TASA rules are here — and your engagement letter probably isn’t compliant

Once upon a time, your engagement letter was two pages. Three, if you were being thorough. Now? Some accountants are pushing out 10, 20, even 130-page proposals and for what?

Thanks to recent changes from the Tax Practitioners Board (TPB) and the introduction of new TASA requirements, many firms have scrambled to update their letters of engagement. And while the intent is good — better compliance, more transparency, clearer client understanding — the execution? It’s quickly turning into a bloated, unread mess.

If you’re sitting there thinking “is it just me?” — it’s not. Here’s what accountants and bookkeepers across Australia are saying. Spoiler: you’re very much not alone.

Clients aren’t reading them, and we know it

A post in the Small Business Accountants & Advisers Brain Trust Facebook group kicked off a massive discussion around the length (and usefulness) of modern engagement letters.

One bookkeeper shared:

“I use Ignition and made a few minor TASA updates — but wow. 10 pages when exported to a PDF. Not many will read it, and even fewer will scroll through it all.”

Another added:

“Mine’s 28 pages long. That’s just the scope for five entities.”

And one comment said it all:

“Make it 100 pages so no one ever reads it. On page 88, add ‘if you piss me off you’ll be charged a $1,000 piss-me-off fee.’”

Despite the laughs, the point stands: most clients aren’t reading them. Many firms openly admit this:

“Honestly… how many clients even read them?”

“I’ve come across one.”

“Everyone just clicks through to get it signed off.”

So why are we writing mini legal novels in the first place?

The font-size drama — is 9pt even allowed?

It gets better. One member asked whether there’s a legal minimum font size for Terms & Conditions. Turns out, there’s no statute that says “you must use 12pt font” — but if your text is too small, a court could rule that your terms are misleading, unfair, and unenforceable.

Best practice? Stick with 11–12pt for readability, especially in key clauses like fees, dispute resolution, liability, and termination. One firm said their terms are formatted in two columns using 9pt font — fine in theory, but borderline in practice.

If your goal is to protect the business, make sure people can actually read what they’re agreeing to.

Do we need to reissue all engagements by 1 July?

Another hot topic: whether staggered engagements throughout the year still comply with the new TASA rules.

One accountant asked:

“We stagger our engagements through the year using Ignition, but should we now be bulk rolling them out all at once on 1 July to be compliant?”

They raised a great point — if you haven’t issued your updated engagement yet, and you’re still relying on last year’s agreement, are you actually covered? Or are you exposing yourself to risk?

The answer? It depends.

The TPB hasn’t mandated that engagements must align with financial year rollover. But if you’re relying on old agreements that no longer meet TASA standards, you’ve got a problem. If you’ve updated your template but haven’t reissued it to current clients, you’re also in a grey zone.

Our take? Review your process now. If your engagement approach is staggered (for good reason, to ease workflow and cash flow), that’s fine. But make sure you’ve reissued updated engagements to everyone as part of that cycle. Don’t assume last year’s covers you.

What are we even including in these letters?

Here’s a rough sample of what firms are now packing into engagement letters, based on feedback from the group:

• Fees quoted and payment terms

• Variations and scope limits

• Client responsibilities

• Termination clauses

• Use of debt collectors

• Ownership of work

• Deadlines and deliverables

• Confidentiality and indemnity

• Dispute resolution

• Confirmation and acceptance

That’s before you even get into the T&Cs from your membership body (e.g. CA ANZ or NTAA), or any disclaimers from your insurer or legal team. Some even include clauses for dealing with crypto clients, AI tool usage, or outsourcing.

One firm broke down their structure like this:

• Cover

• Letter

• Agreed services 4–6. Other services offered (with pricing)

• 4–6. Other services offered (with pricing)

• Client authority & acceptance 8–10. Terms and conditions from CA Plus some ICB-specific extras for good measure.

• 8–10. Terms and conditions from CA

• Plus some ICB-specific extras for good measure.

That’s not necessarily a bad thing; it’s just a lot.

Alternatives worth exploring

Not everyone’s going to take the long-form route. Some firms are getting smart with short-form templates:

“We’ve got a 2-page short version and link out to the T&Cs on our website.”

It’s a clean approach but not without risk. As one accountant noted:

“If a client disputes something later, how do you prove what version of the web page they saw?”

Good point. If you’re using links, make sure you archive the version they agreed to (ideally as a PDF snapshot) and timestamp it with the client’s approval. That way, you’ve got a clear audit trail if needed.

Another tip from the group:

“Remove barriers to sale. Make it easy. Include a checkbox next to the T&Cs link and get them to sign next to it.”

Our verdict? Cover yourself — but keep it readable

At the end of the day, this isn’t about winning design awards. It’s about managing risk and setting clear expectations with clients.

But the balance is shifting too far.

We’re building engagement letters that no one reads, no one understands, and that don’t actually improve the client experience. As one person put it:

“Better to have a longer document no one reads that covers you… than a short one no one reads that doesn’t.”

Sure, but maybe there’s a smarter middle ground?

If you’re feeling overwhelmed, here’s one tool that can help

If managing engagement letters is becoming a compliance headache, tools like

Ignition

are worth looking at.

It automates your engagement process, handles digital sign-offs, integrates with Xero and your payments, and makes it easy to track who’s agreed to what, and when. Best of all, it helps you manage those annual renewals without chasing clients manually.

That means fewer awkward conversations, fewer payment delays, and less admin overhead.

Plenty of accountants in the Brain Trust thread said they use it, and with the new compliance pressure, it’s becoming more than just a ‘nice-to-have’.

Final thoughts: Less is more (if it’s done right)

Here’s the truth no one wants to admit:

Whether your engagement letter is 2 pages or 28, 99% of clients won’t read it. So write it for the 1% who will, the lawyers, the regulators, and the one client who tries to dispute your invoice 10 months later.

But don’t punish every other client with 130 pages of unreadable fine print. Keep it clean. Keep it clear. And use smart tools to manage the process.

And if you haven’t reviewed your engagement letter for this year, now’s the time.