texas ethics opinion 706
on this page
texas professional ethics opinion 706, issued in february 20251, represents a watershed moment for management service organization (mso) structures in legal practice. as the first state ethics opinion specifically addressing mso arrangements for law firms, opinion 706 provides crucial regulatory clarity on two fundamental questions that had been plaguing the industry.
significance and context
official citation: texas commission on professional ethics, opinion 706 (february 2025)1 publication: texas bar journal, april 20252 authority: professional ethics committee for the state of texas historical importance: first state ethics opinion specifically addressing mso structures for law firms
the opinion’s significance extends beyond texas - other states frequently look to texas ethics guidance for persuasive authority on professional conduct issues.5
factual background
the texas commission addressed a specific scenario involving a nonlawyer-owned company providing comprehensive support services to law firms:
company characteristics:
- ownership: nonlawyer-owned entity
- services: case management, back-office support, legal technology platform
- scope: not a law firm itself, doesn’t provide legal services
- market: services marketed exclusively to lawyers and law firms
- control: lawyers and firms direct and oversee platform use
proposed fee structure: periodic fees based on percentage of lawyer or law firm revenues
the two key questions
opinion 706 addressed the fundamental compliance questions facing mso structures:
- revenue-based fees: may a lawyer pay an mso fees based on percentage of law firm revenues?1
- equity ownership: may lawyers and nonlawyers share equity ownership in support service companies?1
Two fundamental questions and rulings on MSO structures: revenue-based fees prohibited, equity ownership permitted with conditions
legal holdings
question 1: revenue-based fees - prohibited
holding: lawyers cannot pay msos percentage-based fees tied to firm revenues.1
complete ruling text:
“under the texas disciplinary rules of professional conduct, a lawyer that engages a nonlawyer-owned company to provide a platform of support services may not pay or promise to pay fees to the company based on a percentage of the revenues of the lawyer or the lawyer’s firm.”1
legal reasoning:
- rule violation: texas disciplinary rule 5.04(a) prohibits fee sharing with nonlawyers3
- precedential basis: professional ethics opinion 467 (november 1990) - office space lease with percentage-based rent structure4
- consistency pattern: holdings align with opinions 467, 552, and 6421
- rationale: proposed fee structure constitutes practical fee splitting, not service-based pricing1
question 2: equity ownership - permitted
holding: lawyers may own equity interests in companies with nonlawyers, subject to conditions.1
complete ruling text:
“a lawyer may own an equity interest in a company owned in part by nonlawyers so long as the company does not engage in the practice of law.”1
key conditions:
- mso cannot engage in law practice
- lawyers maintain control over professional judgment
- equity ownership doesn’t create professional conduct conflicts
alternative compliance structures
opinion 706 explicitly permits several alternative fee arrangements:
permitted fee structures
- flat monthly fees: fixed payments regardless of firm revenue5
- cost-plus arrangements: actual costs plus reasonable markup5
- fair market value pricing: compensation reflecting actual services provided1
- other non-revenue-tied methods: any structure not directly tied to firm revenues or case profits1
compliance framework
the opinion establishes clear boundaries:
prohibited: percentage-based payments that constitute fee sharing required: fee structures based on service amount or actual costs permitted: equity ownership with proper structural safeguards
precedential analysis
for comprehensive source documentation including all texas ethics opinions, regulatory documents, and industry analysis, see our complete bibliography.
prior texas opinions
the commission relied heavily on professional ethics opinion 467 (november 1990):
factual parallel: office space lease with percentage-based rent structure prior holding: percentage-based payments constitute fee sharing with nonlawyers legal consistency: opinion 706 follows established texas precedent on fee sharing
rule 5.04(a) framework
texas disciplinary rule 5.04(a) prohibits lawyers from sharing legal fees with nonlawyers, with limited exceptions for:3
- payments to lawyers
- retirement payments to deceased lawyer estates
- court-approved fee sharing in specific circumstances
practical implications
immediate compliance requirements
existing mso arrangements: must restructure fee arrangements to comply with flat-fee or cost-plus models new transactions: cannot use percentage-based fee structures from inception documentation: management service agreements must clearly specify non-revenue-tied fee calculations
market impact
transaction structuring: private equity and other investors must design mso arrangements around compliant fee structures due diligence: existing mso investments may require restructuring to achieve compliance precedential value: other states likely to consider texas approach for persuasive authority
broader regulatory context
national implications
while binding only in texas, opinion 706 provides influential guidance for:
- other state ethics authorities: likely reference point for similar inquiries
- legal practitioners: nationwide compliance planning considerations
- investors: model for structuring compliant mso arrangements
federal considerations
- tax implications: fee structure changes may affect consolidated return eligibility
- securities compliance: equity ownership structures subject to federal securities laws
- antitrust considerations: management service arrangements require competitive pricing analysis
implementation guidance
for law firms
- fee restructuring: convert percentage-based arrangements to flat-fee or cost-plus models
- professional independence: maintain clear boundaries between legal and business decisions
- documentation: ensure management service agreements reflect compliant fee structures
for investors
- due diligence: review existing mso arrangements for percentage-based fee compliance
- transaction structuring: design equity ownership without law practice engagement
- ongoing compliance: monitor fee arrangements for regulatory adherence
for advisors
- precedential research: analyze texas precedent for application in other jurisdictions
- compliance planning: develop mso structures incorporating opinion 706 guidance
- risk assessment: evaluate percentage-based fee arrangements in existing client structures
future developments
regulatory expansion
opinion 706 likely represents the beginning of increased state-level mso guidance:
- other states: may issue similar opinions following texas precedent
- aba consideration: potential model rule amendments addressing mso structures
- federal oversight: possible increased scrutiny of legal service investment structures
market evolution
- standardization: opinion 706 may drive industry-wide adoption of compliant fee structures
- innovation: new service delivery models designed around regulatory compliance
- consolidation: clearer regulatory framework may accelerate mso market development
texas ethics opinion 706 provides essential regulatory clarity for mso structures while maintaining bright-line rules around fee sharing. the opinion’s distinction between prohibited revenue-based fees and permitted equity ownership creates a workable framework for compliant mso arrangements.
references
[2] Texas Bar Journal. “Ethics Opinion 706.” April 2025
[4] Texas Professional Ethics Committee. “Opinion 467.” November 1990. University of Houston Law Center
[5] Holland & Knight. “Restructuring Law Firms Through Management Service Organizations.” July 2025