Keep clients coming back · Every business
How Law and Accounting Firms Can Ask for Reviews Within Professional Rules
Lawyers, CPAs and tax preparers can ask clients for reviews like any other business, but the rules that govern them reach the gift card, the reply and the details a client puts in a post, so the review system has to be designed around confidentiality from the first message.
At a glance
- A rules-aware review system asks every client at the same point (the close of a matter, an accepted return or a finished year-end) through one link, offers nothing in return and answers every review without adding a single fact about the client.
- The ABA's Model Rule 7.2(b) generally bars lawyers from giving anything of value for a recommendation, and Google separately forbids incentives for reviews, so a gift card for a review fails twice.
- In ABA Formal Opinion 496 (2021), the ABA advised that a lawyer may not reveal client information in replying to a negative review and should seriously consider not responding at all.
- In BrightLocal's 2026 survey, 89% of consumers said they expect owners to respond to reviews and 50% said they are unlikely to choose a business whose replies are templated, so the reply has to be personal without being specific.
General information, not legal, tax or ethics advice; rules differ by state and by license, so talk to your state bar, board of accountancy or a licensed professional about your situation.
Part 1 | Asking is allowed; paying for the review is where the rules start
The owner of a small firm often hesitates at the first step, with a voice that says Our rules probably don't let us ask, though for most firms the request itself is ordinary and the rules begin with what surrounds it. The ABA's Model Rules, the template for state lawyer conduct rules, generally prohibit a lawyer from giving anything of value to a person for recommending the lawyer's services; an article in the ABA's Litigation Journal explains that the exception for nominal gifts covers token thank-yous that are not intended or expected as compensation, such as a holiday gift, which a discount or gift card offered for a review would be hard to fit.
Google's review policy reaches the same place by a different road, prohibiting incentives such as payment, discounts or free services for reviews and forbidding businesses from asking only the clients they expect to be happy. The Federal Trade Commission's consumer review rule, in effect since October 2024, bans fake reviews and the suppression of negative ones while allowing a general request sent to all customers.
For accountants and tax preparers, confidentiality carries the most weight. The AICPA code defines confidential client information as "any information obtained from the client that is not available to the public," and a separate Confidential Client Information Rule governs its disclosure. Tax preparers also work under Internal Revenue Code section 7216, which the IRS describes as covering "all the information tax return preparers obtain from taxpayers," with criminal penalties of up to $1,000 and one year of imprisonment for each violation and a separate civil penalty under section 6713.
Part 2 | The reply is the riskiest sentence in the system
Professional firms get into trouble with reviews mostly when they answer them. ABA Formal Opinion 496, issued in January 2021, concluded that a negative online review does not trigger the self-defense exception to the confidentiality rule, so a lawyer may not rebut a post with details of the matter even when the post is false; the opinion allows asking the host site to remove a review, inviting the reviewer to talk privately and saying that professional obligations prevent a full response, and it suggests wording such as "Professional obligations do not allow me to respond as I would wish."
Consumers, meanwhile, notice whether anyone answers and whether it sounds canned.
The way through is a reply that is warm, written fresh each time and empty of facts about the client. A thank-you can mention the firm's own values or the kind of work it does without confirming what the reviewer hired it for, and a reply to criticism can follow the opinion's model by expressing regret, offering a private conversation and adding nothing else.
Part 3 | A review system built for a confidential practice
| Step | Lawyers | CPAs and tax preparers | Everyone (Google and FTC) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Who gets asked | Every client at matter close, decided by matter type, not by mood | Every client after the return is accepted or the year-end is closed | No asking only happy clients |
| What is offered | Nothing of value for the review | Nothing of value for the review | No incentives of any kind |
| What the request says | Invite them to describe the experience, not the case | Same, with no figures or tax details | No hint about the rating wanted |
| How replies are written | No client information, even to correct a false post | No client or return information | Respond to all, personally |
Some practice areas call for a decision before the first request goes out. A criminal defense, family law or bankruptcy client may not want any public link to the firm, and deciding by matter type, applied to every client in that category, keeps the choice about privacy rather than about who seems pleased.
The request, sent at matter close or after the return is accepted
"Thank you for trusting [business name] with your [matter or return]. If you're comfortable sharing how it was to work with us, a short review helps others find the right help: [review link]. Please describe your experience with our office rather than details of your [case or taxes], and there's no obligation either way."
Replies to copy
For praise: "Thank you for taking the time to write this. Clear communication and careful work are what we aim for with every client." For criticism: "We take every concern seriously. Professional obligations limit what we can say here; please contact our office directly so we can talk."
| Matters or returns closed per year (Assumption) | 150 |
|---|---|
| Share who write a review when asked (Assumption) | 12% |
| New reviews per year (Calculated (150 × 12%)) | 18 |
| New reviews per month (Calculated (18 ÷ 12)) | 1.5 |
| Reviews today (Assumption) | 5 |
| Months to reach 20 reviews (Calculated ((20 − 5) ÷ 1.5)) | 10 |
Illustrative example; replace every assumption with your own numbers. The 20-review mark comes from the BrightLocal finding that 47% of consumers will not use a business with fewer than 20 reviews.
How you compare
- Count: 47% of consumers in the BrightLocal survey said they would not use a business with fewer than 20 reviews.
- Replies: check your last ten replies for any fact a client did not post themselves, such as the type of matter, the outcome or a refund amount.
- Your own baseline: count matters or returns closed last quarter and how many of those clients received a request.
Questions to ask this week
Does any request or reply mention a client's matter, return or result? Rewrite it so it speaks only about the firm.
Is anything offered for a review? Remove it, including entries into drawings and discounts on next year's fee.
Who decides which clients are asked? Set the rule by matter type or service, in writing.
What has our state bar or board said about reviews? Read its advertising rules and any opinions on online reviews before launching.
The next step is to write the request and the two replies above in your own words, check them against your state's rules and send the request to every client whose matter or return closed in the last month.
About this research: This article draws on the ABA Model Rules as described in the ABA's Litigation Journal, ABA Formal Opinion 496, the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct, IRS guidance on section 7216, Google's review policy, the FTC's consumer review rule and BrightLocal's 2026 survey of 1,002 U.S. adults. State rules vary and some state bars have issued their own opinions, so this article is a starting point for a conversation with your bar or board. The worked example is illustrative.
Sources
- American Bar Association, Section of Litigation. Rewarding Referrals from Non-Lawyers. Litigation Journal, Fall 2021.
- American Bar Association Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility. Formal Opinion 496: Responding to Online Criticism. January 13, 2021.
- American Institute of CPAs. AICPA Code of Professional Conduct. Updated through July 2026.
- Internal Revenue Service. Section 7216 Frequently Asked Questions.
- Google. Prohibited and restricted content: Maps user-generated content policy. Google Maps Help.
- Federal Trade Commission. Consumer Reviews and Testimonials Rule: Questions and Answers. 2024.
- BrightLocal. Local Consumer Review Survey 2026. 2026. Panel of 1,002 U.S. adults.
Related reading: How to Get More Reviews Without Begging, Based on What Makes Customers Write Them · The Review Request Text to Send After Every Visit · What to Do When Something Goes Wrong: How Small Businesses Win Customers Back · Referrals for Accountants, Bookkeepers and Tax Preparers
Work with osNOVA on reviews for your firm
We help law, tax and bookkeeping offices set up a review request that goes to every client at the right point, write replies that are personal without revealing anything and decide which matter types to include, starting from what you want more of, whether that is more first consultations, more new clients each season or a profile that reflects the work you do.
Email hello@osnovaops.com about your business
Or leave your email and we will reach out
Tell us what kind of business you run and what you want more of.
Not ready to talk? osNOVA runs free live events for owners.