Both are authorized. Attorneys, CPAs, and enrolled agents may all practice before the IRS under Circular 230, and any of them may file a Form 2848 and handle an examination.

The choice therefore is not about credentials. It turns on three questions. Does the dispute turn on records and computation, or on the application of law to contested facts? Could an honest answer to a factual question establish an element of a penalty or an offense? And does the analysis need to be privileged?

If the answers are records, no, and no, the CPA who prepared the return is usually the better choice. That person knows where the documents are, understands how the return was built, and is less expensive. If any answer is different, counsel should at least be involved in structuring the response, and in some cases should hold the engagement with the CPA working underneath it.

Who May Represent You, and What That Means

Practice before the IRS is governed by Circular 230, 31 C.F.R. part 10. Attorneys, certified public accountants, and enrolled agents have unlimited representation rights: they may represent any taxpayer on any matter before any IRS office, regardless of who prepared the return.

Enrolled agents are worth understanding, because they are frequently overlooked. An enrolled agent is licensed by the Treasury Department after passing a comprehensive examination or through qualifying IRS employment, and is subject to the same Circular 230 duties as attorneys and CPAs. Many are former revenue agents or revenue officers, and in collection matters that experience is directly relevant. An enrolled agent has no privilege beyond the limited protection of section 7525, cannot appear in a federal district court or a court of appeals, and may appear in the Tax Court only if separately admitted under Tax Court Rule 200.

Unenrolled return preparers have sharply limited rights. A preparer with an Annual Filing Season Program record of completion may represent a taxpayer only before revenue agents, customer service representatives, and similar IRS employees including the Taxpayer Advocate Service, only for a return the preparer prepared and signed, and not before Appeals, Collection, or Counsel. A preparer without that credential may not represent at all. This surprises taxpayers who assume the person who prepared the return can handle whatever follows.

Only an attorney can appear in a federal district court or a court of appeals. The United States Tax Court is the exception: under Tax Court Rule 200, attorneys are admitted on application and non-attorneys may be admitted by written examination. Admission alone, however, is not evidence of controversy experience.

What the Dispute Turns On

Documentary disputes belong to the accountant. A correspondence examination questioning charitable contributions, a mileage log, a dependency claim, or the basis reported on a sale asks whether records exist and whether they satisfy the statute. The work is assembly and presentation. Adding counsel adds cost without adding leverage.

Computational and reconstruction work likewise belongs to the accountant. Rebuilding books from bank records, reconstructing basis in a long-held asset, allocating expenses across entities, preparing amended returns, and normalizing a set of records that were never properly maintained are accounting engagements. Lawyers are not better at this and are more expensive at it.

Legal characterization disputes shift the balance. Whether an expenditure is currently deductible under I.R.C. section 162 or must be capitalized under section 263 and Treas. Reg. section 1.263(a)-3; whether compensation is reasonable or a constructive dividend; whether a worker is an employee or an independent contractor; whether an activity is a trade or business and whether the taxpayer materially participated under section 469. In each case the facts are largely documented and the dispute is about what the law does with them. The response has to be built as a legal argument with authority, contrary authority addressed, and the issue framed the way the IRS Independent Office of Appeals will decide it.

Procedural disputes are legal work by definition: whether a notice was validly issued to the last known address under section 6212(b), whether the assessment statute has expired, whether a summons should be resisted, whether supervisory approval under section 6751(b) was obtained on time, whether a refund claim satisfies the variance requirements of Treas. Reg. section 301.6402-2(b)(1), and whether to petition the Tax Court or pay and sue for refund.

Privilege, Precisely

This is the difference that cannot be replicated, and it is routinely overstated in both directions.

The attorney-client privilege protects confidential communications between client and lawyer made for the purpose of obtaining legal advice. It does not protect the underlying facts. It does not attach merely because a lawyer is copied. And it does not cover business advice that happens to be given by a lawyer.

Section 7525 extends a limited privilege to communications with a federally authorized tax practitioner concerning tax advice, to the same extent the attorney-client privilege would apply. Its limits are the point. It applies only in noncriminal proceedings before the IRS and noncriminal federal court proceedings brought by or against the United States. It excludes written communications in connection with the promotion of a tax shelter. And it does not apply in state proceedings or in litigation with private parties.

The consequence is direct. If a matter has any realistic criminal dimension, section 7525 provides nothing. The accountant is a witness, the workpapers are evidence, and the conversations in which the client explained the transactions are the government's proof of knowledge.

Return preparation is not privileged. Whoever performs it. A lawyer who prepares returns is doing accounting work, and the file is discoverable.

Kovel is narrower than its reputation. United States v. Kovel, 296 F.2d 918 (2d Cir. 1961), holds that the attorney-client privilege may extend to an accountant engaged by counsel where the accountant's assistance is necessary or highly useful to effective consultation between client and lawyer. It requires the engagement to run through counsel, in writing, before the work begins, for the purpose of assisting the rendering of legal advice. It does not convert the client's existing accountant into a privileged adviser, it does not protect ordinary accounting or return preparation, and its application is fact dependent. Papering a Kovel arrangement after the accountant has already done the work does not create privilege retroactively.

Waiver. A taxpayer who asserts reliance on professional advice to establish reasonable cause under section 6664(c) and Treas. Reg. section 1.6664-4(c) generally cannot use the advice as a shield while withholding its substance. Federal Rule of Evidence 502(a) limits subject-matter waiver from an intentional disclosure to related communications that fairness requires be considered together, but the scope remains fact and jurisdiction dependent. This decision should be made before anything is produced, because it cannot be reversed.

When Counsel Should Be Involved Early

Certain features should prompt counsel's involvement before the next response rather than after the record hardens.

• Indicators of fraud, or a civil examination that has gone quiet without explanation.
• Any realistic criminal exposure.
• Employment tax delinquency, because of personal exposure under section 6672.
• Unreported foreign accounts or unfiled international information returns.
• A summons, particularly one directed at a third party.
• A proposed civil fraud penalty under section 6663.
• A dispute that recurs across years or entities, where the precedent set now governs later.
• Collateral consequences: professional licensure, security clearance, immigration status, loan covenants, exempt status.
• An impending statutory deadline, particularly a notice of deficiency.

The value of counsel is asymmetric in time. Early, counsel can shape what is produced, how interviews are handled, whether a consent extending the assessment statute should be signed, and whether a privileged analysis of the exposure should be prepared before positions harden. Late, counsel inherits a record that already contains the client's statements, the accountant's memoranda, and productions broader than required.

The Coordinated Team

For substantial matters the strongest structure is usually both, in a defined relationship.

Counsel holds the engagement with the client and directs the analysis. The accountant is engaged through counsel where privilege matters, under a written Kovel engagement executed before work begins. The accountant does the reconstruction, the computations, and the schedules. Counsel frames the legal issues, decides what is produced, and handles the procedural posture.

Three practical rules make this work.

Set it up before the work starts. Privilege cannot be created retroactively.

Do not use the same accountant for the privileged analysis and the ongoing return preparation without thinking it through. Return preparation is not privileged, and mixing the two roles in one person invites a dispute about which hat was being worn.

Keep the file organized so that privileged material is identifiable. A production made under time pressure from a file that mixes everything together is how inadvertent disclosure happens.

What Should Not Drive the Decision

The dollar amount alone. A $30,000 worker classification dispute affecting four years and eight workers is more serious than a $300,000 depreciation timing adjustment. The first sets a recurring liability and implicates employment tax exposure. The second moves deductions between years.

Which professional you already know. Familiarity is a real convenience and a poor criterion when the issue has moved outside that professional's area.

A promise of a particular outcome. Neither profession can deliver one. A practitioner who guarantees a result before seeing the file is telling you something about the practitioner rather than about the case.

Two Questions to Ask

Ask a prospective representative to describe the procedural posture: which notice you received, what deadline it starts, what forum it leads to, and what the next three steps are. The answer reveals whether the person works in controversy or occasionally visits it.

Ask what would change the analysis. A practitioner who can identify the two or three facts that would move the case in either direction has understood it. One who can only describe the outcome sought has not.

If a dispute has moved from records to law, or if an answer to a factual question could support a penalty, the representation question should be settled before the next submission. Chase Counsel accepts selected federal tax controversy engagements and regularly works alongside a client's existing accountant. Learn more at www.ChaseCounsel.Com/federal-tax-controversy.

Related Articles

When Should You Hire a Tax Attorney for an IRS Audit?

How Much Does an IRS Tax Attorney Cost?

What Should I Do If IRS Criminal Investigation Contacts Me?

I Received an IRS Audit Notice. What Should I Do?

This article discusses federal tax procedure generally and is not legal advice for any particular taxpayer. Privilege questions are fact and jurisdiction dependent and should be evaluated in the specific matter.