February 6, 2026 · 6 min · Accountant SEO Company editorial team

What the AICPA Advertising Rule Means for Your Firm's Marketing

A plain reading of AICPA Code 1.600.001 and 1.600.010, why it reaches your marketer too, and example firm copy that is risky or safer.

Free firm review Accounting firm marketing

A tidy home office with two monitors, a filing tray and a plant

The AICPA rule does not stop a CPA firm from advertising. It stops advertising that is false, misleading or deceptive, and it makes you answerable for what anyone promoting your firm says on your behalf: a web designer, an SEO company, the person who writes your ads. In practice the risk sits in a short list of phrases: promised outcomes, implied pull with the IRS, and fees that look fixed but aren't.

This is a plain reading of the two sections, written for a partner reviewing a website or a vendor's draft. It is not legal advice. Your state board of accountancy has its own advertising rules, which may be stricter, and tax practice brings in others, such as Circular 230. Read the source text, and for anything near the line, ask your own counsel.

The two sections, in plain terms

Section 1.600.001 of the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct says a member in public practice shall not seek to obtain clients by advertising or other forms of solicitation in a manner that is false, misleading or deceptive. It also prohibits solicitation by coercion, over-reaching or harassing conduct.

Section 1.600.010 adds two things. Paragraph .01 deals with third parties. If you get the benefit of someone else's promotional efforts, you should make sure those efforts comply, because, in the Code's words, "members must not do through others what they are prohibited from doing themselves."

Paragraph .02 lists what makes promotional efforts false, misleading or deceptive. They fail if they:

create false or unjustified expectations of favorable results;
imply the ability to influence any court, tribunal, regulatory agency or similar body or official;
represent specific services for a stated fee, estimated fee or fee range when it was likely the fees would be substantially increased and the prospective client wasn't told;
contain any other representation likely to cause a reasonable person to misunderstand or be deceived.

The full text is in the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct. Read the section itself once rather than relying on summaries, this one included.

Four places to check on your own site

Each test in paragraph .02 maps to a part of a firm website you can review this week. The examples below are illustrations we wrote for this post, not quotes from any firm and not rulings on what a board would decide.

Outcome language

Test (a) catches copy that promises a result the firm doesn't control. A tax outcome depends on the client's facts and the law. An exam outcome depends on the documents and the examiner. The trouble starts when the copy sounds confident about the result instead of the work.

Example, risky: "We'll lower your tax bill."
Example, risky: a testimonial that reads "They saved me $40,000 in year one," shown with no context.
Example, safer: "We review your prior returns and your current year for planning opportunities, and explain each option before you decide."

The rule doesn't name testimonials, but a quote about a dramatic saving can set the same expectation as your own claim. If you use them, prefer ones about the service (responsiveness, clear explanations), and check whether your state board says anything about them.

Implied influence

Test (b) is about access. Stating someone's work history accurately is different from turning it into a suggestion of pull.

Example, risky: "Our former IRS agents know how to make problems go away."
Example, risky: "Our relationships at the IRS get cases closed faster."
Example, safer: "Two of our team previously worked at the IRS. We represent clients in examinations and collection matters. Outcomes depend on the facts of each case."

Tax practitioners have a second rule here. Under Circular 230, enrolled agents and certain other practitioners may not use the term "certified" or imply an employer/employee relationship with the IRS when describing their designation. "IRS-approved" next to a firm name is worth removing on that basis alone.

Fees that look fixed

Test (c) applies wherever a page shows a price. Publishing fees is not the problem. A starting price that few clients end up paying, with nothing about what raises it, is.

Say a page reads "Business returns from $500," and last season's invoices show most business returns billed at two or three times that. That gap is what the test describes. A safer version names the scope behind the number: "Business returns start at $500 for a single-member LLC with reconciled books. Partnerships, multi-state filings and catch-up bookkeeping add to the fee. We quote in writing after reviewing your prior return."

The check is mechanical. Pull last season's invoices for every service with a published price and compare.

Everything else a reasonable person might misread

Test (d) is the catch-all. Typical candidates:

Example, risky: "Rated the best CPA firm in [city]," with no source.
Example, risky: "the top tax firm in the state," or an award badge nobody at the firm can trace.
Example, risky: a team page using stock photos captioned with staff names, or "our CPAs" when one partner holds the license.
Example, safer: "A licensed CPA firm in [state], serving [city] businesses since [year]."

The third-party paragraph and your marketer

This is the part firms tend to skip. Paragraph .01 means a vendor's copy is treated as your responsibility. That covers website text, ads, Google Business Profile posts and descriptions, social posts, email sequences, directory listings and any article placed on another site that names your firm.

What that looks like in a vendor relationship:

Put a review step in writing: nothing that names the firm goes live without a partner's sign-off.
Ask for a list of every URL the vendor has created or placed that mentions or links to you. You can't review what you can't see.
Read drafted copy line by line, whether a person or a tool wrote it. Stock phrases like "maximize your refund" slip in easily, and they are outcome language.
Treat a ranking guarantee as a warning sign. Google's guidance on hiring an SEO says "No one can guarantee a #1 ranking on Google." A vendor that promises one is making the kind of claim you couldn't make to your own prospects.
If a vendor runs outreach in your name, ask how often a prospect is contacted and how opt-outs are handled. Repeated contact after someone has said no is worth reviewing against the coercion and harassment language in 1.600.001.

A one-hour review this month

Read the homepage, each service page and your Google Business Profile description against the four tests.
Search the site for "save", "guarantee", "maximize", "best", "#1", "certified" and "approved".
Compare every published price with last season's invoices.
List every vendor that publishes anything with the firm's name on it, and ask each for URLs.
Read your state board's advertising rule next to the AICPA text, and note anywhere it goes further.

None of this stops a firm from marketing well. Clear service descriptions, scoped fees, accurate credentials and a plain account of how you work are both compliant and persuasive, and that is the approach behind our accounting firm marketing work.

If you'd like an outside reader on your current site, request a free firm review. It takes a few minutes to ask for, and it is easier to fix copy in February than to explain it later.