Anonymous wrote:The real question is what is their net. Lawyers pay a lot of things out of their pocket - health care, retirement, taxes, office furniture etc

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find this all very interesting. My DH is a first year non-equity partner in a AmLaw 100 firm (lower 50) and he makes $460K base and then got a $125K bonus for an all in of $585K as his first year as a non-equity partner. So more than his last year as a senior associate/counsel but definitely low for a partner compared to some of the big AmLaw 100 firms. I think the rain maker in his group got a $7 million bonus last year but that is from winning a very large contingent case that year. I think the profits per partner in his firm are around $1.2 million (average obviously).

Being a successful partner in a law firm just means you get more pie from the pie eating contest - it never ends. My DH billed around 2000 hours last year and all in was close to 3000 hours with non-billable/business development stuff. An average 40 hour work week person works 2080 hours. That means DH worked close to 900 more billable hours (which is not a 1:1 for hours actually worked) than a normal 9-5 employee. Basically he works all the time.

How old is your DH? Just trying to gage when - or at what age - someone gets to non-equity partner

He made partner at 38. He took a few years off between under grad and law school so he was a few years behind those who went straight through.

For anyone not connected to law, it's not an age thing (at least not directly). It's a seniority at the firm thing. Basically, the amount of time that matters is how long ago you graduated from law school. It's typically somewhere between 8-11 years, firm dependant. (Kirkland does 6, but everyone knows that is basically a senior associate).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find this all very interesting. My DH is a first year non-equity partner in a AmLaw 100 firm (lower 50) and he makes $460K base and then got a $125K bonus for an all in of $585K as his first year as a non-equity partner. So more than his last year as a senior associate/counsel but definitely low for a partner compared to some of the big AmLaw 100 firms. I think the rain maker in his group got a $7 million bonus last year but that is from winning a very large contingent case that year. I think the profits per partner in his firm are around $1.2 million (average obviously).

Being a successful partner in a law firm just means you get more pie from the pie eating contest - it never ends. My DH billed around 2000 hours last year and all in was close to 3000 hours with non-billable/business development stuff. An average 40 hour work week person works 2080 hours. That means DH worked close to 900 more billable hours (which is not a 1:1 for hours actually worked) than a normal 9-5 employee. Basically he works all the time.

How old is your DH? Just trying to gage when - or at what age - someone gets to non-equity partner

He made partner at 38. He took a few years off between under grad and law school so he was a few years behind those who went straight through.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find this all very interesting. My DH is a first year non-equity partner in a AmLaw 100 firm (lower 50) and he makes $460K base and then got a $125K bonus for an all in of $585K as his first year as a non-equity partner. So more than his last year as a senior associate/counsel but definitely low for a partner compared to some of the big AmLaw 100 firms. I think the rain maker in his group got a $7 million bonus last year but that is from winning a very large contingent case that year. I think the profits per partner in his firm are around $1.2 million (average obviously).

Being a successful partner in a law firm just means you get more pie from the pie eating contest - it never ends. My DH billed around 2000 hours last year and all in was close to 3000 hours with non-billable/business development stuff. An average 40 hour work week person works 2080 hours. That means DH worked close to 900 more billable hours (which is not a 1:1 for hours actually worked) than a normal 9-5 employee. Basically he works all the time.

How old is your DH? Just trying to gage when - or at what age - someone gets to non-equity partner

Anonymous wrote:I find this all very interesting. My DH is a first year non-equity partner in a AmLaw 100 firm (lower 50) and he makes $460K base and then got a $125K bonus for an all in of $585K as his first year as a non-equity partner. So more than his last year as a senior associate/counsel but definitely low for a partner compared to some of the big AmLaw 100 firms. I think the rain maker in his group got a $7 million bonus last year but that is from winning a very large contingent case that year. I think the profits per partner in his firm are around $1.2 million (average obviously).

Being a successful partner in a law firm just means you get more pie from the pie eating contest - it never ends. My DH billed around 2000 hours last year and all in was close to 3000 hours with non-billable/business development stuff. An average 40 hour work week person works 2080 hours. That means DH worked close to 900 more billable hours (which is not a 1:1 for hours actually worked) than a normal 9-5 employee. Basically he works all the time.

Anonymous wrote:The real question is what is their net. Lawyers pay a lot of things out of their pocket - health care, retirement, taxes, office furniture etc

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Third year EP at an AmLaw 50 firm with a single-tier partnership. Service partner w no real book. 680k draw this year due to down profits, 732k draw last year.

Our lowest end (firmwide, not just DC) is 560k and top are make 4-5M, but as other posters indicated, most partners stay floating between a 1-2M draw their whole careers, with big bonuses when they bring in a big client or big $.

This is extremely typical. And the hot lateral market and firm consolidation in recent years hasn't impacted it much (at least not in AmLaw 100 firms -- consolidation has had a much bigger impact on the 100-200 firms). There is a certain amount of client money floating around and this is about how it gets allocated. Most partners are also working 50+ hour weeks. Depending on practice, could be a lot of travel, too. IME, most partners really earn their income -- there are no windfalls.

Anonymous wrote:Third year EP at an AmLaw 50 firm with a single-tier partnership. Service partner w no real book. 680k draw this year due to down profits, 732k draw last year.

Our lowest end (firmwide, not just DC) is 560k and top are make 4-5M, but as other posters indicated, most partners stay floating between a 1-2M draw their whole careers, with big bonuses when they bring in a big client or big $.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a CPA for a few downtown and they (my clients) make between 3M and 7M fairly consistently. Some do broach $10M+

That is insane! Wow.

So do most partners fall in the 3-7M range? And what are their ages?

NO. Most do not. PP has somehow cultivated the higher end of the range for clients.

Makes sense, because partners making that kind of money are more likely to need a CPA. Also if the firm does business in multiple states, the partner needs to file non-resident returns in each of those states.

Every partner with a K-1 needs a CPA. Most firms reimburse partners for their tax preparer (ours pays up 4k I think).

The 7MM figure is definitely high end. That’s only remotely normal at a handful of firms (Wachtell, Kirkland, DPW, S&C, maybe Cravath). For most “good not great” firms there will be a good handful in the 7MM-12MM range and a whole lot more in the 2MM-3MM range.

Not to scoff at 2MM. Most biglaw partners are making that kind of pro athlete money by 50. But it’s backup QB money, not Mahomes money… you get to pick one thing: a yacht, a beach house, a house in southern France, a car collection. But you don’t get them all. And given that most are divorced at least once and paying for who knows how many college tuitions and underachieving kids, they may need to be happy with a Range and a CC membership.

Man… why is this? I don’t know a single particularly successful kid of a big rainmaker partner. It’s scary.

Poor people work hard and get rich. Then they spoil their kids who coast off inherited wealth

https://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/shirtsleeves-shirtsleeves-three-generations

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a CPA for a few downtown and they (my clients) make between 3M and 7M fairly consistently. Some do broach $10M+

That is insane! Wow.

So do most partners fall in the 3-7M range? And what are their ages?

NO. Most do not. PP has somehow cultivated the higher end of the range for clients.

Makes sense, because partners making that kind of money are more likely to need a CPA. Also if the firm does business in multiple states, the partner needs to file non-resident returns in each of those states.

Every partner with a K-1 needs a CPA. Most firms reimburse partners for their tax preparer (ours pays up 4k I think).

The 7MM figure is definitely high end. That’s only remotely normal at a handful of firms (Wachtell, Kirkland, DPW, S&C, maybe Cravath). For most “good not great” firms there will be a good handful in the 7MM-12MM range and a whole lot more in the 2MM-3MM range.

Not to scoff at 2MM. Most biglaw partners are making that kind of pro athlete money by 50. But it’s backup QB money, not Mahomes money… you get to pick one thing: a yacht, a beach house, a house in southern France, a car collection. But you don’t get them all. And given that most are divorced at least once and paying for who knows how many college tuitions and underachieving kids, they may need to be happy with a Range and a CC membership.

Man… why is this? I don’t know a single particularly successful kid of a big rainmaker partner. It’s scary.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a CPA for a few downtown and they (my clients) make between 3M and 7M fairly consistently. Some do broach $10M+

That is insane! Wow.

So do most partners fall in the 3-7M range? And what are their ages?

NO. Most do not. PP has somehow cultivated the higher end of the range for clients.

Makes sense, because partners making that kind of money are more likely to need a CPA. Also if the firm does business in multiple states, the partner needs to file non-resident returns in each of those states.

Every partner with a K-1 needs a CPA. Most firms reimburse partners for their tax preparer (ours pays up 4k I think).

The 7MM figure is definitely high end. That’s only remotely normal at a handful of firms (Wachtell, Kirkland, DPW, S&C, maybe Cravath). For most “good not great” firms there will be a good handful in the 7MM-12MM range and a whole lot more in the 2MM-3MM range.

Not to scoff at 2MM. Most biglaw partners are making that kind of pro athlete money by 50. But it’s backup QB money, not Mahomes money… you get to pick one thing: a yacht, a beach house, a house in southern France, a car collection. But you don’t get them all. And given that most are divorced at least once and paying for who knows how many college tuitions and underachieving kids, they may need to be happy with a Range and a CC membership.

I’m a non-equity partner at one of these firms. I make $900k. That’s low for my firm.

Most of my peers with equity are at $5m minimum after 5 years.

I’m gonna guess you mean KE and I’m further gonna guess you’re dead wrong about your SP peers.