09/28/2026
There was a specific moment early in my career when I considered leaving accounting entirely.
I was a few years into a senior tax role at a large firm. The work was technically excellent. The clients were sophisticated. The environment was exactly what I had worked toward from the moment I walked into Georgia State as a returning student.
And I was deeply unsatisfied.
Not because of the work itself — I genuinely loved the complexity of tax strategy. But because of the distance between what I was doing and what I could see needed to be done.
I was working on returns. Big, complex, technically demanding returns. But nobody was having the upstream conversations. Nobody was sitting with a client six months before a major decision and saying — here is what this will cost you, here is what you could do differently, here is what we should think about before you sign anything.
The work was reactive by design. The model required it.
I remember sitting in my car after a long day thinking: this profession has the tools to genuinely change people’s financial outcomes. We are just using them at the wrong point in the process.
That thought took a few more years to become a business. But it never left.
Prime CPA was built backwards from that moment — starting with the question of what a client actually needs, and building a practice model around that instead of around what’s operationally convenient for the firm.
→ Dissatisfaction with how something is done is not a reason to leave — sometimes it’s a reason to build
→ The clearest signal that something needs to exist is the frustration you feel at its absence
→ The best businesses are usually built by people who got tired of the alternative
I almost left this profession because I couldn’t find the version of it I believed in.
So I built it instead.
