tax teams to work faster, more accurately, and more strategically. With automation reducing manual tasks, tax professionals can then focus more on advising the business, not just ensuring compliance.

3 strategies to build a modern tax department

To become a true strategic partner, however, and shed the cost-center label for good, corporate tax leaders must focus on these three core priorities:

1. Align your department鈥檚 tax strategy with your organization鈥檚 business strategy

A modern tax team must understand broader business goals, such as market expansion, innovation, or restructuring, and then align their tax planning to support these objectives.

Steps toward this goal include:

• • • • embedding tax expertise into commercial decision-making;
      • participating early in strategic initiatives and transactions; and
      • advising on tax implications related to operations, contracts, and pricing structures.

Potential result: When tax professionals speak the language of business and contribute insights at the planning stage, they move from the back office to the boardroom.

2. Invest in tax technology and data analytics

Technology is no longer optional for tax departments 鈥� it鈥檚 essential. Investing in tax automation and analytic tools reduces compliance costs, minimizes risk, and enables real-time, strategic reporting.

Key investments to prioritize should include:

• • • • automation tools (such as indirect tax engines, e-filing, and e-invoicing solutions);
      • data analytics for forecasting, modeling, and risk management; and
      • integration with finance and enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems for seamless data consistency.

Potential result: Tech-enabled tax teams have a strategic edge, delivering critical insights that manual processes simply can鈥檛 match.

3. Build a forward-looking, business-savvy tax team

Tomorrow鈥檚 tax department is built on professionals who have a diverse skill set that includes tax technical expertise, digital fluency, strategic thinking, and strong communication skills.

Steps to be taken to future-proof your tax team include:

• • • • upskilling in areas like data analysis, automation, and business communication;
      • promoting collaboration with finance, legal, operations, and commercial teams; and
      • fostering a culture of agility, continuous learning, and adaptability.

Potential result: A modern, multi-disciplinary tax team secures a permanent seat at the table where key business decisions are made.

Today鈥檚 modern tax function goes far beyond compliance and reporting. It drives business value, mitigates risk, enables growth, and acts as a proactive strategic partner. When tax department leaders can successfully implement the three strategies above, it positions their departments in such a way that they are no longer a cost center but instead as a potential powerhouse internal partner that fuels the company鈥檚 growth and competitive advantage.

You can download a full copy of the 成人VR视频 Institute鈥檚 most recent here

In fact, current projections indicate that yearly mitigation funding must exceed US $8.4 trillion from 2023 to 2030, escalating to US $10.4 trillion annually in the subsequent 20 years. This stands in stark contrast to the .

Voluntary carbon markets were seen as a key mechanism for companies to mitigate their carbon emissions, but recent controversies continue to stall efforts to restore integrity to these markets. Earlier this year SBTi advocated for companies to assign a specific internal carbon price per ton of carbon to its operations and supply and then funnel the total amount into a mechanism that would be used to remove carbon from the atmosphere by using technology or investing in natural carbon mitigation efforts, such as tree-planting.

Determining an accurate carbon price

While it sounds good, determining an accurate internal carbon price (ICP) is a challenge. ICP is a voluntary strategy that involves assigning a monetary value to carbon emissions, whereas carbon accounting is systematic way to measure and monitor how much carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) an entity emits. (In 2023, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimated that is $190 per metric ton.)

Overall, two categories of methodologies exist to pay for the social costs 鈥� taxation and ICP 鈥� and each mechanism to ; and because the total cost estimates are based on models, they do not account for variations of carbon emissions across sectors. This is why ICP might be a better option.

Today, there are three well-known methods to conduct internal carbon pricing:

Using an external benchmark 鈥� Commonly called shadow pricing, this method involves the organization setting a monetary value on its greenhouse gas emissions on a per ton basis. Sometimes an organization will get this value from an external source, such as the EPA; or they will base it on an industry estimate. This method helps companies assess the potential costs and benefits of various methods to reduce emissions. While no actual money is exchanged, using this approach in capital planning can help effective decision-making in long-term investment decisions. Typically, finance and strategy professionals are involved in these decisions.

Setting an internally calculated price 鈥� This method involves assigning an internal carbon fee associated with each metric ton of emissions produced. The pricing is then applied at the business unit level based on specific emissions-generating activities or consumption. In this system, a company imposes a fee on itself for each ton of emissions produced. ICP consolidates these values into a standardized metric, such as carbon costs or benefits. This approach allows financial decision-makers, including corporate chief financial officers, to bring these low-carbon metrics into the organization鈥檚 rational, economic decision-making processes. The details of this method are usually determined through collaboration among internal operations, accounting, finance, and sustainability teams.

Calculating a spend-based approach 鈥� Finally, companies can calculate an implicit carbon price based on what the organization spends on emissions reduction targets. In many cases, commitments by companies to reduce emissions already exist, but multiple carbon prices also may exist under this method. This methodology can be problematic because it is not actually accounting for the social cost of carbon.

While use of ICP methods by companies has increased, too few companies are using ICP, whatever the method they pursue, and there is still a long way to go, report. Looking at the top 100 companies by revenue in each sector, nine sectors show an average increase of 10% or more in ICP usage, between 2019 and 2021, the report showed. In the energy and materials sectors 鈥� which together account for approximately 60% of global CO₂听emissions 鈥� ICP take-up is highest but still is used only half or less of those companies.

Varying use by region

An analysis of market-based pricing mechanisms in the McKinsey report showed that the use of internal carbon charges also varies widely by region. In the Europe Union, where ICP is most prevalent, 40% of large companies use this approach to promote sustainability. The EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) also has higher prices than other regions, although only 40% of European companies that use ICP have internal charges exceeding the current ETS price of $87 per metric ton. By contrast, only 26% of Asian companies and 17% of US companies have implemented ICP.

This is where corporate finance professionals can contribute their expertise to determine their own internal prices for carbon, based on the company鈥檚 unique operating model, its geographic dispersion, and its own supply chain.

To get started, the following actions:

• • • • determine why creating an ICP strategy and a specific objective would be important to your organization;
      • define how government-supervised pricing can affect your organization;
      • calculate an internal price;
      • run a pilot exercise; and
      • develop a plan to scale the process across the organization.

One added benefit of using ICP is the ability to integrate sustainability into core business operations. In fact, the best practice approaches to ICP are those that contribute to a journey of bringing a company鈥檚 business strategy in line with its transition to a low-carbon economy. By using these best practice approaches to ICP, companies can embed the trajectory of a low-carbon transition into their daily decision-making, determine the most effective strategy in changing market environments, and stay ahead of the curve.

You can find more about here.

In the corporate world, strategic priorities set the stage for this kind of goal setting. So where are corporate law departments focusing this year?

In our annual study of the legal market, we asked roughly 400 law department leaders to tell us about the key strategic objectives and challenges their departments were facing. We wanted to go beyond specific legal matters to help us understand where law department leaders are turning their focus in the year ahead.

We discerned four main areas on which department leaders indicated they were focused. These included providing an effective delivery of legal work, doing so efficiently, proactively safeguarding against risk, and investing in the talent development of the legal team for the long term.鈥�

Efficiency of operations

Half (50%) of our law department respondents were clear that efficiency is their number one priority. This means managing the growing pressure from the business to handle or reduce costs without compromising the department鈥檚 ability to deliver quality legal service even in the face of an increasing workload. For many, the pressure to do more with less has pushed them more quickly toward technology solutions and digitalizing operations while others focus on driving more efficient operations and processes.

One respondent cited the challenge of catching up with the digital era and modernizing how the department does its work. 鈥淚 mean getting on board with e-billing, internal matter management systems 鈥� we really need to evolve to become more modern,鈥� they said. 鈥淲hich often means just using the technology that’s there that, but we aren’t using.鈥�

Safeguarding the business from risk

Almost half (46%) of respondents said they are focused on protecting the organization from risk 鈥� much of which comes in the form of an almost constantly shifting regulatory and compliance landscape.

For a global corporation operating across many jurisdictions, the first question often is how to keep up with changing regulations across multiple geographies? And second, how to communicate the implications of those changes to the wider business?

Besides complex and changing regulations, many corporations are still dealing with the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their business, while others are trying to avoid the risk of litigation by anticipating and mitigating such risks preemptively. And of course, cybersecurity and data security are also high on the list of concerns for many law departments.

Safeguarding the business as a category of concern has increased the most since 2019, with the pandemic introducing risks that were not present two years ago.

鈥淭he challenge nowadays is, for lack of a better word, the regional regulatory madness,鈥� said one survey respondent who works in the law department at a retail company in Spain. 鈥淓very day there are new regional regulations, and we are the ones responsible for keeping the entire organization updated with each regulation because it affects us.鈥�

Effective delivery of legal work

The next most frequently mentioned area by more than one-third of respondents (39%) is how their law department can adapt to the new and dynamic set of external pressures to continue running the legal function as effectively as possible.

Some businesses found new growth opportunities in the pandemic. The digitalization of services due to remote working and lockdowns meant growth for a lot of tech companies, for example, so the big challenge facing their law departments is rapidly scaling the activity of the department itself.

Another area of focus is improving the听level听of integration between the law department and the rest of the business so that the department can become an enabler of the business鈥檚 overall strategy.

Interestingly, factors relating to the effectiveness of the law department have been mentioned less often in 2021, but it is still a concern for about two-in-every-five department leaders as they seek to meet their companies鈥� strategic goals and facilitate business growth.

鈥淏ecause we just merged, [the challenge] is integration,鈥� said one department leader at a U.S.-based engineering company. 鈥淭he current legal function in the two firms is critical, so supporting the day-to-day operation internally with basic needs of the organization, trying to understand what’s needed, and then being responsive.鈥�

Talent development

The fourth area, mentioned by a smaller group (14%) is all about developing and retaining talent. As we experience the Great Resignation spurred on by much reflection by individuals on their position in life, at work, and in their careers, employers have been forced to think hard and long about their talent strategy and how best to attract, retain, and develop the right people and skills in-house for the longer term.

Talent is another issue that is occupying minds of general counsel more now than two years ago as the pandemic has transformed the way we work. Here, the priorities are to attract and retain high quality talent, to manage a transition to hybrid working as a more permanent feature of work life, and to ensure good collaboration across the team.

鈥淐oming out of the pandemic there are people who are stepping back, moving away, and moving on, so retention and recruitment are the other priorities,鈥� said one survey respondent. 鈥淚t has been a tough year in that regard 鈥� you’re trying to keep the hearts and minds of people globally when you can’t see them. I meet with them regularly, but the opportunism from other companies is taking its toll.鈥�

Next in this series: Mind the gap! The mismatch between what corporate law departments are trying to achieve and what they are measuring