At the 2023 Association of American Law Schools Tax Section meeting, professors discussed their impressions of a decline in the number of JD students studying tax. Their impressions were consistent with declines that have been documented in similar fields. Between 2011 and 2021, U.S. accounting programs saw an 18% drop in students, while new CPA candidates declined 39% from 2010 to 2022. In the United Kingdom, the number of law schools that teach tax has diminished by 43% since 2002. This Article examines tax education in 40 U.S. law schools, focusing on course offerings and enrollment trends from 2012 to 2022.
There is good news. All 40 U.S. schools studied offered an introductory Federal Tax course, with 35 offering at least one advanced course and 20 offering two or more. The number of law professors who teach tax has remained steady in recent years. Enrollment in advanced tax courses remained stable, with steady percentages of students enrolled in Partnership Tax, Corporation Tax, and Business Entities Tax.
But there is bad news. Enrollment in advanced tax courses has declined due to shrinking student populations, with mean enrollments dropping in Corporation Tax and Business Entities Tax. Percentage-wise, Federal Tax enrollment fell significantly, from 24% of second and third-year JD students to 18%, with mean enrollments dropping from 89 to 56 students. This decline risks diminishing general familiarity with tax law and jeopardizing future advanced course offerings.
At the 2023 Association of American Law Schools Tax Section meeting, professors from across the United States discussed their impressions that there were fewer law students studying tax. Beyond their personal impressions, there were good reasons to believe the study of tax law was declining. Across the campus, in the accounting programs that train the professionals that share the tax field with lawyers, the number of students declined 18.1% between 2011 and 2021. Across the country, the number of new CPA candidates decreased 39.0% between 2010 and 2022. While there has been no research on the number of law schools in the U.S. that teach tax, across the Atlantic, the number of law schools in the United Kingdom that teach tax declined 42.9% between 2002 and 2022. And, as a percentage of law faculty members in the US, the number of tax professors declined 46.4% between 1973 and 2017.
What is the state of tax education in U.S. law schools? This Article partially answers that question by reporting the extent to which certain tax courses are offered in the 40 U.S. law schools studied. It reports on the number of students enrolled in those courses, changes between the 2012/2013 and 2021/2022 academic years, and statistical relationships between those changes and changes in the number of electives offered, bar exams testing tax, and demographic changes among law students. It also reports on the change in the number of tax law professors in that decade, specifically in the context of their relative decline since 1973. The purpose of the Article is to enable tax law professors to assess the state of tax law education within their own law schools, provide suggestions for those who want to improve enrollment, and provide comparison and contrast between the state of tax education in U.S. law schools and the situations in U.S. accounting programs and law schools in the United Kingdom.
The question of tax class enrollment arose in discussion at the 2023 Association of American Law Schools (AALS) Tax Section meeting. Many of the tax professors shared a sense that they were teaching fewer tax law students than in the recent past. Some wondered if changes in bar exam coverage were responsible. Some wondered if arithmophobia and innumeracy were increasing. Some thought more transaction-oriented courses in general, such as tax and securities regulation were all losing ground to advocacy-oriented courses, perhaps being less appealing simply because students are unfamiliar with transactional practice. Some wondered if their own faculties had changed so much in recent years that even they were so unfamiliar with transactional practice they were unable to distinguish among transactions-oriented courses, thinking that current tax professors should add securities regulation, business organizations, and even contracts to their course coverage. Some wondered if it was simply a change in what law students are seeking in legal education.
The worry of tax professors that tax studies are declining is a worry that the importance of tax law is being lost on emerging lawyers. Tax courses provide important elements of financial literacy to those who will become lawyers. Tax courses familiarize them with the administrative state, statutory interpretation, Constitutional limitations, and policy tradeoffs. Tax law is the means by which government operations are funded and personal and business behavior is incentivized and disincentivized. Tax law determines how health insurance and retirement plans are funded. Tax law provides the nation’s largest cash subsidies to low-and-moderate income families, and otherwise effects redistributions of wealth. With its unique worldwide taxation approach, U.S. tax law and administration wrap the globe. Tax law is pervasive, and the need for new lawyers to know at least the fundamentals of tax is obvious. Beyond the risks of potential tax consequences to clients in a wide variety of situations, the risks to the public interest of the decline of tax expertise includes the quality of future legislation and regulation, tax agency staffing, and the arguments and, therefore, the holdings in cases.
Unfortunately, beyond the anecdotes of tax law professors, there are other reasons to suspect tax expertise may be declining. In 2020, William J. Carney (Emory) estimated the number of law professors teaching Federal Taxation in 1973 and 2017. He was not focused on tax education specifically but rather legal education generally during an era in which faculties were becoming more academically oriented and less professionally oriented; he considered this one of the problems in legal education alongside the increase in the number of faculty, the increase in the costs of legal education, and the decrease in bar passage rates. He estimated the number of professors teaching specific courses, and took the position that professors teaching courses “useful for practice” had been crowded-out by those teaching “unneeded and esoteric courses.” In 1973, Federal Taxation was in the top 10 of faculty specializations with 2.8% of all law faculty. In 2017, it was no longer in the top 10, its share of faculty members having declined 46.4% to 1.5% of the total.
Whether or not there is a shortage of tax law professors, there is certainly a shortage of tax accountants. One cause of the shortage is the number of accountants who are retiring or leaving for other types of jobs, especially those in finance or technology. Another cause is the declining number of accounting students who are becoming Certified Public Accountants (CPAs). Between 2010 and 2022, the number of new CPA candidates decreased 39.0%. This appears to reflect the reaction to the requirements beyond an undergraduate degree that are needed to qualify for the CPA exam (e.g., earning an additional 150 credits). Currently, fewer than half of accounting graduates sit for the CPA exam. But the more fundamental problem for the profession is that, even though enrollment in business school programs is increasing, enrollment in those schools’ accounting programs is decreasing.Accounting programs are losing out to business school programs in fintech, data analytics, and supply chain management, as well as losing out to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics programs outside business schools. Between 2010/2011 and 2021/2022, enrollment in undergraduate accounting programs decreased 18.1%.
The challenges facing tax professionals is not limited to those in the US. In the United Kingdom (UK), the “temperature” of tax education in law schools was taken in 1959 and then again in 2002 and, most recently, by Stephen Daly (King’s College) and Amy Lawton (Edinburgh) in 2022. In 1959, tax was taught in one UK law school. In 2002, it was taught in 49. In their 2022 study, Daly and Lawton counted tax being taught in only 28 of 140 UK law schools. None of the law schools in Northern Ireland or Wales teach tax. In England and Scotland, law schools teach tax in both undergraduate LLB and graduate LLM programs. Although the LLB is the academic degree usually connected to qualifying to practice as a lawyer in the UK, tax teaching is concentrated in the LLM degree programs. Tax is not a required subject for qualifying to practice anywhere in the United Kingdom. Until 2011, it was required for the LLB in Scotland. After that requirement was removed, the number of law schools offering tax declined, such that, now only four of the ten Scottish schools offering the LLB offer tax. More broadly, tax not being required dampens the demand for it by LLB students, which partially explains the low level of tax offerings in LLB programs. Another likely part of the explanation is that there is a lack of faculty to teach tax. The decline in the number of UK schools where tax is taught has meant that law schools have “struggled (or chosen not) to replace tax colleagues who have retired or moved to other institutions.” This then leads not only to a lack of a “critical mass of tax teachers” at particular schools, but also to a self-perpetuation problem: “… when there are fewer people teaching tax there will, in turn, be fewer students who can study it…”, and “[i]f there are fewer people who study tax at law schools, there will be fewer people who teach tax at law schools.” In fact, the elimination of tax as a required subject for the Scottish LLB “could well be because institutions were struggling to find staff that could teach tax.”
To assess the state of tax education in U.S. law schools, I gathered data on curriculum from law school websites, ABA-mandated disclosures, the AALS Directory of Law Teachers, and through state open records act requests. I focused on the JD programs at flagship law schools in the 2012/2013 through 2021/2 academic years. I checked for statistical associations between enrollment in tax courses, tax as a bar exam topic, increases in electives offered, and changes in the gender demographics of law students. I also counted the number of tax law professors to determine if there had been a decline that might impact enrollment.
I wanted to determine the extent to which tax is offered in U.S. law schools. Among UK schools, tax teaching is concentrated in the LLM programs. In the U.S., tax is also taught in LLM programs. But I wanted to determine the extent tax is taught in JD programs. The state of tax education in JD programs provides insight into the degree of tax understanding among emerging bar members, generally, not only those pursuing a career specialized in business transaction or tax advising, as one would expect of students in tax LLM programs. Law schools publish their course catalogs on their websites, so determining whether a school is offering tax in its JD curriculum is straightforward.
Law schools often offer more than one tax course. In addition to a course on the basics of federal taxation (usually with the emphasis on the income taxation of individuals), law schools often offer courses on corporation income taxation, partnership income taxation, or business entity income taxation (covering both corporations and partnerships), as well as estate and gift taxation, state and local taxation, international taxation, and tax policy. I expected almost all law schools to offer not only a course on the basics of federal income taxation (“Federal Tax”) but also either (i) a course covering the federal income taxation of both corporations and partnerships (“Business Entities Tax”) or (ii) both a course in the federal income taxation of corporations (“Corporation Tax”) and a comparable course for partnerships (“Partnership Tax”).
I wanted to investigate the number of students who enroll in these tax courses, and any recent change. This responds to the impression many tax professors have of a recent decline, and also a curiosity as to whether there is a law school analog to the decline in accounting enrollments. It also is an indirect way of estimating the number students who are likely studying tax due to a firm interest in practicing as a tax lawyer or as business transactions lawyer, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, those who are studying it for other reasons, such as bar exam preparation. Partnership Tax is often regarded as one of the most demanding law school courses, and very few (if any) students with only a slight interest in tax enroll. Partnership Tax students tend to be the most firmly interested in tax, and changes in the numbers enrolled in Partnership Tax seem likely to suggest changes in the number of law students focused on becoming tax specialists. Students who enroll in a Corporations Tax or Business Entities Tax evidence more interest in tax than those who enroll only in Federal Tax, but their career interest may be in advising business clients generally as much as in tax specialization as such. Students enrolling in Partnership Tax, Corporation Tax, or Business Entities Tax seem unlikely to do so only because of the time of the day the course is offered or some other factor incidental to the substance. Those who enroll in Federal Tax would include students with the greatest range of motivations.
I wanted to determine the number of students enrolled, but also determine the percentage of students who do, comparing these percentages across time. As these courses are offered only to JD students beyond the first year (“Advanced JD Students”), I needed to determine the number of Advanced JD Students. Each law school is required to publicize enrollment of its first and subsequent JD classes as part of its American Bar Association (ABA) accreditation-related Standard 509 Disclosures. These Disclosures are available on the ABA website. These Disclosures include the gender breakdown of JD students, which enable determining how the gender composition of Advanced JD students changed over time.
As I wanted to measure recent change, I needed a set period. In 2022, Daly and Lawton were able to incorporate findings from studies of UK law schools in 1959 and 2002. However, there is no historical research that would enable such a comparison for U.S. law schools. I set the period of study as the academic year 2012/2013 through the academic year 2021/2022. A longer period would likely mean that the record systems used in any university had changed. Those of us who work in universities know how difficult it can be to retrieve information not stored in the currently used system. Given that I wanted to study enrollment of Advanced JD students in multiple schools across a period of years, I needed to limit the challenges any one law school might have in retrieving and sharing the information requested. Second, looking over the past decade (but not further back) would increase the chances that those who read the study are personally familiar with what has been occurring not only in legal education, but also education more broadly and the economic, political, and cultural dynamics during that time. The AALS Tax Section law professors who shared the impression of a decline in tax law enrollments were mostly law professors who taught throughout that decade. This personal familiarity with the time period would not only make this study more interesting, but it would also better prepare those professors to consider strategies for response.
How to get the numbers of Advanced JD Students enrolled in Federal Tax, Corporation Tax, Partnership Tax, and Business Entities Tax in the years 2012/2013–2021/2022? There are 196 ABA-accredited law schools in the United States. Asking 196 deans for a decade of data on their JD students enrolled in three or four specific courses did not seem like a good plan. However, most states have open records acts that entitle members of the public to certain records held by government agencies and units, usually including universities. Requests to universities are typically handled by the university’s general counsel’s office or someone else dedicated to navigating the university’s data systems in order to identify, retrieve, and provide the information requested.
Relying on these laws meant limiting the study to the public universities that are subject to the laws. There are 87 public law schools. In addition to these schools being spread across the US, the schools vary tremendously in terms of numbers of students and faculty members, financial resources, standings in the rankings, and any other measure by which schools might be compared. While the names of elite private schools may pop into one’s mind when the discussion is tax education, there are also public schools at the top of any list, and the bottom of these lists have at least as many private as public schools.
Analyzing the enrollment of Advanced JD Students in four different tax courses at 87 law schools over a decade was impractical. Instead, I sought to analyze the flagship university law school in each state. By “flagship,” I meant to include the law school best known outside its own state. To determine this, I took the highest ranked public law school in each state as determined by peer votes on reputation in the 2023 U.S. News and World Report (USNWR) law school ranking. Many states have only one public law school, while others, especially larger population states, have several. In the event there was a second public law school within the state that was within 20 places of the highest peer-ranked public school, I counted both. For example, by this method, I included the law schools at both the University of California at Berkeley and the University of California at Los Angeles.
For each of these flagship schools, I gathered the course name and number of its relevant tax courses from its course catalog. I then made a request under the relevant state law for the JD enrollment of students in those courses between 2012/2013 and 2021/2022. I requested the information from 53 public schools. Some of these schools either failed to provide the information or provided incomplete information. A total of 40 schools responded with complete information. This is more than 20% of all ABA accredited law schools in the US. The schools studied are as follows.
(1) University of Arizona (James E. Rogers) College of Law
(2) University of California, Berkeley School of Law
(3) University of California, Los Angeles School of Law
(4) University of Colorado School of Law
(5) University of Connecticut School of Law
(6) Florida State University College of Law
(7) University of Georgia School of Law
(8) Georgia State University College of Law
(9) University of Hawaii (William S. Richardson) School of Law
(10) University of Idaho College of Law
(11) University of Illinois College of Law
(12) Indiana University (Maurer) School of Law
(13) University of Iowa College of Law
(14) University of Kansas School of Law
(15) University of Kentucky (J. David Rosenberg) College of Law
(16) Louisiana State University (Paul M. Herbert) Law Center
(17) University of Maine School of Law
(18) University of Maryland School of Law
(19) University of Massachusetts School of Law
(20) University of Michigan Law School
(21) University of Minnesota School of Law
(22) University of Mississippi School of Law
(23) University of Montana School of Law
(24) University of Nebraska (Lincoln) College of Law
(25) University of Nevada, Las Vegas (William S. Boyd) School of Law
(26) University of New Mexico School of Law
(27) State University of New York, University at Buffalo Law School
(28) University of North Dakota School of Law
(29) The Ohio State University (Michael E. Moritz) College of Law
(30) University of Oklahoma College of Law
(31) University of Oregon School of Law
(32) University of Pittsburgh School of Law
(33) University of South Carolina School of Law
(34) University of South Dakota (Knudson) School of Law
(35) University of Texas School of Law
(36) University of Utah (S.J. Quinney) College of Law
(37) University of Washington School of Law
(38) West Virginia University College of Law
(39) University of Wisconsin Law School
(40) University of Wyoming College of Law
One concern I had with undertaking this project was that the result might be read as a ranking of law schools’ tax programs. My goal was to provide useful information to tax professors for assessing their own school’s tax education, and some thoughts on how tax professors might work to improve their own school’s situation, and to encourage tax professors across schools to collaborate with one another and with other tax professionals. Ranking or otherwise enabling criticism or, for that matter, praise of this or that particular school based on courses offered and enrollment numbers would be ridiculous. Thus, I have minimized the naming of particular schools to one instance. For those who are curious about the enrollment at my own school, the University of Washington School of Law, I point them to the university website where this information is publicized.
In addition to the Standard 509 Disclosures, which provided information on Advanced JD Student enrollments, and the responses of the 40 schools with the information on enrollment in the specified tax courses, I also wanted to determine the number of faculty teaching tax law at these schools. Carney had estimated a significant decline in the relative number of tax professors among law school professors between 1973 and 2017 (46.4%), and Lawton and Daly had noted a shortage in UK law schools. I wanted to determine the extent of any decline in tax faculty numbers at these 40 public schools between 2012/2013 and 2021/2022. Carney, having embarked on a far broader project than my own, estimated the number of law professors by measuring the columns listing professors for specific courses in the AALS Directory of Law Teachers editions from 1973 through 2017. With my narrower focus, I simply counted those listed for teaching Federal Taxation at the 40 schools for the editions from 2012 through 2021. As Carney acknowledged, this directory is not a perfect source for the information, containing, as he noted, the names of retired professors, and, as I discovered, repeats of names. Given that it relies on self-reporting, presumably there are also omissions. Although it is not perfect, no other source comes to mind, especially for counting over a 10-year period.
Having gathered the Advanced JD Student enrollment numbers, and the tax course enrollment numbers, across the decade, I hoped to find some insights into any changes. As Carney had suggested a connection between an increase in elective course offerings at law schools between 1973 and 2017 and a decline in the prominence of tax law at law schools, I explored whether any change in the number of courses beyond the first year (“Advanced Courses”) offered at these 40 schools between 2012/2013 and 2021/2022 seemed related to any change in the number of students enrolled in their tax courses. Each law school’s 509 Disclosure includes the school’s count of Advanced Courses. Daly and Lawton suggested a connection between the elimination of tax as a requirement of the LLB degree and the subsequent decline in demand for it by LLB students. And some professors at the 2023 AALS Tax Section believed their tax course enrollment declinesreflected the elimination of tax from their state’s bar exam. Thus, I wanted to investigate whether tax being on the bar likely affected any change seen in enrollment in tax courses. Finally, knowing both about the under-representation of women in the ABA Tax Section and the decline in men completing undergraduate degrees and enrolling in law schools, I wondered if any changes in the gender of Advanced JD Students might be connected to changes seen in tax course enrollment.
Between 2012/2013 and 2021/2022, the total number of Advanced JD Students at the 40 schools studied decreased 13.7% from 383.8 per school to 331.3, on average. The enrollment in Federal Tax, Corporate Tax, and Business Entities Tax also decreased, but not by just 13.7%. Business Entities Tax enrollment decreased by more than three times that amount, 41.4%; Federal Tax by close to two-and-three-quarters times that amount, 37.0%; and Corporate Tax by almost twice that amount, 27.0%. Interestingly, despite those decreases, enrollment in Partnership Tax actually increased during this period—by 13.9%.
Whatever is occurring with tax course enrollments, it is within the context of law school enrollment generally. The decade studied was lean in law students. In 2012/2013, there were 15,351 Advanced JD Students enrolled in the 40 schools, but in 2021/2022 there were 13,253, a 13.7% decrease. However, 2020/2021 and 2021/2022 had higher enrollments than 2015/2016-2019/2020. Nevertheless, as can be seen in the following chart, the downward trend over the decade would itself account for law professors’ impression that they were teaching fewer students, be it in tax courses or otherwise.
Most tax professors will never have looked at the numbers of students at 40 schools, so seeing a decline from 15,351 to 13,253 may not mean much. However, we are all familiar with the number of students in our own schools and we know whether our own school is relatively large or small (or about average). Looking at enrollment among the schools is thus more helpful.
Among the 40 schools, the mean enrollment of advanced JD students between 2012/2013 and 2021/2022 was 331.9. In 2012/2013, the mean was 383.8 and in 2021/2022, 331.3. Two schools enrolled the same number in 2021/2022 as in 2012/2013. Six schools had a higher enrollment in 2021/2022 than in 2012/2013: One increased from 594 to 704 (+110); one from 241 to 306 (+65); one from 206 to 230 (+24); one from 453 to 476 (+23); one from 255 to 274 (+19); and one from 419 to 420 (+1). All of the other schools had a lower enrollment in 2021/2022 than in 2012/2013. Outside one standard deviation: the school with the highest enrollment in 2012/2013 enrolled 780; in 2021/2022 the highest enrollment was 704; the lowest in 2012/2013, 152; the lowest in 2021/2022, 146. The chart below shows the mean enrollment of the schools for each year and one standard deviation above and below.
All of the 40 schools offered Federal Tax. Four of the schools semi-required it, meaning it was one of several electives in a category from which students must choose (e.g., a “code class.”) Five of the 40 schools offered only Federal Tax. Twenty-one of the 40 schools offered Corporation Tax, and 20 offered Partnership Tax. Seventeen of the 40 schools offered Business Entities Tax. Fourteen of the schools that offered Business Entities Tax did not offer a separate course in Corporation Tax or Partnership Tax; that is, Business Entities Tax was offered in lieu of Corporation Tax or Partnership Tax. One of the schools offered courses in Business Entities, Corporation Tax, and Partnership Tax; that is, Business Entities Tax was offered in addition to both of those courses. Two of the schools offered the Business Entities Tax course in years in which neither Corporation Tax nor Partnership Tax were offered; that is, at these schools, Business Entities Tax alternated with the other courses.
Considering changes in the total enrollment in Federal Tax across the 40 schools, we see that there were fewer law students at those schools graduating with familiarity with the fundamentals of tax at the end of the decade than there were at the beginning. In 2012/2013, there were 3,552 Advanced JD Students enrolled in the Federal Tax courses at the 40 schools, but in 2021/2022 there were 2,238. That is, 1,314 fewer students were enrolled in Federal Tax in 2021/2022 than 2012/2013, a 37.0% decrease. The chart below shows the total Federal Tax enrollment over the decade.
Again, looking at total numbers across 40 schools is not likely to be immediately relatable, but looking at the enrollment on a per-school basis likely is. Among the 40 schools, the mean enrollment in Federal Tax between 2012/2013 and 2021/2022 was 65.6. In 2012/2013, the mean was 88.8, and in 2021/2022, 56.0. Eight schools had a higher Federal Tax enrollment in 2021/2022 than in 2012/2013: one increased from 10 to 32 (+22); one, 112 to 130 (+18); one, 207 to 220 (+13); one, 33 to 44 (+11); one, 36 to 44 (+8); one, 10 to 12 (+2); one, 25 to 26 (+1); and one, 31 to 32 (+1). All of the other schools had a lower Federal Tax enrollment in 2021/2022 than in 2012/2013. Outside one standard deviation: the school with the highest enrollment in 2012/2013 enrolled 207 in Federal Tax; in 2021/2022 the highest enrollment was 220; the lowest in 2012/2013, 10 (at two schools); the lowest in 2021/2022, 10 (at one school), 12. In each of the years 2018/2019 and 2020/2021, one school failed to enroll any students in Federal Tax. One of these schools was below the mean of enrollment of Advanced JD Students in its zero-enrollment year (240 students in 2018; the mean was 304.5), and one was below one standard deviation in its zero-enrollment year (152 in 2020; the mean was 335.9 and one standard deviation was 151.0). The chart below shows the mean enrollment in Federal Tax for each year and one standard deviation above and below.
The numbers in the charts above reflect the combination of the 40 schools. For individual professors who want to assess the state of tax education at their own schools, perhaps the most useful measure is the percentage of a school’s Advanced JD Students who are enrolled in Federal Tax. After all, the Advanced JD Student enrollment varies widely among schools. In this period, among these schools, it ranged from one school’s 146 (2020/2021) to another school’s 780 (2012/2013).
From 2012/2013–2021/2022, the average school enrolled 20.8% of its Advanced JD Students in Federal Tax. In 2012/2013, the mean percentage of enrollment in Federal Tax was 23.7% but by 2021/2022 it was only 17.7%, a decrease of 25.3%. In 2012/2013, outside one standard deviation the lowest percentage of enrollment at a school was 4.1% and the highest 45.8%. In 2021/2022, the lowest percentage of enrollment at a school was 5.4% and the highest 44.1%. In 2012/2013, five schools each enrolled more than 33.4% of their Advanced JD Students in Federal Tax, and six schools each enrolled less than 13.8%. In 2021/2022, three schools each enrolled more than 33.4%, and 12 schools each enrolled less than 13.8%. The chart below shows the mean percentage of school’s Advanced JD Students enrolled in Federal Tax and one standard deviation above and below.
Students may enroll in Federal Tax for various reasons. It may be tested on the bar exam, or routinely suggested as an important part of a broad legal education, or students may hear others have enjoyed the professor or the course, or it may be the least unappealing of the courses that fit a slot on their schedule. Of course, some students who enroll in Federal Tax do so out of a preexisting interest in studying tax, perhaps for its political importance, or its importance for their intended specialization, or because they intend to specialize in tax. But students who enroll in Corporation Tax tend to have a narrower range of motivations. They usually do so because they intend to specialize either in tax advising specifically or business advising generally. In fact, given that corporations are the one type of business entity almost everyone has heard about, some law students may consider “corporations” and “business” as near synonyms (before taking the course in Corporation Tax and learning otherwise). Thus, the number of Advanced JD Students enrolling in Corporation Tax is an estimate of the number particularly interested in business generally or tax specifically as a professional focus.
Twenty-one of the 40 schools offered a Corporation Tax course during the decade. In 2012/2013, there were 344 advanced JD students enrolled in the Corporation Tax courses at these 21 schools, but in 2021/2022 there were 251—a 27.0% decrease. See the chart below for Corporation Tax enrollment.
How was that loss of 93 students spread among the 21 schools that offered Corporation Tax? Their mean enrollment of Advanced JD Students in Corporation Tax between 2012/2013 and 2021/2022 was 14.8. In 2012/2013, the mean was 17.2 and in 2021/2022, 12.6. Four schools had the same enrollment in 2012/2013 and 2021/2022. Eight schools had a higher Corporation Tax enrollment in 2021/2022 than in 2012/2013: one school increased from nine to 25 (+16); one, 13 to 28 (+15); one 0 to eight (+8); one, 11 to 16 (+5); one, eight to 11 (+3); one 0 to three (+3); one, 17 to 19 (+2); one 23 to 24 (+1). Nine schools had a lower Corporation Tax enrollment in 2021/2022 than in 2012/2013: one school decreased from 39 to 0 (-39); one, 29 to six (-23); one, 30 to nine (-21); one, 34 to 15 (-19); one, 29 to 17 (-12); one, 10 to 0 (-10); one 16 to seven (-9); one, 12 to four (-8); and one 13 to eight (-5). Outside one standard deviation: the school with the highest Corporation Tax enrollment in 2012/2013 had 39 students; in 2021/2022, the highest enrollment was 28; the lowest Corporation Tax enrollment in 2012/2013 was eight; the lowest in 2021/2022, zero in two schools. The two schools with zero enrollment in 2021/2022 had higher than average enrollments in other years: one enrolled that 39 students in 2012/2013, and the other enrolled up to 17 (in 2016). The chart below shows the mean enrollment of Advanced JD Students in Corporation Tax and one standard deviation above and below.
The 21 schools offering Corporation Tax ranged significantly in their total enrollment of Advanced JD Students: from 142 (in 2017/2018 and 2018/2019) to 756 (in 2012/2013). Knowing how the loss of 93 students was spread across those schools is less useful to individual tax professors who want to assess the state of their own school’s enrollment in Corporation Tax than knowing the percentage of Advanced JD Students who enrolled.
From 2012/2013 through 2021/2022, the mean percentage of enrollment of Advanced JD Students in Corporation Tax at these schools was 4.4%. In 2012/2013, the mean enrollment was 4.2%. In 2012/2013, outside one standard deviation: one school enrolled 7.9% and one, 15.3%; and two schools enrolled 0%. In 2021/2022, the mean enrollment was 3.9%; the highest enrollment percentage at a school in 2012/2013 was 15.3%; in 2021/2022, the highest enrollment percentage was 9.0%, by two schools; and the lowest enrollment was 0%, again by two schools. The highest enrollment percentage at a school during the decade was 16.6% (in 2016/2017). In all but one year, there were one-to-three schools with 0% enrolled; seven different schools had a 0% enrollment in at least one year. The chart below shows the mean percentage of schools’ Advanced JD Students enrolled in Corporation Tax, one standard deviation above the mean, and the lowest enrollment percentage (above zero) each year.
The motivation of students who enroll in Corporation Tax, who would likely be more focused on business or tax advising as a professional specialization, would be shared by those enrolling Business Entities Tax. Most schools offering the latter do not offer the former. Business Entities Tax being a survey of different types of entities may indeed make it even more appealing to those students focused more on general business advising. As with the changes in the number of Advanced JD Students enrolling in Corporation Tax, changes in enrollment in Business Entities Tax is an estimate of likely changes in the supply of business and tax lawyers.
Seventeen of the 40 schools offered a Business Entities Tax course during the decade. In 2012/2013, there were 336 Advanced JD Students enrolled in the Business Entities Tax courses of these 17 schools but in 2021/2022 there were 197, a 41.4% decrease. The chart below shows the total Advanced JD Student enrollment in Business Entities Tax for the decade.
How was the loss of those 139 students from Business Entities Tax spread among the17 schools offering it? Their mean enrollment in Business Entities Tax between 2012/2013 and 2021/2022 was 13.4. In 2012/2013, the mean was 19.8 and in 2021/2022, 12.3. Three schools had the same Business Entities Tax enrollment in 2012/2013 and 2021/2022. Five schools had a higher Business Entities Tax Course enrollment in 2021/2022 than in 2012/2013: One school increased from three to 15 (+12); one from 0 to 10 (+10); one from 0 to nine (+9); one from 0 to four (+4); one from eight to 11 (+3). Nine schools decreased: 72 to 26 (-46); 59 to 21 (-38); 42 to 17 (-25); 26 to 10 (-16); 26 to 12 (-14); 21 to 8 (-13); 11 to 0 (-11); 8 to 0 (-8); and 20 to 14 (-6). The chart below shows the mean, highest enrollment, and lowest enrollment greater than zero in each year. In each year, there were three-to-six schools with zero enrollment in Business Entities Tax. In 2012/2013, there were five; in 2021/2022 there were three. There were nine schools with zero enrollment in one or more years; however, in other years, those schools enrolled as many as 26, 24, 21, 17, 13, 11, 10, 8, and 5.
The 17 schools that offered Business Entities Tax varied in total enrollment size across the years from 142 (in 2017 and 2018) to 756 (in 2012). What does the Business Entities Tax enrollment look like as a percentage of the Advanced JD Students? From 2012/2013 to 2021/2022, the mean percentage of enrollment of Advanced JD Students in Business Entities Tax at these schools was 4.8%. In 2012/2013, the mean enrollment was 5.1%. In 2012/2013, five schools enrolled zero percent. In 2021/2022, the mean enrollment was 4.5%; three schools enrolled zero percent in 2021/2022. In each year, there were three-to-six schools with zero percent enrolled. For enrollment of Advanced JD Students in Business Entities Tax, the chart below shows the mean enrollment percentage, highest enrollment percentage, and lowest enrollment percentage greater than zero in each year.
Partnership Tax does not have a great reputation. No one suggests it is part of a broad legal education; no one enrolls because it is offered at a convenient time of day or because they hear the professor is funny. Students interested in business advising generally, and not tax specifically, are presumablyless likely to enroll in Partnership Tax than Corporation Tax. I suspect it is the complexities of Partnership Tax and the shortage of professors interested in teaching it that tipped the scales at some schools to offer Business Entities Tax as a survey of corporation and partnership taxation. For these reasons, changes in enrollment in Partnership Tax may be an estimate of law student interest in tax advising specifically.
Twenty of the 40 schools offered a Partnership Tax course during the decade. In 2012/2013, there were 173 advanced JD students enrolled in the Partnership Tax courses at these 20 schools, but in 2021/2022 there were 197, a 13.9 % increase. See the chart below.
How was the gain of 24 allocated among the 20 schools? Their mean enrollment in Partnership Tax between 2012/2013 and 2021/2022 was 8.9. In 2012/2013, the mean was 9.1 and in 2021/2022, 10.4. Three schools had the same enrollment in 2012/2013 and 2021/2022. Six schools had a lower Partnership Tax enrollment in 2021/2022 than in 2012/2013: One dropped from 27 to 8 (-19); one, 27 to 10 (-17); one, 12 to 0 (-12); one, 16 to 10 (-6); one, seven to five (-2); and one, six to five (-1). Eleven schools’ enrollment increased: one school’s enrollment increased from 11 to 12 (+1); one, 14 to 16 (+2); one, 19 to 21 (+2); one, nine to 11 (+2); one, zero to five (+5); one, zero to eight (+8); one, 11 to 20 (+9); one, 0 to 10 (+10); one, seven to 19 (+12); one 0 to 14 (+14); and one, 0 to 16 (+16). In each year, one to six schools had zero enrollment in Partnership Tax. A total of 13 schools had zero enrollment in at least one year. At one of those schools, the zero enrollment was every other year, suggesting an intention to enroll students in Partnership Tax once each two years. None of the other zero enrollment schools had this pattern. Of the 13 schools that had zero enrollment in Partnership Tax in one or more years, each also enrolled higher than the mean in another year; the highest enrollment for each of those schools in some year in the decade: 34, 27, 25, 24, 22, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 14, 14, and 10. For Advanced JD Students in Partnership Tax, the chart below shows the mean, highest enrollment, and lowest enrollment greater than zero in each year.
The 20 schools that offered Partnership Tax ranged from 142 Advanced JD Students (in 2017 and 2018) to 756 (in 2012). What does the Partnership Tax enrollment look like as a percentage of the Advanced JD Students? From 2012/2013–2021/2022, the mean percentage of enrollment of Advanced JD Students in Partnership Tax at these schools was 2.8%. In 2012/2013, the mean enrollment was 2.6%; six schools enrolled 0%. In 2021/2022, the mean enrollment was 3.9% and two schools enrolled 0%. The highest percentage enrollment in Partnership Tax at a school in 2012/2013 was 9.1%; in 2021/2022 the highest enrollment percentage was 9.3%. The highest enrollment percentage at a school during the decade was 10.3% in 2013. In each year, there were one to six schools with 0% enrolled. For enrollment of Advanced JD Students in Partnership Tax, the chart below shows the mean enrollment percentage, highest enrollment percentage, and lowest enrollment percentage greater than zero in each year.
What might account for the changes in enrollment in these tax courses? Are there interesting relationships with other numbers? If, as Carney suggested, the number of tax law faculty have been in relative decline since 1973, what was the change in the number of tax law professors between 2012/2013 and 2021/2022? Might the decrease in tax course enrollment be due to increasing electives that students prefer to tax? How many states dropped tax from the bar exam between 2012/2013 and 2021/2022, and did that have an impact on tax course enrollment? Might changes in the shares of men and women who are law students have an impact on tax course enrollment? Does semi-requiring Federal Tax improve enrollment?
In 2012/2013, the AALS directory listed 100 tax professors at the 40 schools studied, and in 2021/2022, 101 were listed. Over the decade, the number of listed tax professors ranged from 100 to 115 (2014 and 2019). The mean was 107.3 tax professors; that would be two to three tax professors for each of the 40 schools. The number of tax professors at the 40 schools between 2012/2013 and 2021/2022 was quite steady.
This count contrasts with Carney’s estimates about the number of tax law professors between 1973 and 2017. But Carney estimated the decline of tax law professors relative to the total of all law professors, not an absolute decline; it would be interesting to know if tax law professors remained steady between 2012/2013 and 2021/2022 but declined relatively. Carney also considered a much longer period, and, as a practicality of such a long period and covering all types of professors (not just tax), he relied on estimating by measuring printed text columns; I counted names. But regardless of the arc of history for tax professors over the past half-century, it appears that, on balance, retirements and other departures have been filled over the past decade or so. This is in contrast with the UK situation in which such vacancies often go unfilled.
In 2012/2013, there were 5,582 advanced courses offered at the studied schools and in 2021/2022 there were 5,530, a 0.9% decrease. However, 2021/2022 had the fourth highest number of advanced courses offered in the decade: only 2012/2013 (5,582), 2013 (5,547), and 2017 (5,658) offered more. The highest year (2017/2018) happened to be the year of the lowest enrollment of advanced JD students in the decade. Twenty-seven schools increased their offerings in that year. The ten schools that increased their offerings the most provided 380 additional courses. Perhaps the increase in advanced course offerings, even though the number of Advanced JD Students decreased that year reflected curricular reaction to Donald Trump becoming President in January 2017— a curricular equivalent to the “Trump bump” in law school applications. Whatever the cause of the 2017 spike, the next three years (2018, 2019, and 2020) had the lowest advanced course offerings of the decade. The increase in 2020/2021 and again in 2021/2022 is interesting, as these were the academic years most impacted by reactions to COVID. Despite what may have been increases in reaction to President Trump and COVID, the trend in advanced offerings over the decade was downward. The chart below shows the total Advanced Courses offered during the period.
Among the 40 schools studied, the mean advanced courses offered between 2012/2013 and 2021/2022 was 136.5. In 2012/2013, the mean was 139.6; the highest offering was 296 and the lowest was 49. In 2021/2022, the mean offering was 138.3; the highest was 326 and the lowest was 61. One school had the same number offered in 2012/2013 and 2021/2022. Twenty-three schools offered fewer advanced courses: one offered 107 fewer (a 35.8% decrease); three offered 41-50 fewer (a 21.2%-33.1% decrease); four offered 21-38 fewer (a 12.8%-19.4% decrease); six offered 10-16 fewer (a 4.9%-13.8% decrease); and nine offered one to nine fewer (a 1.1 %- 9.9 % decrease). On average, each of these schools offered 20.8 fewer courses. Sixteen schools offered more advanced courses in 2021/2022 than in 2012/2013. Seven schools offered 2-16 more courses in 2021/2022 than in 2012/2013 (a 0.8%-8.3% increase); three schools offered 23-26 more courses (a 17.6%-53.1% increase); five schools offered 38-52 more courses (a 38.3%-64.3% increase); and one school offered 78 more (a 31.5% increase). On average, each of these schools offered 26.6 more courses. Not surprisingly, the schools that enrolled more Advanced JD Students during the 2012/2013-2021/2022 also offered more advanced courses. The chart below shows the mean advanced course offerings for the schools and one standard deviation above and below.
Among the 16 schools that increased their Advanced Course offerings over the decade, the number of students enrolled in Federal Tax decreased. There was a negative correlation of 89.6% between the number of Advanced Courses and enrollment in Federal Tax, and an ordinary least squares regression analysis associates the increase in Advanced Courses with 80.3% of the variability in Federal Tax enrollment. The following chart shows the increase in advanced course offerings and the decrease in Federal Tax enrollment during the decade. The same increase of Advanced Course offerings did not have a strong (positive or negative) relationship with enrollment in Corporation Tax, Partnership Tax, or Business Entities Tax. This suggests that students who enrolled in these advanced tax electives had a firmer interest in studying tax.
For some schools, one possible explanation for decreased enrollment in Federal Tax is the fact that tax ceased to be tested on the school’s home state bar exam during the study period. This intuitive explanation was offered by some AALS Tax Section professors as to why enrollment had declined at their schools, and such a decline was seen in Scotland when tax was no longer required for the LLB. Of the U.S. law schools studied, only two of their home states now test tax on their bar exam: Wisconsin and Mississippi. Tax is tested on the Wisconsin bar exam, but graduates of law schools within Wisconsin that earn satisfactory grades in specified courses need not take the bar exam; tax, however, is not one of those specified courses. Although I am disinclined to publicize data on particular schools in this Article, discussing the Mississippi bar exam’s effect on law students’ course choices obviously means discussing the University of Mississippi’s students. Tax being on their bar exam does not appear to impact their enrollment in tax as University of Mississippi students enroll in Federal Tax at almost exactly the average percentage of all of the 40 studied schools.
Of the home states of schools studied, there are 11 that dropped tax from the bar exam between 2012/2013 and 2021/2022. These are listed below.
Year Tax Dropped |
|
Illinois |
2019 |
Indiana |
2021 |
Kentucky |
2017 |
Maine |
2017 |
Minnesota |
2014 |
Montana |
2013 |
Oklahoma |
2021 |
Oregon |
2017 |
Pennsylvania |
2022 |
Texas |
2021 |
Utah |
2013 |
For the schools in states that dropped tax from the bar exam, I compared the mean percentage of Advanced JD Students enrolled in Federal Tax in the academic years before tax was dropped (Period I) with the mean percentage enrolled in Federal Tax in the academic year in which tax was dropped and those afterward (Period II). Since Pennsylvania dropped tax in the final year covered in the study, and Montana and Utah dropped it in the first year, these comparisons could not be made for those schools. As for the other eight, on average, these schools enrolled 27.6% of their Advanced JD Students in Federal Tax in their respective Periods I and 21.1% in their respective Periods II; that is, there was a 23.8 % decrease between those schools’ Periods I and I. For each relevant Period I and Period II, I calculated the mean enrollment in Federal Tax of all the schools other than those in Mississippi and Wisconsin and the schools in states that dropped tax from the bar exam during the decade. For these schools, the average of the mean enrollment of Advanced JD Students in Federal Tax for all Periods I was 20.4% and for all Periods II was 17.6%; that is a 13.8% decrease. Thus, on average, the schools in states that dropped tax from the bar exam had a greater decrease in Federal Tax enrollment (23.8%) following the change in the bar exam than did other schools when the same sets of years are compared (13.8%).
Between 2012/2013 and 2021/2022, there was a decrease in men enrolled as Advanced JD Students in the 40 studied schools: 8,537 to 6,206, which is a 27.3% decline. Only four of the schools did not have a decrease in men enrolled between 2012/2013 and 2021/2022. The other 36 had declines ranging from 9.5% to 59.8%.The chart below shows the total men enrolled as Advanced JD Students in each year from 2012/2013–2021/2022 and the Federal Tax enrollment.
The loss of men as law students at these schools is very closely related to the loss of law students from Federal Tax there. There is a positive correlation of 98.8% between the decrease in men as Advanced JD Students and the decrease in Federal Tax enrollment. An ordinary least squares regression analysis associates the decrease in men with 97.5% of the variability in Federal Tax enrollment. Of course, total Advanced JD Student enrollment decreased during the period. But the total decrease in Advanced JD Students is not as closely associated with the decrease in Federal Tax enrollment: a positive correlation of 88.0% between the decrease in total Advanced JD Students and the Federal Tax enrollment decrease, and an association of 77.5% of that decrease in total enrollment with the variability in Federal Tax enrollment.
The decrease in men who are Advanced JD Students, and the decrease in Federal Tax Enrollment, should be considered within the context of the apparent underrepresentation of women among tax lawyers. Although there is no census of U.S. tax lawyers that would reveal the number of women in the tax bar, the Tax Section of the American Bar Association has a lower percentage of women members (25%) than any other specialty section except Construction Law (24%). I also note that, in my counting of tax law professors at the 40 studied schools, the percentage who were women ranged from 13.0% (2019) to 27.2% (2021); the mean across the years was 22.7%. In contrast to tax lawyers, there are more women who are practicing accountants then men. There also are more women than men completing accounting degrees at both the undergraduate and graduate level. The role of gender in tax studies and the tax professions is beyond the scope of this research; but research should be undertaken, especially given the gender representation difference between the lawyers and the accountants who share the tax field.
Four of the schools semi-require tax, meaning that tax is in a category of courses from which students must take a specified number in order to graduate with the JD. What is the effect of this type of requirement on enrollment in Federal Tax? When looking at schools by the mean percentage of their Advanced JD Students enrolled in Federal Tax over the decade, the mean percentage is 20.8%, and the top of one standard deviation is 29.2%. Two of the schools semi-requiring Federal Tax had a mean percentage enrolled over the decade above that: 38.5% and 35.4%. The third was at 27.1%. However, the fourth was at 12.8%; that was the lowest percentage still within one standard deviation below the mean (12.4%). That school, and the school enrolling 27.1%, offer no tax courses beyond Federal Tax.
Four observations can be made about these schools. First, each of these four schools had an Advanced JD Student enrollment below the mean over the decade (332). Second, each school had below the mean number of Advanced Courses offered by all the schools over the decade. In fact, the four school offerings were well below the average; for all schools the average was 132, but the four semi-requiring tax, it was 75.
Third, as to the two schools that offer courses other than Federal Tax, over the decade, each also enrolled a percentage of its Advanced JD Students in Corporation Tax that was above the mean. The mean acrossthe decade at all the schools offering Corporation Tax was 4.4% of their Advanced JD Students, with the top of one standard deviation being 6.8%. These two schools’ respective means over the decade were 8.2% and 8.3%. For Partnership Tax, the mean over the decade for all schools offering it was 2.8%. These two schools had respective means of 1.7% and 7.2%, with the latter being the strongest of all 40 schools.
Finally, as to the two schools that enrolled an average of 38.5% and 35.4% of their Advanced JD Students in Federal Tax over the decade, it is interesting to note the semi-requirement of that course was added more than halfway through the decade at each. What is especially notable is that, even before Federal Tax was added as a semi-requirement, those two schools were already enrolling their Advanced JD Students at a rate above the top of one standard deviation from the mean. In other words, it appears that one of the consequences of those schools having a strong Federal Tax enrollment was the faculty adding Federal Tax as a semi-requirement; the strong tax culture was not created by the dictate but, rather, the dictate reflected it. As to what contributes towards that strong culture, I note each of those schools has a Federal Tax professor who has won teaching awards, serves as an associate dean, publishes regularly on a range of topics and in different formats, and teaches advanced tax courses.
Total law school enrollment at the schools studied declined, so, not surprisingly, there were fewer law students who studied tax and, thus, fewer lawyers who graduated from those schools familiar with tax law. But it is not only that there are fewer lawyers who have studied tax, but that the percentage of law students studying basic Federal Tax has declined. With the decrease in supply of tax accountants, those eventual lawyers will have fewer accountants to whom to refer their clients for tax advice. There also will be fewer tax experts to note and solve the problems of tax legislators and tax agencies. While much of what has driven the decrease in the rate at which law students study Federal Tax may be outside the influence of tax law professors, cues can be taken from accountants on what is motivating students, innovations needed in tax courses, and collaborations with professionals.
There is both good news and bad news about the state of tax education in law schools. The good news includes the extent to which tax is being taught in law schools. While only 28 out of 140 UK law schools offer a tax course, all of the 40 U.S. law schools studied offered at least one, the introductory Federal Tax course. Thirty-five of the 40 offered at least one advanced course, and 20 of the 40 offered at least two advanced courses. In sum, U.S. law schools are offering good opportunities for law students to study tax with no decline in the offerings in the decade studied.
More good news is as to the number of tax law professors. While tax law professors may be in short supply in the UK, and their relative share of the total U.S. law faculty count may be lower than 50 years ago, in the U.S. the number remained steady in 2012/2013 through 2021/2022, meaning that, on balance, retirements and departures were filled.By this measure, and particularly relative to , the situation in the UK, tax law education in U.S. law schools is solid.
Other good news is that the percentage of Advanced JD Students enrolled in Partnership Tax increased from about 3% to about 4% over the decade, and the percentage enrolled in Corporation Tax and Business Entities was steady at about 4% for the former in 2012/2013 and 2021/2022 and about 5% for the latter. This means the share of law students with a strong interest in tax specifically or business generally has not declined. Indeed, even at the schools that increased their other elective offerings during this period, there was no negative impact on enrollment in the advanced tax courses. There is a reliable share of law students who progress from Federal Tax to the advanced tax courses, and that is encouraging.
However, even though the percentage of these students is steady, the overall decline in the number of Advanced JD Students means enrollment in the advanced tax courses declined. In Corporation Tax, the mean enrollment in 2012/2013 was 17 and it was 13 in 2021/22; in Business Entities Tax, the mean enrollment went from 20 to 12. In Partnership Tax it increased but only from 9 to 10. When enrollment in courses is consistently at a dozen or fewer, it is reasonable to expect some deans to question offering the course or, at least, having a full time law professor teach it if there are more pressing curricular needs the professor could cover. It also is reasonable to expect deans to question if retiring or otherwise departing tax specialists should be replaced with tax specialists. Unless there is a reversal in the decline in the law student population, over the long term, a specialization in which only about 1 in 20 students has a strong interest seems likely to be at-risk.
The most troubling news is the decline in the percentage of Advanced JD Students enrolling in Federal Tax, from about 24% to about 18%. Coupled with the decline in the student population itself, the mean enrollment in Federal Tax went from about 89 in 2012/2013 to about 56 in 2021/2022. Although the percentage of law students with a strong interest in tax has remained constant, the decline in the percentage without a strong interest but who have studied the basics is worrisome. It means that there will be less familiarity with tax law outside tax and business specializations. And if the number of Advanced JD Students electing to enroll in Federal Tax continues to decline, then the enrollment in the advanced tax courses will suffer. Improving enrollment in Federal Tax in law schools is essential to securing tax education in law schools.
What can law professors do to encourage enrollment inFederal Tax? Some law faculties formally advise students to study taxation as part of the substantive base of legal education. Presumably such advice is heeded by some students, but, remarkably, given that American legal education is comprised mostly of elective courses, there is no published research on how seriously law students take faculty advice on course selection or what else may motivate their choices. Students at the University of California, Irvine School of Law, informally surveyed second and third year law students about their priorities when selecting courses. As the first priority, the top four of the eight motivations listed: personal interest (whether or not intending to practice in the area); then schedule fit and bar preparation (equally); then the area of intended practice. The identity of the professor teaching the course was fifth out of eight, followed by seeking skills-based courses, courses in which the student is expected to do well grade-wise, and courses taken with friends. This informal list is not surprising to those of who have been through law school, and especially those of us who work in law schools: students balance factors when choosing courses.
There are factors out of any particular tax professor’s control that may impact enrollment in the courses the professor teaches. For example, Federal Tax might be scheduled at the same time as the ABA-mandated Professional Responsibility, and there may be a solid administrative rationale for that (at least on occasion). If a school significantly increases its advanced course offerings, that too may impact enrollment in Federal Tax; and such an increase might be driven less by adding what Carney described as “unnecessary and esoteric courses” as by external events. National trends, such as the decreasing number of Advanced JD Students and the declining share who are men are also beyond professors’ control but may impact enrollment in Federal Tax. More generally, whatever influence a tax professor might have in the admissions process, it is unlikely to include persuading the committee to make a significant effort to identify and favor applicants who express a strong interest in tax. Similarly, few tax professors are likely able to convince their colleagues that Federal Tax should be semi-required for the JD degree.
To learn what might be within tax professors’ control and useful to encouraging enrollment, I suggest learning from the accountants confronting their own dwindling student count. Tax lawyers and CPAs have always shared the Federal tax field. The two differ in strengths, with CPAs expert with the numbers and the lawyers with the words, but tax always involves both. There are different pathways into the professions: accounting is but one undergraduate major in business schools, while the JD is a graduate degree and there are no majors in law schools. Research suggests that there are also differences in what motivates those who choose accounting, and what motivates those who choose law. Those who become accountants tend to have been motivated more by job security and earnings potential, while those who become lawyers tend to be motivated more by job satisfaction and social status. Nevertheless, research suggests that, in terms of personality types, while lawyers, generally, tend to have a preference for intuition over sensing (that is, preferring to consider information abstractly than in its details), tax lawyers are more similar to accountants in that both tax lawyers and accountants tend to have a sensing preference (that is, be more detail-oriented). As a bottom line on their commonalities: it is now quite common for law graduates committed to tax to be working in accounting firms rather than law firms.
What can tax law professors learn from accountants? First, that whatever the supply of tax law students or accounting students, there is demand for tax expertise. While tax professors can make no guarantees of employment to students interested in tax, we can make ourselves aware of the employment market and share the best information we have and, if need be, expand our notion of good employment for law graduates to include accounting firms, especially if the shortage in tax expertise there persists. Second, that the decreasing number of students is a problem for the profession, not just the professors. The AICPA has undertaken high school pipeline projects, financial scholarships, and collaborated in the development of a low cost distance learning program for new accountants who intend to seek CPA certification and work in participating firms. Tax professors can keep the tax bar updated on enrollment trends; advocate for tax course scholarships to encourage enrollment; and look for opportunities to work with tax bar organizations and employers to more clearly mark and then facilitate the path from tax student to tax lawyer. Accounting professors are being encouraged to innovate with their curriculum, working not only to improve student experiences with introductory courses, but also to increase the appeal to students and their engagement by incorporating more digital components, focusing on skills demanded by employers, and by emphasizing social responsibilities. Tax law professors should be similarly encouraged; there is a growing literature on teaching tax.
One problem tax law professors have to address that tax accounting professors do not is how better to engage women. Perhaps women who would be the most likely to head towards tax in law school never enter law schools, having become accountants instead. But putting aside the women who enter tax without entering law school, we know that there are women law students who prefer to enroll in other courses; given that the share of law students who are women has increased while the number of law students who enrolled in tax courses has decreased, women law students preferring other courses is a specific challenge. To the extent their preferences reflect misunderstandings of tax as a subject or as a profession, we should find good ways to provide good information.
One challenge for tax law professors seeking to persuade law students to enroll is that, as tax is not a first-year course, most of us are unlikely to have personal contact with first year students prior to their making second-year enrollment decisions. Given the nature of tax practice, most first-year students will not have been exposed to tax professionals. We should participate in opportunities to meet those students, especially any opportunities to discuss career or course planning. Telling students about the supply of tax job openings, or how pervasive tax issues are, or how important tax is as a part of the knowledge base for lawyers, or even how much social good they might accomplish providing pro bono tax advice, advising tax-exempt organizations, or working on tax policy may persuade some who otherwise never would have enrolled. But most importantly, the students we should recruit are those likely to enjoy tax. Who are those students? Research shows that the motivations for individuals to pursue a career in tax are largely intrinsic. Tax professionals tend to enjoy learning, puzzling with details, and working with smart colleagues, and they tend to dislike adversarial situations. In my experience, tax law professors are the same. Our challenge, then, is to identify law students, particularly those in their first year, who likely are much as were in our first year: students who prefer intellectual challenges and personal relationships over debate and contention but whose exposure to tax law has been no more than their own Form 1040.
Some types of lawyers’ clients always need tax advice, and, sometimes, tax advice is needed by types of clients who usually do not need it. Tax is pervasive. Tax agencies and legislators, and not just private clients, need tax expertise, too, of course. Yet, to the extent the 40 studied schools are representative, the number of students enrolling in tax law courses is decreasing. While factors such as the number of electives a law school offers, the testing of tax on bar exams, or the number of students who enter the school and their gender mix may impact tax course enrollment, these are outside the control of individual tax law professors. Tax law professors should look for opportunities to collaborate with the tax bar to benefit and guide law students who may become interested in tax. We should keep up to date on employment opportunities for our students so that we can advise those students as to what opportunities exist and what skills are required. We especially should seek out those law students who are most likely to enjoy tax but are unlikely to have ever considered it, bearing in mind the specific need to engage women law students. We should make special efforts to continuously innovate in our tax teaching, adapting to changes in information technologies but remaining focused on enabling our students to solve detailed tax puzzles and to appreciate their social responsibilities. And we should bear in mind that, ultimately, the problem of the decline in tax studies does not need to be solved to protect our tax curriculum but to protect our tax system.
