Are tax lawyers part of the problem ?

Keep in mind that many tax lawyers and CPAs do not themselves understand the complexities of the tax law; when penalties can apply under the law, and when a criminal act has actually been committed when evaluating a taxpayer’s options. The result is that many of these “advisors” may simply have neglected to truly advise their clients of the law and its application and the options available to each and every Benign and Bad Actor separately.
A tax lawyer should be part of the solution and not part of the problem which unfortunately happens more and more.
For everybody here that needs a tax lawyer for whatever reason – make no mistake this will be one of the most important decisions you will have to make in your lifetime – try not to rush this and do not be afraid to ask questions and form your own opinion on your facts and circumstances.
It makes a big difference with regards to the tone and attitude your tax attorney is approaching the IRS on your behalf about options available, discuss penalties, or dictate how to categorize your case. Obviously that tone and attitude comes from past experience the the tax lawyer had with his clients cases.
Keep in mind that hourly rates normally increase by approx. 25$/h every year . So if your lawyer starts working 11/2014 @ 500$/h his rate will be 525$/h by 1/2015 without your specific consent. If and when you do find “Mr. Right” watch out for possible billing traps or commonly known as “liberal billing practices” :
 - they call it “research” any time they thought you were asking a really chargeable question
 - ”pro-actively” carry out unauthorized work and insist on charging you
 - hand-off your simple stuff to a different person every week to boost billable time and increase mistakes because of no familiarity with the file
 - duplicate your own work to “verify” it and then charge you for the time

The bottom line here is do not think just because you throw money at the problem and use a lawyer that the stress factor will be any less. It will not and imo. the more you actually know about the facts and circumstances of your case the stress and anger level will rise significantly because you have to “babysit” and constantly check what your lawyer is doing on your behalf and trust me your lawyer is not happy when you know more than he does .
Of course you will hardly find any tax attorney who will advise you of what the penalties are according to the Internal Revenue Manual. The IRS FAQs and answers, representing some 28 pages in length with more than 16,000 words of explanation…..in no part of the IRS FAQs, is there any attempt to explain how penalties under the law actually apply to any particular factual circumstances if the taxpayer were to NOT participate in the OVDP. Most tax lawyers are the IRS` henchmen . They both need each other – it is a win-win situation for both but unfortunately not for you. The IRS examiner is happy to close cases – the more the better to get his supervisor off his back – the tax lawyer needs to find ways for billable hours – the more he can dublicate simple tasks the better which means the OVDI/P annuity in form of many retainers is perfect. The bottom level IRS clerks are happy to talk to them about how to categorize a case – how to integrate them into the IDRS , about options available, discuss penalties etc.
 http://lasthonestlawyer.org/2012/05/02/how-a-10-minute-hearing-can-cost-you-3265-17/

The need to bill 1,900 to 2,200 hours a year also means that “there are bound to be temptations to exaggerate the hours actually put in. The possibilities for fraud abound, though fraud is often hard to detect. Lawyers can cheat by writing down hours they didn’t work or by exaggerating the hours they did. They can credit themselves for hours worked by associates, paralegals and secretaries. They can bill one client for work already paid for by another, or double-bill two clients for the same hours (recycling work product and billing the client who receives the recycled work product time already billed to another client when that work product was originally created ). Timeliness of invoices : The longer the time between work done and the invoice, the likelier it is an estimate or “best guess” and not indicative of actual time spent. The ABA said in 1993 that it’s unethical to bill one client for travel time and a second client for work performed en route, but surveys show that the practice has not been eliminated. Some lawyers who have left private practice point to the billable hour as a central motivation for their departure. Patrick Schiltz is a law professor who, along with his wife, left a firm. He gave up a stake in the very large fees earned by his firm from the Exxon Valdez oil-spill litigation. He tells his students that they are entering a profession that is “one of the most unhappy and unhealthy on the face of the earth—and, in the view of many, one of the most unethical.” Much of the blame, he has concluded, lies with “the hours.” “You should not underestimate the likelihood that you will practice law unethically,” Schiltz advises new lawyers. The problem, he warns, will “begin with your time sheets.” Rules that prohibit padding or lying about hours worked include ABA Model Rules 1.5 (requiring that fees be reasonable), 8.4 (prohibiting fraud, deceit, and misrepresentation by lawyers), and 7.1 (prohibiting false statements about a lawyer’s services), and the comparable rules in most states.