As registered investment advisors push to offer more holistic financial planning, many are confronting a practical reality: building in-house tax capabilities is expensive, complex and often inefficient. Instead, a growing number are turning to partnerships with CPA firms as a faster, more flexible way to meet client demand.
Processing Content
The appeal is straightforward. Clients increasingly want coordinated advice across investments and taxes, particularly at higher wealth levels. But delivering that coordination doesn’t necessarily require advisors to become tax preparers themselves.
“For the kind of clients we want to be working with, $10-$50 million, those clients generally really need expert/coordinated tax planning,” said Lisa Kirchenbauer, founding partner and senior advisor at Omega Wealth Management in Arlington, Virginia.
That demand is helping fuel a range of partnership structures between RIAs and accounting firms, from loose referral networks to formal revenue-sharing arrangements.
READ MORE: More RIAs are outsourcing their compliance. Is that a problem?
A middle ground between referrals and full integration
Historically, many RIAs have taken a hands-off approach, referring clients out to trusted CPAs and coordinating as needed. But that model has its limits, particularly when it comes to growth.
“Up until just recently, we had been referring clients to CPAs and then coordinating tax filing/planning advice for our clients,” Kirchenbauer said. “In one case, we have maybe 25 mutual clients with one CPA firm which has been good but virtually no referrals over many years.”
That experience has prompted her firm to rethink the relationship. Omega Wealth Management is now exploring more formalized partnerships that include revenue sharing in both directions — a shift that reflects a broader industry trend toward deeper alignment between advisors and tax professionals.
Such arrangements can create stronger incentives on both sides. Accounting firms gain access to a high-margin wealth management offering, while RIAs benefit from a more consistent pipeline of referrals and tighter integration of services.
Still, these partnerships come with complexity. Regulatory considerations around referral fees and revenue sharing require careful structuring, and not every firm is comfortable entering into formal financial arrangements.
READ MORE: Crypto investors want to comply with tax rules but aren’t sure how
Keeping it separate, by design
For some advisors, independence remains a priority. Rather than formalizing partnerships, they choose to maintain a network of CPAs and match clients based on their needs.
“We prefer to keep our CPA relationship separate but coordinate tax planning,” said Crystal McKeon, chief compliance officer at TSA Wealth Management in Houston. “We work with the CPAs on the client’s plan but do not exchange any funds or formal agreements.”
That approach allows for flexibility, particularly across different client segments. McKeon said her firm works with a range of CPAs depending on complexity, from ultra high net worth specialists to professionals focused on business owners or more straightforward tax returns.
“It is helpful to have a variety of CPAs that we have worked with to best meet the needs of our clients,” she said.
This model also avoids some of the compliance and reputational risks that can come with revenue-sharing arrangements. While it may limit direct monetization of referrals, it preserves objectivity and reduces potential conflicts of interest.
When close partnerships falter
Other firms take a more integrated approach, building long-term relationships with a single CPA firm to deliver a coordinated client experience.
David Demming, founder and principal of Demming Financial Services in Aurora, Ohio, said his firm benefited from such a partnership for decades.
“We have partnered closely with one CPA firm where a senior partner closely worked with us,” he said. “Our clients got great service and coordination between firms.”
But even successful partnerships can be fragile. When that CPA partner retired, the dynamic changed.
“The downside is they retired and the new firm [does not have] the same philosophy,” Demming said.
The experience highlights a key risk in tight partnerships: continuity. Cultural alignment between firms, and even between individual professionals, can be just as important as the structure of the agreement itself.
READ MORE: Tax planners share tips for making April more bearable
Why not just build tax services in-house?
For some RIAs, the obvious alternative to partnerships is to bring tax preparation and planning under their own roof. But that path remains uneven across the industry.
Research shows that while about 1 in 6 firms now offer tax preparation, adoption is heavily skewed toward larger RIAs. A Financial Planning survey found that firms with more than $500 million in assets are more than twice as likely to use tax software as those under $100 million, reflecting the scale required to make the economics work.
Even large firms often find limits to what they can handle internally, particularly when clients have complex business structures or specialized tax needs. In those cases, outside expertise remains essential.
At the same time, client demand for a “one-stop shop” continues to grow. Surveys show a sharp increase in investors who prefer integrated financial services, putting pressure on advisors to expand their offerings, whether directly or through partnerships.
