Podcasts about thomson reuters institute

In this compelling podcast, Judge Maritza Braswell and Judge Maryam Ahmad offer a rare judicial perspective on how AI is transforming trial courts. From AI-powered legal avatars assisting pro se litigants to practical tools already reshaping courtroom efficiency, the judges candidly explore the delicate balance between leveraging AI innovation to improve access to justice and preserving core judicial values.

The tax, audit & accounting industry faces a defining moment — and doing nothing is the riskiest strategy of all. In this eye-opening podcast, M&A expert Bob Lewis, President of the Visionary Group, reveals why more than 60% of top tax firms have already taken outside capital, fundamentally reshaping the competitive landscape. Lewis also discusses why hourly billing leaves a lot of money on the table, how to unlock hidden capacity, and why AI will slash labor costs by 20% while doubling revenue per tax professional.

In the latest Clarity podcast, Heather Panton, Senior Advisor for Social Impact & Human Rights at Thomson Reuters, speaks with Dr. Jay Golden, Director of the Dynamic Sustainability Lab at Syracuse University and Pontarelli Professor of Environmental Sustainability & Finance, about recent research jointly executed by Syracuse and Thomson Reuters around Generation Z's changing purchasing habits and their willingness to pay a premium for apparel and beverage products manufactured ethically. 

Haven't heard of agentic AI? You probably will soon, as it's already beginning to be integrated into professional services software across the board. Coming off of the Thomson Reuters Institute's Emerging Technology and Generative AI Forum, conference speaker Joe Kendall, the AI Director of Product Management at law firm DLA Piper, breaks down how agentic AI automates workflows, how agentic AI differs from generative AI, and why the term agentic AI is already getting muddied, despite its implications being very real.

In this episode of Clarity, we explore the Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework (CARF) with expert Paul Chaveriat from CRB Monitor, examining how this pivotal regulatory shift will fundamentally reshape the cryptocurrency landscape through comprehensive reporting requirements designed to combat tax evasion and align digital assets with traditional financial regulations. The discussion delves into CARF's extensive reach across exchanges, DeFi protocols, and even self-custody wallets, analyzing the substantial compliance costs, privacy concerns, and competitive implications that will transform how the crypto industry operates in an increasingly regulated environment.

In the latest episode of the Thomson Reuters Institute's (TRI) Clarity podcast, we speak to Ruth Kruse, a financial services compliance veteran and BSA officer for Southwest Heritage Bank, for a sharp, no‑nonsense dive into why the quality of Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) matters more than the raw volume of filings. From the surge in filings to the ripple effects of digital banking and crypto, Kruse unpacks outcome‑based SARs, smarter triggers, and the kind of investigator judgment that actually drives results.

In the latest episode of the Thomson Reuters Institute's Clarity on Tech, U.S. Magistrate Judge Maritza Braswell and Colorado Court of Appeals Judge Lino S. Lipinsky de Orlov delve into the intersection of AI and legal ethics, exploring the challenges and implications that advanced technology is having on the legal profession.

In the latest episode of Clarity, the Thomson Reuters Institute's Becky Halat, Senior Manager of Client Services, and Eve Starks, Senior Consultant, delve into critical insights from the latest Stellar Performance research and discuss how cultural alignment is a strong driver for the measurable success of law firms.

In this episode of the Thomson Reuters Institute (TRI) Clarity podcast, Judge Mark D. Pfeiffer of the Missouri Court of Appeals, speaks with TRI's Rabihah Butler about how partisan perceptions, inconsistent sentencing, limited accessibility, and the acceleration of social media and the 24-hour news cycles can erode public confidence in courts, reshaping how judicial legitimacy is contested in real time.

In this kick-off episode of the third season of the Thomson Reuters Institute's (TRI) Clarity podcast, Mike Abbott, Head of the Thomson Reuters Institute, sits down with Thomson Reuters' Legal, Corporates, and Tax segment presidents — Raghu Ramanathan, Laura Clayton McDonald, and Elizabeth Beastrom, respectively — to explore how business leaders are transforming their organizations and client relationships through strategic AI adoption. Grounded in key insights from the latest Future of Professionals research, this timely conversation is not to be missed!

This Day in Legal History: First SCOTUS DecisionOn August 11, 1792, the United States Supreme Court issued its first reported decision in Georgia v. Brailsford. The case arose from the complex aftermath of the Revolutionary War, when questions about debts owed to British creditors came before the new federal judiciary. The State of Georgia had enacted laws seizing debts owed to British subjects, while the 1783 Treaty of Paris required those debts to be honored. The dispute involved a British creditor, Samuel Brailsford, seeking repayment from a Georgia resident. Georgia argued that its confiscation laws extinguished the debt, but the Court was faced with balancing state statutes against treaty obligations. In its decision, the Court reaffirmed that treaties made under the authority of the United States were binding on the states, even when they conflicted with local laws. This early opinion helped cement the principle of federal supremacy in foreign affairs and treaty enforcement. It also demonstrated the Court's willingness to decide politically sensitive disputes involving state sovereignty. The ruling, authored before the modern opinion-writing style developed, was short and straightforward, focusing narrowly on the facts and legal issue. It set an early precedent for judicial interpretation of the Constitution's Supremacy Clause. Georgia v. Brailsford thus marked the Court's entry into shaping the balance between state power and federal authority. The case also foreshadowed the judiciary's role in resolving conflicts between domestic law and international agreements. While not as well-known as later landmark cases, its legacy lies in establishing the Court as a neutral arbiter in disputes implicating both constitutional structure and international commitments.President Donald Trump is expected to nominate David Rosner, a Democrat currently serving on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), as its next chair. The agency oversees decisions on natural gas export facilities and major power infrastructure, making it central to Trump's energy agenda. Rosner, appointed to FERC by President Joe Biden, previously worked for former Senator Joe Manchin, who was known for supporting coal and gas interests. White House officials say Rosner aligns with Trump's priorities, despite his party affiliation. FERC was a flashpoint during Trump's first term, when his appointees attempted—but failed—to push policies favoring fossil fuel power generation. Today, surging energy demand from data centers has renewed attention on expanding cheap power sources. In July, the country's largest electric grid saw record power auction revenues of $16.1 billion, highlighting the strain on supply. Rosner's promotion would follow the departure of Republican Mark Christie as chair, signaling a bipartisan leadership shift at the influential regulator.Trump to Tap Democrat to Lead US Agency Overseeing Gas, PowerA closely watched trial began today in San Francisco over President Trump's deployment of National Guard troops to assist immigration raids and manage protests in Los Angeles. California argues the move violates the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which limits the use of the military in civilian law enforcement. The dispute centers on Trump's June order sending 700 Marines and 4,000 National Guard members to the city after mass immigration raids sparked unrest. State officials, including Governor Gavin Newsom, claim about 2,000 Guard members are still aiding U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents in raids and restricting civilian movement. The administration denies the troops engaged in law enforcement, saying they were protecting federal property and ICE personnel. The three-day, non-jury trial before U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer could set limits on Trump's authority to deploy the military in U.S. cities. California is also seeking to regain control of its National Guard from federal command. A ruling against the administration could have lasting implications for the president's power to use military forces domestically.Landmark trial kicks off over Trump's use of US military in policing role | ReutersU.S. law firms saw stronger-than-expected business in the second quarter of 2025, with overall demand rising 1.6% from the same period last year and billing rates climbing 7.4%, according to the Thomson Reuters Institute. Clients sought legal guidance on shifting tariffs, regulatory changes, and an unsteady economy, partly fueled by President Trump's trade policies. The growth was uneven—top 100 firms experienced a 0.6% drop in demand, while the next-largest 100 grew 2.6% and midsized firms rose 3.5%, suggesting clients may be opting for lower-cost or more specialized services. Practice area results also varied: litigation demand rose 2%, corporate work 1.3%, mergers and acquisitions 0.3%, while intellectual property fell 1.4%. The industry's Financial Index score hit 55, up four points from Q1, but the report warned of risks ahead as overhead costs climb, collections dip, and productivity lags 1.3% year-over-year. Unpaid bills and write-downs could create further financial pressure if trends persist. Law firms stayed busy in second quarter but uncertainty looms - report | ReutersThe U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has moved to terminate its labor contract with the union representing 8,000 of its employees, according to the union's president. The action is part of President Trump's broader push to limit collective bargaining rights across federal agencies. Trump's March executive order seeks to remove such rights at more than 30 agencies, including the EPA, and is being challenged in court by unions that argue it violates free speech and bargaining obligations. The EPA says it is acting in compliance with the order, which would make it easier for agencies to discipline or dismiss workers. The move comes as the EPA plans to reduce its workforce by at least 23% and close its scientific research office as part of broader federal downsizing. Unions, including the American Federation of Government Employees, are suing to stop the effort, but a recent federal appeals court decision allowed the administration to proceed with exempting some agencies from negotiating with unions. The union representing EPA employees has pledged a legal response.Trump's environment agency terminates contract with unionized employees | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

We're excited to welcome back Maya Markovich, a familiar voice on the podcast and a leading thinker in legal innovation and AI strategy. Since her last appearance with us, Maya has taken on a new role as vice president of the American Arbitration Association Institute, the thought leadership and R&D arm of the AAA-ICDR. She is also still serving as executive director of the Justice Technology Association, advising startups, and writing her monthly Scaling Justice column for Thomson Reuters Institute. In this episode, Maya talks about her new role at the AAA, and how the organization is thinking about innovation—a fascinating case study on change management for a successful longtime organization. We also dig into the uneven landscape of AI oversight in dispute resolution, and hear her take on what's emerging and exciting in the world of justice tech. Read the full transcript of today's episode here: https://www.seyfarth.com/dir_docs/podcast_transcripts/Pioneers_MayaMarkovichReturns.pdf

In our latest Clarity on Tech podcast, Judge Maritza Braswell and Judge Scott Schlegel discuss the far-reaching impact of AI on society and the legal system, exploring its potential to increase access to justice while also considering the ethical and practical challenges that come with it. Drawing on their experiences in trial and appellate courts to examine the transformative power of AI, the judges discuss the need for adapting traditional legal frameworks and the emerging duties and responsibilities of judges and court professionals in an AI-driven world.

In this episode of the Thomson Reuters Institute (TRI) Clarity podcast, Nadya Britton, TRI Content Lead for tax, and Shaun Hunley, Executive Editor of Thomson Reuters Checkpoint, break down the newly signed One Big Beautiful Bill Act and discuss how you could be impacted. Delivering a clear, insightful look at the most important tax provisions included in this sweeping legislation, the pair examine what this really means in practice — from key changes that impact your clients to strategies for effective communication and preparation.  

In this episode of the Thomson Reuters Institute Clarity podcast, Mike Abbott, Head of the Thomson Reuters Institute, speaks with Steve Hasker, President and CEO of Thomson Reuters, about the recently released third annual Future of Professionals report, which looks at the impact AI is having on professional work and how legal firms, tax, audit & accounting firms, and in-house corporate teams can leverage their use of AI for maximum value.

In this episode of the Thomson Reuters Institute (TRI) Clarity podcast, Nadya Britton, Enterprise Content Manager of Tax, Accounting, Audit, and Trade at TRI, speaks with Allen Stahl, Director of Strategic Tax & Accounting Technology at Thomson Reuters. Together, they explore the central theme of this year's recent 2025 State of Tax Professionals Report: leveraging technology to enhance efficiency and drive growth in tax workflows. With firms increasingly prioritizing technology, the pair discuss how automation and AI integration are key strategies for boosting productivity and freeing up professionals to focus on higher-value services.

In our latest Clarity on Tech podcast, Judge Maritza Braswell and Judge Pamela Gates explore how AI currently is being integrated into trial courts and the potential future applications for it. The judges discuss the promising uses of AI for administrative tasks and improving access to justice, while also addressing concerns about overreliance, the risk of AI influencing judicial outcomes, and maintaining public trust in court decisions.

In the latest Clarity podcast, Thomson Reuters' Will Strickland and Jenifer Fernandez are joined by trade expert Ryan Bialas, Director of Global Trade Compliance for Thermo Fisher Scientific, to explore how technology tools and innovative strategies are helping businesses mitigate the impacts of tariffs and how trade professionals can navigate changing tariff policies.

In the latest Clarity podcast, Rabihah Butler, Enterprise Content Manager for Risk, Fraud, Government & Courts for Thomson Reuters Institute (TRI), speaks with David Slayton, Executive Officer and Clerk of Court for the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, and Andrea Miller, Senior Research Associate at the National Center for State Courts (NCSC). The group discusses the findings of the latest report from TRI and NCSC, “Staffing, Operations and Technology: A 2025 Survey of State Courts” and the reasons behind the judiciary's slow embrace of AI technologies and what this hesitation signifies for the future of our justice system.

AI agents may be arriving at tax, audit & accounting firms sooner than you'd expect. In the premiere episode of our new Clarity on Tech podcast series, we're exploring the world of agentic AI in tax, audit & accounting. What is it? How is it different from generative AI? And will there be an AI agent doing my tax research in the near future? In this podcast, he Thomson Reuters Institute's Zach Warren speaks with Michael Kim, Director of AI Integration and Customer Success at Thomson Reuters, who says the future is already here.

Managing partners in today's law firms not only find themselves carefully watching the rapid changes in the legal market but also increasingly wondering how they will differentiate their firms to order to increase market share and shore up their strategic position. Jen Dezso, director of client relations with the Thomson Reuters Institute, joins the podcast to discuss findings from numerous interviews with managing partners and explore what today's managing partners are thinking most about and how that's influencing their thinking around developing and implementing their law firms' strategies.

In the latest Clarity podcast, the Thomson Reuters Institute's Rabihah Butler speaks with Aaron Frye of Lucid Point Consulting about the importance of having organizations accurately document and report fraud losses to better ensure transparency and accountability. The podcast highlights best practices for tracking fraudulent activities, gathering evidence, and communicating key findings to relevant stakeholders.

In the latest Clarity podcast, the Thomson Reuters Institute's Bill Josten and Isaac Brooks speak with Belinda Jones, CFO of Ballard Spahr, about the impact of current economic volatility on law firms' financial performance, exploring such issues as aggressive firm rate hikes, a sudden surge in client demand due to the global trade war, and the challenges of managing rising expenses.

Today, the global supply chain is experiencing a one-in-a-lifetime crisis, navigating an unpredictable level of escalation, de-escalation, and uncertainty amid the Trump administration's trade war. In our latest podcast, Brian Wenck, CEO of Flat World Global Solutions, will help us see just how companies and their customers are navigating the disruption and what may yet lie ahead.  

This Day in Legal History: John T. Scopes ArrestedOn May 5, 1925, John T. Scopes, a 24-year-old high school science teacher in Dayton, Tennessee, was arrested for violating the state's Butler Act, which prohibited the teaching of human evolution in public schools. His arrest set in motion one of the most famous trials in American history: the Scopes "Monkey" Trial. The case was a deliberate test of the new law, orchestrated by local businessmen and supported by the ACLU, who wanted to challenge the constitutionality of the statute. Scopes agreed to be the defendant, even though there was uncertainty about whether he had actually taught evolution during class.The trial drew national attention, pitting two legal giants against each other: William Jennings Bryan, a three-time presidential candidate and staunch creationist, for the prosecution, and Clarence Darrow, one of the most famous defense attorneys of the era, for the defense. The proceedings became a spectacle, with reporters from across the country descending on Dayton. The courtroom debate highlighted the deep cultural divide between modernist and fundamentalist values in 1920s America.Scopes was ultimately found guilty and fined $100, though the verdict was later overturned on a technicality. However, the trial's significance went far beyond the outcome. It sparked national conversation about science, religion, education, and the role of government in regulating ideas taught in schools. The Butler Act remained in effect until 1967, and the trial inspired numerous retellings in literature and film, including Inherit the Wind. The Scopes Trial remains a key historical moment in the legal and cultural struggle over academic freedom and the separation of church and state.The first quarter of 2025 offered law firms a paradox: weak demand to start the year, followed by a surge in legal work tied to renewed global trade tensions under President Trump. According to the Thomson Reuters Institute's Law Firm Financial Index, litigation and transactional practices saw a marked uptick in March, largely driven by tariff-related disputes. This late-quarter boost helped mask deeper structural issues—namely declining lawyer productivity and elevated expenses.Despite the spike in work, the index dropped 13 points from Q4 2024, reflecting sluggish growth in demand and a 2.4% year-over-year drop in productivity. Direct expenses, driven by aggressive lateral hiring and performance-based bonus payouts, rose 7.6%, while overhead climbed 6.3%. These figures underscore the cost pressures firms are navigating even as they attempt to capitalize on short-term geopolitical volatility.Billing rates were a rare highlight. Firms raised rates by 7.3% over the prior year, marking the most aggressive pricing push since 2005. That pricing power helped offset some of the drag from low productivity and rising costs.Still, the benefits of this trade-driven spike appear temporary. The report notes that economic instability—particularly trade disruptions—tends to generate front-loaded demand that quickly tapers. With several financial institutions upping their recession odds for late 2025, law firm leaders are being urged to treat Q1 gains as a buffer, not a trend.The legal sector may have outperformed expectations in early 2025, but its exposure to macroeconomic uncertainty is increasing. Strategic planning—not reactive optimism—will determine how firms fare in the months ahead.Trade war boosted law firm demand in early 2025 but challenges lie ahead, report says | ReutersCalifornia's experiment with a homegrown bar exam has officially unraveled. Following a disastrous February rollout plagued by scoring issues, technical failures, and the undisclosed use of AI-generated questions, the California Supreme Court has scrapped the state's new exam for July and ordered a return to the traditional Multistate Bar Exam (MBE).In a Friday order, the court cited ongoing concerns with the question development process and approved a series of score adjustments to mitigate the damage done to February test-takers. Results, initially due that same day, were delayed until Monday to accommodate recalculations. The court also mandated that July's exam revert to the format and components used prior to the February overhaul, abandoning the cost-saving, AI-assisted approach California had pursued.This reversal is not cheap. The State Bar now expects to spend $2.3 million more than originally budgeted to address the fallout, effectively wiping out the projected $3.8 million in annual savings the new system was meant to deliver. Executive Director Leah Wilson, who had championed the exam reform, announced she will step down in July.The court also set the passing score for February's test at 534—lower than what standardized testing experts had advised—and instructed the bar to estimate (“impute”) scores for candidates unable to complete major sections of the exam due to system failures.California, home to the nation's second-largest pool of bar applicants, has now reversed course entirely. What was meant to be a modern, streamlined alternative has turned into a cautionary tale about reform without readiness.California scraps new bar exam for July, adjusts scores on botched February test | ReutersDonald Trump's second-term judicial nomination strategy is picking up right where his first left off: turning to state solicitors general and their deputies to stock the federal bench with young, deeply conservative legal talent. His first new appellate pick, Whitney Hermandorfer of Tennessee, reflects a clear pattern—Trump is drawing from red-state lawyers who've spent the last several years battling the Biden administration in federal courts on issues like abortion, transgender rights, and administrative authority.Hermandorfer, who currently leads strategic litigation for Tennessee's attorney general, has defended the state's abortion ban in medical emergency cases and pushed back against federal Title IX expansions to protect transgender students. She also clerked for three sitting conservative justices, checking all the ideological boxes sought by Trump's judicial selection machine. Her nomination is part of a larger pipeline strategy that prioritizes appellate experience in politically charged litigation and loyalty to the conservative legal movement.This approach is anything but accidental. State solicitors general, particularly in Republican-controlled states, have become central figures in the legal battles over federal policy, turning what was once a technical appellate role into a political proving ground. The result: a crop of hardline conservative lawyers—like Mississippi's Scott Stewart, who argued Dobbs, or Alabama's Edmund LaCour, who defended gender-affirming care bans—ready to step into lifetime judicial roles.With at least 45 current and 15 future federal vacancies, including six at the appellate level, Trump has the opportunity to accelerate his effort to reshape the judiciary. The model is clear: ideological fidelity, battlefield experience, and youth. What's emerging is a deliberate, well-coordinated pipeline from red-state litigation offices straight onto the federal bench—a move likely to solidify conservative judicial influence for decades.Trump Returns to Red State Appeals Lawyers to Fill Judgeships This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Ragunath (Raghu) Ramanathan, President of Legal Professionals at Thomson Reuters speaks with Esther Bowers, Chief Practice Innovation Officer at Honigman, to discuss how the firm is handling enterprise-wide adoption of AI, practice area by practice area, as well as how the firm is analyzing lawyer workflow, and how AI is being used in the firm's summer associate program.

Professional services organizations have rushed to adopt generative AI (GenAI), but now it's time for the next step — integrating it into their business plans. Today's podcast follows up on a recent Thomson Reuters Institute report on GenAI in professional services and speaks with Thomson Reuters chief product officer David Wong, who discusses why 2025 may be the year of AI in tax, the barriers holding professional services back from greater adoption, and how to get from the early innings of GenAI to a more fully developed plan.

Robert J. Leo, a partner at Meeks, Sheppard, Leo & Pillsbury, and Karen Lobdell, a Senior Manager at Thomson Reuters, join Thomson Reuters Institute Senior Industry Analyst Bryce Engelland on the podcast to discuss the current volatility around tariffs amid a rapidly evolving global trade landscape. Additional Producer Credits: Mariana Maldonado - Implementation Consultant Global Trade Andrew Moxon - Senior Product Marketing Manager

Jim Shoemaker, COO of Miles & Stockbridge, joins the podcast to discuss how law firms can find a quick and meaningful return on their investment in AI by targeting hours that would otherwise end up being written down and never billed to clients at all. Shoemaker discusses how these written-down hours become a hidden tax on law firms and makes a compelling case that these hours can be the first targets for firms' AI efforts, potentially boosting firm revenue and profits while avoiding the loss of revenue that many lawyers fear AI adoption might bring. The views, opinions, and positions expressed by the speakers are theirs alone and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or positions of Miles & Stockbridge.  

  We speak to Andreas Rasche, Professor and Associate Dean at Copenhagen Business School, about the proposed omnibus simplification package of the EU's sustainability reporting regulations, what supporters and critics are saying about it, and what those companies that may have already started complying ahead of the Jan. 1, 2026, deadline should do now.

With a new US president, a new crypto czar, and so much happening in the cryptocurrency space, we look at the shift in direction of crypto and what it means for the nation. Two industry experts discuss how the move from regulation by enforcement to a clearer infrastructure impacts the landscape of crypto in the US.

This week, we're diving into the world of access to justice with Kristen Sonday, a true trailblazer in making pro bono legal work more efficient and effective. Kristen is the co-founder and CEO of Paladin, an organization dedicated to increasing pro bono engagement while reducing administrative burdens. Through partnerships with law firms, corporate legal teams, bar associations, the US government, and over 300 legal service organizations, Paladin is helping to bridge the justice gap by streamlining how legal professionals connect with those in need. Before launching Paladin, Kristen worked on international criminal matters for the US Department of Justice in Mexico and Central America, and was part of the founding team of a New York City-based tech startup. She also shares her insights in her Thomson Reuters Institute column NextGen Justice Tech, where she explores the role of technology in expanding access to justice. Beyond her work in legal tech, Kristen is a founding partner of LongJump, a Chicago-based venture capital fund focused on supporting the next generation of founders. In our conversation, Kristen takes us through how Paladin is creating a blueprint for justice technology, her journey into access to justice work, the mission of LongJump, and the key lessons she has learned from her entrepreneurial journey. Read the full transcript of today's episode here: https://www.seyfarth.com/dir_docs/podcast_transcripts/Pioneers_Kristen_Sonday.pdf

Natalie Runyon, content lead for sustainability for the Thomson Reuters Institute speaks with David Glasgow, Executive Director of the Meltzer Center for Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging at the NYU School of Law, about how companies can navigate the complexity and the legal landscape around diversity, equity & inclusion.  

We have seen alternative legal services providers (ALSPs) emerge as a small but mighty factor in the legal market. Historically, law firms have not considered ALSPs true competitors, but with the growing influence of generative AI, that mindset might change. Delving into the Thomson Reuters Institute's recently released Alternative Legal Services Providers 2025 report, we try to bring some clarity to an increasingly complex legal landscape.  

The question of what legal clients really want — high levels of service, quickly and at a low cost — has become a more difficult equation to solve, as generative AI, which seems poised to disrupt how legal services are delivered and valued, adds another level of complexity to the picture. Armed with the findings of the Thomson Reuters Institute's 2025 Report on the State of the US Legal Market, our industry experts can offer some guidance to those legal leaders looking for an assist.

This Day in Legal History: Lockerbie Bombing IndictmentsOn November 11, 1991, indictments were formally announced in the notorious Lockerbie bombing case, marking a significant milestone in international criminal justice. U.S. and U.K. prosecutors indicted two Libyan nationals—Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi and Lamin Khalifah Fhimah—in connection with the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103. The attack took place on December 21, 1988, when the plane exploded over Lockerbie, Scotland, killing all 259 people on board and 11 residents on the ground. This tragedy led to a complex, multi-year investigation involving multiple countries and was one of the deadliest terrorist attacks in the West prior to September 11, 2001.The indictments represented a significant moment in the use of international legal cooperation to address terrorism, as both the U.S. and U.K. sought justice for their citizens. The two men were accused of planting a bomb in the cargo hold, allegedly on behalf of Libyan intelligence services. However, for nearly a decade after the indictments, Libya resisted extradition requests, prompting years of diplomatic pressure and international sanctions.Finally, in 1999, Libya agreed to turn over Megrahi and Fhimah for trial in a specially created Scottish court seated in the Netherlands. This arrangement respected Libyan sovereignty while ensuring an impartial setting for the trial. After extensive proceedings, Megrahi was found guilty in 2001 of the murders, receiving a life sentence, while Fhimah was acquitted. The trial itself remains a significant example of international criminal law in action, setting a precedent for how nations can pursue justice in politically sensitive, cross-border terrorism cases. The Lockerbie bombing case also raised ongoing questions about evidence reliability and political influences in terrorism prosecutions, as Megrahi's conviction remained controversial, leading to a compassionate release in 2009 due to his terminal illness.This legal landmark underscored both the complexities of prosecuting international terrorism and the power of coordinated legal frameworks to address global threats.A New York judge, Justice Juan Merchan, will soon decide if President-elect Donald Trump's criminal conviction for falsifying business records related to hush money payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels should be overturned. This decision follows a July U.S. Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity, which Trump's lawyers argue should apply to his case, asserting that the conviction should be dismissed. Merchan is also considering whether to proceed with sentencing Trump on Nov. 26, although legal experts believe this is unlikely before his Jan. 20 inauguration. If Merchan rules favorably on immunity or delays sentencing, Trump may assume the presidency without immediate legal encumbrances. Meanwhile, federal cases against Trump by Special Counsel Jack Smith are expected to be paused due to Justice Department policies against prosecuting sitting presidents. However, a separate Georgia state case remains unresolved. Trump, who maintains his innocence in all four cases, argues these prosecutions are politically motivated. Manhattan prosecutors counter that the Supreme Court's immunity decision doesn't apply since Trump's case involves non-official conduct, not covered by presidential immunity. Experts note that even if the conviction stands, Trump's team will likely seek to delay sentencing, which could potentially involve up to four years in prison, although fines or probation are more likely.Judge to decide whether Trump's hush money conviction can stand | ReutersDonald Trump's upcoming administration aims to drastically cut federal regulations, but recent Supreme Court rulings, including the end of Chevron deference, could complicate these efforts. Chevron deference, which previously allowed agencies flexibility in interpreting vague laws, was struck down in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. Without this precedent, Trump's regulatory changes may face increased legal scrutiny, with courts more likely to question whether agencies are acting beyond Congress's intent. Despite these obstacles, Trump will likely have Senate support for his deregulation goals, especially as the ruling requires more specific legislative language—a challenge in a closely divided Congress.Lobbyists expect Trump's administration to focus on rolling back labor, environmental, and financial regulations. However, advocacy groups are poised to use the Supreme Court's ruling to defend Biden-era rules, arguing against the administration's authority under the revised legal framework. Trump may opt for informal guidance, like advisory memos or circulars, rather than formal rule-making, as these are harder to legally challenge. Corporate and industry groups generally support deregulation, though the ongoing legal and policy shifts could create near-term uncertainty. To establish lasting changes, Trump and Congress would need to pass new legislation, avoiding the “ping pong effect” of policies fluctuating with each administration change.Trump's Push to Deregulate Faces Challenges in Post-Chevron EraLaw firms saw a substantial profit increase of 11.2% in the third quarter of 2024, largely due to high lawyer productivity, strong billing rates, and controlled expenses, as reported by the Thomson Reuters Institute's Law Firm Financial Index. This index, which aggregates financial metrics from 195 large and midsize firms, recorded its second-highest score since inception, highlighting broad-based demand growth across multiple practice areas. Litigation demand rose by 4%, with gains also in corporate, real estate, labor, employment, and bankruptcy practices, while only intellectual property showed a slight decline.The report contrasts 2024's strong, diversified demand with the post-2021 demand slump, suggesting more stable long-term profitability for law firms. With Donald Trump's recent election win, firms anticipate additional work in areas such as regulation, compliance, antitrust, and energy. Although declining inflation may limit future billing rate increases, firms remain optimistic about the potential for new legal work stemming from significant regulatory changes expected in early 2025.Law firm profits soared in third quarter of 2024, report finds | ReutersThe National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has overturned a 40-year-old precedent, ruling that employers can no longer generally warn workers that unionization will harm their relationship with management. This ruling came from a case involving Starbucks, where the company allegedly made unlawful threats to employees during a union drive at its Seattle Roastery, warning them that unionizing could lead to reduced benefits and suggesting it would be futile. The board's decision revisits the 1985 Tri-Cast Inc. ruling, which had allowed employers to legally imply that unionizing would alter employees' direct relationships with management. Although the NLRB ultimately found that Starbucks' statements encouraging a "no" vote to maintain open communication with managers did not directly violate the law, it changed the standards for such statements going forward. The board's Democratic majority explained that the earlier precedent was incorrect in permitting nearly any statement that unionizing would affect the employee-manager relationship. This decision reinforces the NLRB's recent actions against Starbucks in its efforts to unionize over 500 locations nationwide, requiring the company to stop unlawful behavior and delete certain social media posts.NLRB Tosses 40-Year Stance on Manager Unionization Threats This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Zach Warren from Thomson Reuters Institute and Amanda Aguillard from Padgett dive into the pressing challenges facing modern accounting firms, particularly those in the mid-sized range. They explore innovative solutions to the talent shortage, discuss the surprising resilience of time-based pricing, and emphasize the critical role of technology adoption in driving efficiency. This data-driven conversation offers practical insights for firm owners looking to navigate industry pressures and position themselves for sustainable growth.Connect with Zachary Warren, MBAhttps://www.linkedin.com/in/zach-warren-19403371https://www.thomsonreuters.com/en-us/posts/authors/zach-warren Connect with Amanda Aguillard, CPA CISDhttps://www.linkedin.com/in/amandaaguillardhttps://www.aguillardaccounting.comReviewLeave a review on Apple Podcasts or PodchaserSubscribeSubscribe to the Federal Tax Updates podcast in your favorite podcast app!This podcast is a production of the Earmark Media

In this episode of On Record PR, Gina Rubel goes on record with Mike Abbott, Head of The Thomson Reuters Institute, to discuss how data and market insights are key to crafting effective law firm strategy in an ever-changing landscape. Learn More Mike Abbott is the Head of the Thomson Reuters Institute. The Institute brings together leaders from across the Legal, Corporate, Tax, and Government communities to share data and insights, discuss market trends, and help shape the way forward for these markets and individual organizations. Prior to creating the Institute, Mike was a senior consultant with Hildebrandt Consulting and held leadership positions across Thomson Reuters Sales, Marketing, and Client Management in Washington DC and Minneapolis - St. Paul.  Mike attended Westminster College in New Wilmington, PA where he earned his B.A. in English/Writing.

This Day in Legal History: Ronald Reagan Fires Air Traffic ControllersOn August 5, 1981, President Ronald Reagan made a landmark decision to fire over 11,000 striking air traffic controllers. These federal employees, members of the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization (PATCO), had initiated a strike on August 3, demanding better pay, shorter working hours, and improved working conditions. The strike posed significant risks to national air travel safety and disrupted the aviation system.President Reagan responded with a firm stance, citing the controllers' sworn oath not to strike against the government. In a nationally televised address on August 3, Reagan warned that if the controllers did not return to work within 48 hours, they would face termination. When the deadline passed without compliance, Reagan followed through on his ultimatum, effectively dismantling PATCO.The mass firings had profound implications for labor relations and federal employment policies in the United States. It underscored the government's commitment to maintaining uninterrupted air traffic services and demonstrated a strict enforcement of federal labor laws. This event marked a pivotal moment in the Reagan administration, showcasing its determination to curb union influence and assert governmental authority. The firings also led to long-term changes in air traffic control, with the federal government embarking on extensive recruitment and training programs to replace the dismissed controllers.A political action committee (PAC) supported by Elon Musk is under investigation in Michigan for potential legal violations. The Michigan Secretary of State's office confirmed the inquiry on Sunday. The Musk-backed America PAC has been collecting detailed voter information through its website, prompting scrutiny from state authorities. Although America PAC is a federal entity, Michigan officials are reviewing its actions to determine if state laws have been breached. If violations are found, the case may be referred to the Michigan Attorney General. The investigation is in its early stages, and specific focuses have not been disclosed.Musk, CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, has previously stated he created a PAC to support candidates but denied making specific pledges. He has publicly supported Donald Trump and criticized various Democratic policies and initiatives.Neither the Michigan Attorney General's office nor America PAC has commented on the investigation. Musk also has not responded to requests for comment. The situation underscores concerns about how PACs use personal information collected from citizens, particularly in voter registration efforts.Musk-backed PAC under investigation for potential violations of Michigan laws | ReutersThomas V. Girardi, the famed attorney behind the landmark $333 million Pacific Gas & Electric settlement featured in the film "Erin Brockovich," faces a criminal trial for wire fraud in Los Angeles federal court. At 85, Girardi has been disbarred and bankrupt, charged with misappropriating $15 million in settlement funds intended for his clients over the past decade. This trial could mark the end of his distinguished legal career, tainted by allegations of unethical conduct and questionable ties to the state's lawyer disciplinary agency.Plaintiff's attorney Jay Edelson emphasizes the broader implications for the legal community, suggesting it could either prompt reform or be dismissed as an isolated incident. Girardi also faces additional fraud charges in Illinois, and numerous civil lawsuits. His once-celebrated career has become a cautionary tale of legal misconduct.Prosecutors allege that since 2010, Girardi diverted millions from his firm, Girardi Keese, for personal luxuries and to fund EJ Global, an entertainment company of his estranged wife, Erika Jayne. Girardi's defense argues that he was not responsible for financial mismanagement, attributing it to the firm's CFO, Christopher Kamon, whose trial has been separated. They also claim Girardi's cognitive decline impairs his ability to have intentionally defrauded clients.Girardi's case stands out not just for the legal drama but also for its celebrity connections, given his marriage to a reality TV star, influencing public and juror perception. The trial will focus on whether Girardi's cognitive state affects his culpability for the alleged crimes committed during his competent years. The court's ruling on his competency to stand trial, despite cognitive impairments, adds a layer of complexity to this high-profile case.Thomas Girardi's Legal Drama Approaches Its Hollywood EndingFormer Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. has sued GameStop CEO Ryan Cohen and his company, RC Ventures LLC, seeking to recover $47 million from alleged insider trading in 2022. Cohen, also the founder of Chewy Inc., allegedly used nonpublic information to trade Bed Bath & Beyond (BBBY) stock profitably between January and August 2022 while serving as a statutory director. The lawsuit, filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, claims Cohen and RC Ventures made numerous profitable trades of BBBY securities, which were executed within a six-month period. Under Section 16(b) of the 1934 Securities Exchange Act, the company seeks to reclaim these short-swing profits because Cohen and RC Ventures owned more than 10% of BBBY's common stock and had access to inside information through their board appointees.This legal action is part of a broader effort by the bankrupt company and its plan administrator, Michael Goldberg, to recover funds for creditors. Goldberg has also filed a separate suit to reclaim $19 million in tax credits from a New Jersey agency and is pursuing over $300 million from Hudson Bay Capital Management for trading profits related to a failed financing plan.RC Ventures is GameStop's largest shareholder with an 8.7% stake. Bed Bath & Beyond, now operating as 20230930-DK-BUTTERFLY-1 Inc., is demanding monetary damages and legal costs. Cohen and RC Ventures have not commented on the lawsuit. The case is titled 20230930-DK-BUTTERFLY-I Inc. v. Cohen.GameStop CEO Sued by Bed Bath & Beyond for Insider Trading (1)The demand for transactional legal work is recovering after nearly three years of decline, according to the Thomson Reuters Institute's Law Firm Financial Index. The report shows a 2.2% increase in corporate transactional work, including contract drafting, real estate deals, and bank financing, in the second quarter of 2024 compared to the previous year. This rise contributed to a 2.4% overall increase in law firm demand.Additionally, U.S. law firms have seen a 6.6% increase in billing rates and a 5.3% rise in direct expenses, putting them in one of their strongest financial positions in the last decade. Profits per equity partner have increased by 8.8% over the past year.While transactional practices are rebounding, counter-cyclical practices like litigation and bankruptcy continue to drive significant demand. Litigation demand rose by 3.4% and bankruptcy by 2.4% in the same period. These trends provide law firms with greater stability by diversifying their revenue streams.However, the gains are not uniform across the industry. The Am Law 50 firms have not seen the same increase in litigation demand as other firms, and midsize firms have not experienced the same growth in transactional demand as Am Law 100 firms.Overall, the second quarter of 2024 has been positive for the legal sector, with significant improvements in demand and profitability.Law firm transactional work rebounds after 3-year slump, report says | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

The world of technology is rapidly transforming the corporate tax sector — but are tax departments ready for it? Zach Warren, of the Thomson Reuters Institute, sits down with Cheria Coram, a corporate tax technologist and chair of the Tax Executives Institute's Tax Technology Committee, to discuss what they learned from this year's TEI Tax Technology Seminar. In the podcast, the two break down how nailing the cupcake of tech fundamentals is so important before applying the sprinkles of new tools, why tax professionals should adopt a growth mindset and focus on leading through change, and how meeting new global tax regulations all comes down to data readiness.

Mike Abbott, head of the Thomson Reuters Institute, and Steve Hasker, president and CEO of Thomson Reuters, discuss the recently released 2nd annual Thomson Reuters Future of Professionals Report on the Thomson Reuters Institute Insights podcast this week. Their conversation highlights the numerous insights from thousands of professionals surveyed across many organizations worldwide about the impact that generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) will have on their work, including time-savings, the need for responsible AI development, and the importance of human expertise and judgment in the use of GenAI.

This Day in Legal History: 27th Amendment RatifiedOn May 7, 1992, a significant addition was made to the United States Constitution with the ratification of the Twenty-seventh Amendment. This amendment, which prohibits any law that increases or decreases the salary of members of Congress from taking effect until the start of the next set of terms of office for Representatives, addresses concerns about the ethical issues surrounding Congressional pay raises.The journey of the Twenty-seventh Amendment is particularly unique as it was one of the original amendments proposed by James Madison in 1789. Originally part of Madison's package that included what became the Bill of Rights, the amendment was intended to check Congress's power over its financial recompense. However, it failed to achieve the necessary support from three-fourths of the state legislatures at that time.The amendment languished in obscurity until the 1980s when a renewed interest in limiting Congressional privileges, spurred by public concerns over government fiscal irresponsibility and perceived excesses by lawmakers, brought it back into the national conversation. The resurrection of the amendment was largely driven by a grassroots campaign led by Gregory Watson, a University of Texas undergraduate who discovered the dormant amendment and spearheaded a national push for its ratification.By 1992, the required number of states had ratified the amendment, nearly 203 years after it was first proposed. This ratification process holds the record as the longest in U.S. history, showcasing the complexities and capricities of amending the Constitution.The Twenty-seventh Amendment's ratification marked a noteworthy instance of how citizen activism can influence constitutional law, illustrating the enduring nature of the document and the adaptability of its provisions to the evolving concerns of the American populace. It serves as a reminder of the power of persistence in civic engagement and the impact that individuals can have on national law.Today in the ongoing criminal trial of former U.S. President Donald Trump, centered around allegations of hush money payments, two significant developments have occurred. Trump, who faces charges of falsifying business records to cover up a $130,000 payment to adult-film actress Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election, stepped closer to facing jail time for contempt of court. Justice Juan Merchan has already fined Trump $10,000 for repeated violations of a gag order and warned that further infractions could lead to imprisonment. This legal action could potentially sway public opinion as the November elections approach, particularly among undecided voters.Additionally, Stormy Daniels is set to testify today, promising a pivotal moment in the trial. Her involvement stems from claims of a past encounter with Trump, which he denies. The prosecution aims to show that Trump was directly responsible for the illegal cover-up by labeling the reimbursement to his lawyer, Michael Cohen, as legal expenses. Trump's defense argues that Daniels' testimony is irrelevant to the alleged financial misconduct, attempting to keep the dispute centered on the allegation that the former president made financial misstatements.As we all well know at this point, this trial is just one of several legal challenges Trump faces, including accusations related to attempting to overturn the 2020 election results and mishandling classified documents. The outcome of this trial and Trump's compliance with court orders could significantly impact his political future and public perception as he runs for president again.Jail time for contempt could spell political trouble for Trump | ReutersStormy Daniels to testify in Trump hush money trial, media reports say | ReutersLaw firms have experienced a robust start to 2024, showing a significant recovery from a sluggish 2023 characterized by weak client demand and poor collection rates. According to the Thomson Reuters Institute's Law Firm Financial Index, which monitors 186 large and midsize firms, there has been a 1.9% increase in demand for legal services in the first quarter of 2024 compared to the same period last year. Billing rates also rose by 6.6%, with midsize firms notably driving much of this growth. Overall firm revenues increased by 5.7%, and profits grew by 5.8%, supported by a controlled rise in direct expenses of just 5.4%.The sector seeing the most growth in demand was litigation, which surged by 3.8%, followed by bankruptcy with a 3% increase, and labor and employment rising by 1%. However, corporate practices saw only a modest gain of 0.6%, and M&A practices experienced a decline of nearly 4%, with high interest rates posing additional challenges for recovery in this area.Despite the positive start, there remains some uncertainty about the ability of firms to collect on the increased billing rates due to previous declines in realization rates — the percentage of billed work that is actually paid. The impact of the 2024 billing rates will not be clear until the second quarter results due to billing cycles.Additionally, law firms are continuing to invest in technology, with spending up 6.6% above inflation, indicating a growing interest in new technologies, particularly those incorporating artificial intelligence. This investment suggests law firms are optimistic about the potential of AI to enhance their operations.Law firms kicked off 2024 with strong demand and profits, report finds | ReutersActivision Blizzard has been ordered by a Delaware federal jury to pay $23.4 million in damages for infringing patents related to multiplayer features in their popular games, including "World of Warcraft" and two "Call of Duty" titles. The lawsuit, filed by Acceleration Bay, which acquired the patents from Boeing, argued that Activision's games used their patented technology for online multiplayer networking. The jury awarded $18 million for violations linked to "World of Warcraft" and $5.4 million related to the "Call of Duty" games.Activision, however, contends that their technology does not infringe on Acceleration Bay's patents and believes there are strong grounds for an appeal. They had previously argued in court that if found liable, the damages should not exceed $300,000. Despite the verdict, Activision expressed disappointment and is considering its next steps in the legal process. Meanwhile, Acceleration Bay has expressed satisfaction with the jury's decision. This legal battle highlights ongoing issues in the gaming industry regarding the use and ownership of multiplayer networking technologies.Activision hit with $23.4 mln US patent verdict in multiplayer-gaming case | ReutersIn my column this week, I explore the evolving dynamics of property tax systems and suggest an income-adjusted approach to foster homeowner equity. The traditional property tax system, which levies a uniform rate based on property values, increasingly clashes with the financial realities of many homeowners whose incomes haven't kept pace with rising property values. This misalignment has led to higher foreclosure and mortgage delinquency rates. I propose a more equitable system that adjusts tax liabilities based on income, allowing tax burdens to scale with financial capacity, which could mitigate these issues.Traditional relief methods like reassessments or appeals often benefit those least in need and require resources that not all homeowners have. An income-adjusted system would simplify the process, eliminate the need for appeals, and align tax liabilities more closely with homeowners' ability to pay, enhancing both fairness and compliance.However, implementing such a system presents challenges, including the need for bipartisan political support and the integration of property and income tax systems to accurately assess individual financial situations. Despite these hurdles, rethinking property tax to include income-sensitive adjustments could lead to a more just tax system that reflects both market values and personal economic realities.Income-Adjusted Property Tax System Would Foster Homeowner Equity Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Check out the TR 2024 Report on the State of the US Legal Market.Check out my new show, the Law for Kids Podcast.Get Connected with SixFifty⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, a business and employment legal document automation tool.Sign up for ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Gavel⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ using the code LAWSUBSCRIBED to get 10% off an annual subscription.Visit ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Law Subscribed⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to subscribe to the Substack newsletter to get notified about every episode, listen from your web browser, and for additional content.Follow ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@lawsubscribed⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠everywhere⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.Sign up for the Subscription Seminar waitlist at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠subscriptionseminar.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.Check out ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Mathew Kerbis'⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ law firm ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Subscription Attorney LLC⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Get full access to Law Subscribed at www.lawsubscribed.com/subscribe

This Day in Legal History: Great Britain Introduces an Income TaxOn January 9, 1799, a significant milestone was marked in the history of taxation with the introduction of Great Britain's first income tax. Initiated by British Prime Minister William Pitt, this tax was a revolutionary step in the country's fiscal policy. The context of its introduction was deeply rooted in the exigencies of war. In December 1798, Pitt announced the tax as a means to amass funds for the escalating war efforts against Napoleon Bonaparte, a critical juncture in European history.Pitt's income tax was not merely a financial mechanism but also a strategic tool, reflecting the gravity of the geopolitical situation at the time. It was a progressive tax, a concept relatively novel for its era, aiming to levy heavier taxes on the wealthier segments of society. This progressive nature marked a departure from the flat taxes commonly used, signifying an evolution in the understanding of equitable taxation.The tax, however, was short-lived in its initial form. In 1802, Henry Addington, Pitt's successor, repealed the tax. This repeal was a response to the temporary subsidence in hostilities. The peace was fleeting, and the return of conflict in the following year prompted Addington to reinstate the income tax. This on-and-off nature of the tax during these years mirrored the tumultuous period of the Napoleonic Wars.Significantly, the model of taxation that Addington implemented laid the groundwork for what would become the modern British income tax system. It set a precedent in tax structure and collection that has had a lasting impact. The evolution of this tax model reflects the interplay between fiscal policy and social priorities, a theme that has persisted through centuries of tax law development.Today, as we reflect on the introduction of Great Britain's first income tax, it serves as a reminder of the dynamic nature of tax law and its deep entwinement with the broader socio-political landscape. The story of this tax is not just a tale of revenue collection; it's a narrative about war, peace, and the ever-evolving understanding of economic justice.In a 2024 report by Georgetown Law's Center on Ethics and the Legal Profession and the Thomson Reuters Institute, law firms are facing a challenging year due to various factors including client demand, staffing, and the rise of artificial intelligence. The report, analyzing trends since 2009, indicates a shift in the legal market towards a buyer's market for legal services. Despite a marginal increase in the overall average demand for legal services in the previous year, transactional work has seen a decline. This is significant as many firms relied on transactional practices, particularly in mergers and acquisitions, to boost revenue in the past decade.The report highlights that midsize law firms performed better than top-grossing firms in terms of demand growth. However, the legal sector can no longer depend solely on transactional work due to reduced client spending and evolving market conditions. Interestingly, counter-cyclical practices like litigation and bankruptcy experienced growth in demand, contrasting the slowdown in transactional demand.The survey revealed a 6% increase in billing rates on paper, but actual charges to clients and collection rates have decreased. Law firms are also grappling with rising overhead and direct expenses, not yet accounting for recent associate salary increases. In response to these financial pressures, law firms are adjusting their staffing strategies, with midsized firms increasing their associate numbers more than larger firms.Clients are increasingly seeking more affordable legal services, opting for lower-priced firms, reflecting a cost-conscious attitude. Additionally, the emergence of generative AI poses uncertainties for the legal industry. Its impact on staffing, efficiency, and profitability is still unclear, but it could lead to clients handling more legal work in-house or enhance the efficiency of legal services.The report's authors expect 2024 to be volatile, particularly as election years often bring unpredictability. This projection suggests that the legal industry may not experience stability for some time, indicating a period of significant change and adaptation for law firms.Law firms face 'volatile' 2024 amid demand, staffing and AI risks - report | ReutersGoogle is facing a significant patent infringement lawsuit brought by Singular Computing, which could potentially cost the tech giant up to $7 billion in damages. The lawsuit, set to be tried in a federal court in Boston, accuses Google of infringing patents held by computer scientist Joseph Bates, the founder of Singular Computing. Bates alleges that Google used his patented technology in its processors to enhance AI features in various services such as Google Search, Gmail, and Google Translate.Google has responded by questioning the validity of Singular's patents and asserting that its processors were independently developed over many years. The company has also argued that its technology operates differently from the patented technology of Singular. In parallel, a separate legal proceeding is underway, where a U.S. appeals court in Washington will hear arguments on whether Singular's patents should be invalidated, a case that Google appealed from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.The trial, expected to last two to three weeks, centers around Google's Tensor Processing Units introduced in 2016 and subsequent versions in 2017 and 2018. These units are crucial for Google's AI capabilities, including speech recognition and content generation. The outcome of this trial could have significant financial and technological implications for Google.Google faces multibillion-dollar US patent trial over AI technology | ReutersThe Biden administration, through the U.S. Department of Labor, has issued a new rule that aims to redefine the classification of workers as employees instead of independent contractors. This move, set to affect industries reliant on contract labor, including trucking, manufacturing, healthcare, and app-based gig services, is anticipated to increase labor costs significantly. Under the new rule, workers will be considered employees if they are "economically dependent" on a company, a shift from the previous Trump administration's regulation which allowed more flexibility in classifying workers as contractors.The rule, which takes effect on March 11, has sparked concern among business groups and is expected to face legal challenges. It is designed to combat the misclassification of workers, a common issue in industries such as construction and healthcare, but its impact on gig economy companies like Uber and Lyft has attracted the most attention. These companies have expressed concerns but also believe the rule won't necessarily lead to their drivers being classified as employees.Acting U.S. Labor Secretary Julie Su emphasized the importance of this rule for low-income workers who would benefit from employee legal protections such as minimum wage and unemployment insurance. However, some business groups argue that the rule goes too far, potentially depriving millions of workers of flexibility and opportunity. Marc Freedman of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce criticized the rule for its potential to create confusion and inconsistency in worker classification, potentially leading to costly legal battles. Despite these concerns, the Labor Department will evaluate factors like a worker's chance for profit or loss, the level of control a company has over a worker, and the relevance of the work to the company's business to determine employee or contractor status.Biden administration issues rule that could curb 'gig' work, contracting | ReutersJohnson & Johnson (J&J) has tentatively agreed to pay approximately $700 million to settle an investigation by over 40 U.S. states into claims that it improperly marketed its talc-based baby powder without adequately warning about potential health risks. This settlement aims to prevent potential lawsuits that allege J&J concealed links between its talc powder and various cancers. The agreement, still in finalization, follows J&J's failed attempts to use bankruptcy courts to settle numerous lawsuits accusing it of hiding the health risks of its baby powder.The litigation, which has been ongoing for a decade, has had a noticeable impact on J&J's stock price and overall market performance. Initially, J&J had proposed a $9 billion settlement for all current and future baby powder claims through a bankruptcy filing of one of its units. The company had previously set aside $400 million to resolve U.S. states' consumer protection claims, which was increased following mediation.However, the proposed settlement does not include suits by Mississippi and New Mexico, which are seeking higher settlements due to their ongoing litigation efforts. These states argue for significant damages based on the extensive sale of baby powder without cancer warnings over several decades.J&J faces broader legal challenges beyond this settlement, with over 50,000 lawsuits alleging that its talc-based products, contaminated with asbestos, pose a cancer risk. Despite maintaining that its products do not cause cancer and appropriately marketing its baby powder for over a century, J&J has faced numerous court losses and large damage awards. In response to declining sales and ongoing litigation, J&J discontinued its talc-based powders in the U.S. and Canada in 2020 and pledged to replace talc with cornstarch in its products globally by the end of the previous year.J&J to Pay $700 Million to Settle States' Talc Investigation (2)In my latest column, I explore the potential of tax policy as a solution to address the critical issue of water depletion. Water, our most finite resource, has been overexploited for decades, leading to alarming groundwater depletion in the United States since 1900. As climate change disrupts the distribution of freshwater resources, tax policy emerges as a possible remedy.Drawing inspiration from the success of the Pajaro Valley's water tax, which effectively curbed water usage while mitigating saltwater infiltration and crop destruction in the California desert, I delve into the implications of such a tax on a broader scale. Overuse of aquifers goes beyond water depletion; it can result in aquifer failure, which is often difficult and expensive to repair.Tax policy, a tool for making resource users bear the true cost of their actions, is especially pertinent to address the tragedy of the commons observed in groundwater use. By internalizing the cost of water extraction and its associated damages, a water tax can incentivize responsible water use.However, the effectiveness of a water tax not only lies in its implementation but also in wise investment of the revenue generated. I propose allocating funds toward promising technologies like hydropanels that generate clean drinking water from the air, as well as improving existing water transport, storage, and recapture systems.Investments in desalination, water recycling, and more durable water storage and transport methods can further mitigate water loss. Research grants and public-private partnerships can accelerate technology development and infrastructure improvement.In conclusion, the Pajaro Valley's success with a water tax demonstrates the potential of tax policy to manage our vital water resources effectively. By deterring overuse, internalizing costs, and directing revenue toward innovative solutions, we can shift from water consumption to responsible stewardship, ensuring the sustainable management of this essential resource.Taxing Water Is the Only Way to Limit Use and Reduce Depletion Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

On this day in legal history, August 7, 1789, Congress passed an act known as the 9th Act of the First Congress, which established the Lighthouse Service. This marked a crucial commitment to maritime navigation safety in the United States and was a key piece of legislation designed for the establishment and support of lighthouses, beacons, buoys, and public piers. Remarkably, this was the first non-revenue responsibility assigned to Collectors of Customs. They were tasked with the design, construction, staffing, and management of lighthouses within their Customs districts, broadening their role beyond mere revenue collection. Two centuries later, the importance of this act was commemorated when Congress designated August 7, 1989, as National Lighthouse Day, celebrating both the history and the continued significance of lighthouses and other navigational aids in American maritime history.National Lighthouse Day – August 7thRoger Johnson, a prominent M&A partner at Kirkland & Ellis in London, specializing in private equity deals, was asked to leave the firm after it was discovered he was in talks with a rival company. Johnson, who joined Kirkland from Linklaters in 2015, was instrumental in the U.S. firm's efforts to expand into the private equity M&A sector in London. His departure was confirmed by a spokesperson from Kirkland, who wished him well but declined to comment further on personnel matters. Johnson's recent achievements include representing EQT in a £4.5 billion takeover of Dechra, a veterinary pharmaceuticals company. This personnel change follows the departure of David Holdsworth, a fellow Linklaters alumnus, from Kirkland last year. Separately, on August 2, Kirkland announced the hiring of Alvaro Membrillera, Paul Weiss's London head, a highly rated private equity M&A partner. Meanwhile, Kirkland's average equity partner pay reached $7.5 million in 2022, with the firm's revenue rising nearly 8% to $6.5 billion.Wake Up Call: Kirkland Boots Deals Partner Over Talks With RivalKirkland & Ellis M&A star asked to leave after exit plans leakedDonald Trump's lawyers have dropped a lawsuit in Georgia seeking to force a state judge to rule on Trump's request to discard evidence gathered by a special purpose grand jury and to disqualify Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis from the investigation. This decision came three days after the judge denied the request to remove Willis. Though disagreeing with Judge Robert McBurney's ruling, Trump's lawyers stated that they will explore other channels to seek judicial review. Fulton County DA Willis plans to decide this month whether to ask a new grand jury to charge Trump and his associates. The special purpose grand jury Trump is challenging had only an advisory role and could not indict. This legal maneuvering comes as Trump already faces three other indictments. Additionally, the Fulton County Sheriff's Office announced they will close streets around the courthouse for two weeks starting August 7th as a security measure.Trump Drops Georgia Lawsuit Over Grand Jury, Promises New CaseDemocratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has filed a lawsuit against Google LLC for removing his YouTube videos that questioned the safety of Covid-19 vaccines. Kennedy, a well-known anti-vaccine activist, labeled the company's medical misinformation policies as “impermissibly vague” and the video removal as “unconstitutional,” asserting it violated his First Amendment right to free speech. The lawsuit also criticized the Biden Administration, claiming officials colluded with tech companies to “censor dissenting views” on the pandemic. Kennedy has faced significant backlash for his misleading claims about vaccines and controversial remarks related to the pandemic. The lawsuit reflects broader critiques against social media platforms implementing policies to combat misinformation. YouTube defended its actions, stating that it enforces its Community Guidelines transparently and consistently, and a Google spokesperson described the claims as meritless. Kennedy, seeking an order to restore all removed videos and demanding a jury trial, likens YouTube to a “digital town square” where censorship of political speech is inappropriate.RFK Jr. Sues Google, YouTube For Removal of Anti-Vaccine SpeechOn Sunday, Donald Trump targeted the federal judge overseeing the case that charges him with conspiring to overturn the 2020 presidential election. Trump expressed in a social media post that he cannot receive a fair trial from U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan and intends to seek her recusal and a change of venue. No formal request has yet been filed. Trump faces a Monday deadline to respond to a proposed protective order meant to shield witnesses and evidence after Chutkan denied his request for a delay. Trump's lawyer, John Lauro, defended Trump's actions after the 2020 election loss, referring to them as "aspirational asks" rather than directives, and expressed opposition to the protective order. Former Vice President Mike Pence countered Trump's claims, saying he had no right to overturn the election result. Additionally, Trump is facing other legal troubles, including possible charges in Georgia, along with ongoing charges related to classified documents and hush money payments.Trump targets DC judge in 2020 election case | ReutersAccording to a new report from the Thomson Reuters Institute, large and midsized law firms experienced a boost in financial performance in Q2 2023, with demand growth for legal work in specific areas like bankruptcy, labor and employment, litigation, and antitrust. The demand increased by 1.5% year-over-year, and the Law Firm Financial Index jumped six points in Q2 to reach its highest level since Q1 2022. The average rate a client agreed to pay for legal services grew by 5.9% in comparison to the same period the previous year. Demand specifically grew for bankruptcy work (5.7%), antitrust and regulatory work (4.6%), and labor and employment work (2.4%), with litigation climbing by 4%. On the other hand, demand for mergers and acquisitions fell by 6%, and real estate demand dropped by 8.4%. The report also highlights differing tactics between midsize and large firms to strengthen profitability, with midsize firms increasing their associate headcount, and top 100 firms trimming theirs. While some large U.S. law firms have made layoffs, the industry is not conducting mass layoffs like in the 2008 financial crisis.Law firms saw rising demand in Q2, report says | ReutersElon Musk's social media platform, X, formerly known as Twitter, will pay legal bills for users who have been treated unfairly by employers for posting or liking something on the site. Musk announced this commitment in a post on X, stating that there would be no limits to funding the legal bills. He also emphasized that legal action would be "extremely loud," and that the company would target the boards of directors of offending companies. This move comes at a time when the platform is experiencing a new high in monthly users, with over 540 million as of last month. X is currently going through organizational changes and is aiming to boost falling advertising revenue. The platform was rebranded from Twitter to X in July, with Musk stating a new focus on building an "everything app." However, the platform's cash flow remains negative due to a nearly 50% drop in advertising revenue and a substantial debt load, with an expected upturn in advertising revenue failing to materialize in June.Musk's X to pay legal bills of people 'unfairly treated' for posting on platform | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Compliance officers are operating with limited sets of resources while simultaneously managing a diverse and expanding range of subject areas where the volume of regulatory change is expected to increase. The 14th annual Cost of Compliance, published by Thomson Reuters Regulatory Intelligence, found costs are expected to increase with difficulties recruiting appropriately skilled staff also reported.In this episode of Compliance Clarified, managing editor, Alex Robson, is joined by Mike Cowan, senior regulatory intelligence expert, on the findings of the report. The research was carried out before the latest developments in generative AI, which they also discuss.In 2022, the number of regulatory events monitored by TRRI was 61,228, the third-highest annual total since 2008. This figure covered 1,374 regulators in 190 countries, equivalent to an average 234 daily alerts. And in the coming year 73% of respondents said they expected an increase in regulatory activity.This increase in regulatory activity was also seen as a compliance challenge for both corporate boards and compliance officers were keeping up with the volume and implementation of regulatory change and managing growing regulatory expectations featured prominently in many respondents' responses.The "Compliance Clarified" podcast series covers the wide range of topics which affect compliance at financial services firms and aims to help compliance officers make sense of the often-challenging regulatory environment. It considers the big challenges of the day and offers practical ideas for emerging good practice.Programme notes:Visit the Thomson Reuters Institute to download a free copy of the report: www.thomsonreuters.com/en/institute.htmlSubscribers to Regulatory Intelligence can find a copy on the home page. Compliance Clarified is a podcast from Thomson Reuters Regulatory Intelligence.Listen to wide-ranging, insightful discussions on all things compliance for financial services firms. We delve into the hot topics of the day, the challenges faced and offer up practical ideas for emerging good practice. We de-mystify regulation and explore the art, as well as the science, of the ever-expanding role of the compliance officer.  Enforcements, digital transformation, regulatory change, governance, culture, conduct risk – anything and everything impacting the compliance function is up for discussion.

A lot of attention has been paid lately to lateral hiring and associate compensation, but changes are also taking place in law firm staffing.  Thomson Reuters Institute recently completed its annual analysis on law firm staffing ratios.  Today, we'll talk about what the new trends are with Isaac Brooks, senior industry data analyst and Natalie Runyon, director, ESG content and advisory services.

I spent two days at the 2022 International Legal Technology Association conference interviewing leaders about key trends and developments that are impacting the profession. Thanks to David Carns of Casepoint, Brian Kenneally of Bundledocs, Josh Baxter of NetDocuments, Kalina Leopold of Lupl, Olga Mack of Parley Pro, a LexisNexis company, Steve Irons of DocSolid, Tom Dreyfus of Josef, Tori Kim of eBrevia, and Zach Warren of Thomson Reuters Institute for sharing their perspectives on the road ahead for legal tech.

I spent two days at the 2022 International Legal Technology Association conference interviewing leaders about key trends and developments that are impacting the profession. Thanks to David Carns of Casepoint, Brian Kenneally of Bundledocs, Josh Baxter of NetDocuments, Kalina Leopold of Lupl, Olga Mack of Parley Pro, a LexisNexis company, Steve Irons of DocSolid, Tom Dreyfus of Josef, Tori Kim of eBrevia, and Zach Warren of Thomson Reuters Institute for sharing their perspectives on the road ahead for legal tech.

Join us on Be Brave at Work as we speak with Phyllis Weiss Haserot. Phyllis, “the cross-generational voice,” is a facilitator, marketing/business development strategist, speaker, podcaster, and best-selling author focused on the business of uniting People, Purpose, Potential and Profits across the generations at work. Phyllis brings multi-generational perspective, curiosity, extensive marketing and conflict resolution experience to help organizations solve intergenerational challenges with clients, external stakeholders and for internal teams, including attraction/retention, knowledge transfer and succession planning. The desired outcomes are greater GENgagementtm harmony, productivity and profit. Clients often say she has an unusual ability to relate to all the different generations - and, in turn, to help them to better understand each other and work harmoniously. Fostering inclusion and belonging has always been a part of her work since an early career as an urban planner. Over three decades as President of Practice Development Counsel, Phyllis has been a trailblazer as both business development consultant to professional service firms and in delivering multigenerational workplace solutions to a variety of industries. Phyllis is co-host of the Legacy-Makers@Work podcast and author of You Can't Google It!: The Compelling Case for Cross-Generational Conversation at Work, Embrace GENgagement: How to Transform Generational Challenges to Opportunities for You and Your Firm, and The Rainmaking Machine, and frequent speaker, blogger, podcast guest and Thomson Reuters Institute columnist. Links of Interest LinkedIn Twitter Facebook You Can't Google It Website PDCounsel Website You Can't Google It!: The Compelling Case for Cross-Generational Conversation at Work A special thank you to our sponsor, Cabot Risk Strategies. For more information, please visit them at CabotRisk.com Please click the button to subscribe so you don't miss any episodes and leave a review if your favorite podcast app has that ability. Thank you! More information about Ed, visit Excellius.com © 2022 Ed Evarts