CSSI Cost Segregation vs AE Tax Advisors
Do not compare study fees alone. Compare the property analysis, report support, Form 3115 work, return implementation, and who owns each step after the report is delivered.
What should you compare in a CSSI cost segregation proposal?
Compare the complete path from building basis to filed tax return—not a projected deduction or study fee by itself.
A useful proposal should let you identify who will reconcile land and building basis, document asset classifications, deliver the depreciation schedules, prepare any required Form 3115, test whether the loss is usable, update the federal and state returns, and answer questions if the study is examined. If any step is outside the quoted scope, price and assign it before hiring the provider.
CSSI publicly markets cost segregation services, but its current scope, fee, turnaround time, implementation assistance, and audit-support terms should be confirmed in the actual proposal. AE Tax Advisors offers an integrated model: we evaluate deduction usability, perform the study, and handle agreed tax-return implementation. The right choice depends on the written deliverables and whether your current preparer will own the work outside the study.
Book a Return Review Call if you want AE to review a proposal against the return work your property will require.
What is verified—and what belongs in the proposal
CSSI is an established cost segregation provider. Historical company materials describe engineering-based studies and coordination with tax professionals. Because service menus and engagement terms change, do not assume that an old brochure or a comparison page defines the scope of a current engagement.
Ask CSSI to state in writing whether the engagement includes a site visit or remote inspection, basis reconciliation, source-level cost support, depreciation schedules, Form 3115 workpapers, responses to preparer questions, report revisions, and audit support. Ask separately who prepares and signs the tax forms. Those answers—not the provider's size or a projected deduction—determine whether you are comparing the same deliverable.
The IRS Cost Segregation Audit Techniques Guide focuses on methodology, documentation, cost reconciliation, asset classification, and the expertise of the people performing the analysis. Use those quality signals when reviewing any provider, including AE.
Who AE Tax Advisors is on cost segregation
We are a tax advisory and preparation firm that performs its own cost segregation studies. The deliverable follows the same engineering-based approach: site data and construction documents are analyzed, components are allocated into 5-year, 7-year, and 15-year MACRS classes, land improvements are separated, and the remaining structural basis is identified on a 27.5-year or 39-year life depending on whether the property is residential rental or nonresidential.
Where the engagement differs is sequence. We analyze usability first. Under Section 469, rental losses are presumptively passive, and a large first-year deduction that gets suspended does nothing for your current-year tax bill. Real estate professional status under Section 469(c)(7), the short-term rental exception for average stays of seven days or less, or the presence of offsetting passive income are what make the deduction real. We confirm one of those applies before running the study.
Then we implement: Form 3115 with the Section 481(a) catch-up adjustment for older properties, amended returns at $2,500 each where a prior year was missed, and the current return prepared by the same team.
Eight questions to ask before signing the proposal
- What basis will the study reconcile? The purchase price is not automatically depreciable basis. The analysis should identify land, acquisition allocations, capitalized improvements, prior depreciation, and the date each asset was placed in service.
- What property facts will be inspected? Confirm whether the team will use site observations, photographs, plans, appraisals, invoices, contractor records, or estimates—and which assumptions require your approval.
- What will the final report contain? Ask for the asset-level cost detail, class lives, recovery periods, conventions, legal rationale, reconciliation to total basis, and depreciation schedules your return preparer needs.
- Who decides whether the deduction is usable? A study can accelerate depreciation while the resulting loss is limited by basis, at-risk, passive-activity, excess-business-loss, or state rules. That tax analysis is separate from allocating building components.
- Who handles an older property? If depreciation treatment must change after the property has already been reported, ask who determines the correction procedure, computes the Section 481(a) adjustment, prepares Form 3115 and its attachments, and coordinates the duplicate-copy filing rules in the current instructions.
- Who implements the report? Identify who updates the fixed-asset ledger, Form 4562, Schedule E or Form 8825, owner K-1s, state returns, basis schedules, and later-year depreciation.
- What does audit support mean? Ask whether it includes written responses, calculation revisions, conferences with the return preparer, and direct participation in an examination—or only a copy of the original report.
- What is excluded from the fee? List proposal revisions, travel, Form 3115, amended or superseding returns, state filings, preparer implementation, and post-delivery support so the total project cost is comparable.
Worked comparison: a lower study fee can cost more
Assume an investor bought a rental building for $1.4 million three years ago. Proposal A quotes $3,200 for a report. The investor's CPA separately quotes $2,500 for the accounting-method review and Form 3115, plus $1,500 to rebuild the depreciation schedule and update the return. Proposal B quotes $5,800 and expressly includes the study, method-change workpapers, Form 3115 preparation, fixed-asset conversion, and return implementation.
Proposal A appears $2,600 cheaper when only the study line is compared. Its known delivered cost is actually $7,200 before any state work or report revisions. Proposal B may be less expensive and has one accountable team—but only if its written scope truly includes those tasks. The same calculation can favor Proposal A when the owner's existing CPA includes implementation in an annual fee. Compare total delivered cost, not labels.
The projected deduction is not the same as tax saved. If the study creates a $250,000 passive loss and the owner has no passive income or qualifying nonpassive treatment, some or all of that loss may be suspended. A proposal review should therefore model both the depreciation result and the return-level usability before treating the estimate as a cash benefit.
Documents to gather for a proposal review
- Closing statement, purchase agreement, appraisal, and any allocation agreed to by the parties
- Prior depreciation schedules and the federal and state returns for every year the property was owned
- Construction contracts, invoices, change orders, plans, renovation records, and available photographs
- Placed-in-service date, rental history, personal-use days, entity ownership, and current use of the property
- Each provider's signed proposal, assumptions, exclusions, delivery timeline, revision policy, and audit-support terms
- Your return preparer's written fee and responsibility for Form 3115, Form 4562, state conformity, and later-year schedules
For filing mechanics, review the current Form 3115 instructions, Form 4562 materials, and IRS Publication 946. The applicable procedure depends on the property's facts and the method already used; a look-back study does not make Form 3115 automatic in every case.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| CSSI | AE Tax Advisors | |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering-based study | ✔ Yes | ✔ Yes |
| Pricing model | Confirm in current proposal | $1/sq ft, $2,000 minimum for the study |
| Preliminary benefit estimate | Confirm current terms | ✔ Available |
| Works with your existing CPA | Confirm roles in proposal | ✔ Yes, for standalone studies |
| Tax return preparation | Confirm current scope | ✔ Available by engagement |
| Form 3115 preparation | Confirm current scope and signer | ✔ Available when the method-change path applies |
| Section 469 usability analysis | Confirm current scope | ✔ Included in tax review |
| Federal and state implementation | Confirm current scope | ✔ Available by engagement |
| Audit support | Confirm actions, limits, and duration | Defined in engagement terms |
| Best comparison measure | Total delivered cost through a filed, supportable return | |
Pros and Cons of Each
Every firm has a profile it serves well and a profile it does not. Here is an honest read on both.
CSSI
High-volume engineering-based cost seg provider
Strengths
- Established provider focused on cost segregation
- Historical public materials describe an engineering-based approach
- May suit owners who want a separate study provider and tax preparer
- A current proposal can be evaluated against the IRS study-quality framework
Limitations
- Current fee and scope must be confirmed directly
- Form 3115, return preparation, and state implementation should not be assumed unless written into the engagement
- Owner and preparer must assign responsibility for loss-usability analysis
- Separate-provider projects can require additional coordination and fees
AE Tax Advisors / Stratum
Cost seg plus full tax implementation
Strengths
- $1 per square foot with a $2,000 minimum, published up front
- Return-level usability analysis can be completed before the study
- Form 3115 and Section 481(a) work are available when the facts support the method-change path
- Federal and state return implementation can be scoped with the study
- One engagement can assign responsibility from study through filed return
Limitations
- Boutique scale with smaller study volume than large national providers
- Integrated return work costs more than purchasing only a report
- Not built for very large industrial or institutional portfolios
- A standalone study still requires clear coordination with your current preparer
- No standalone referral program for outside accounting firms at scale
Which One Should You Choose?
Choose CSSI if
Choose CSSI when its current written proposal covers the study quality and support you need, your tax advisor has accepted responsibility for the return work outside that scope, and the total delivered cost is favorable. Ask both parties to confirm their roles before the study begins.
Choose AE Tax Advisors if
Choose AE Tax Advisors when you want the study and agreed tax-return implementation under one engagement, need a pre-study usability review, or do not yet have a preparer willing to own the method-change and later-year depreciation work.
A caution worth repeating
A study does not file itself. For an older property, the correction may require Form 3115 and a Section 481(a) adjustment, but eligibility and procedure depend on the method used and the property's filing history. For a current-year property, implementation may instead run through the depreciation schedules and owning return. Decide that path before accepting a benefit estimate.
Why Clients Choose AE Tax Advisors
- We check usability before you spend a dollar. Section 469 decides whether your accelerated depreciation offsets income this year or sits suspended. That analysis is free and it happens first.
- $1 per square foot, published. No quote process, no negotiation, no per-property surprise. A $2,000 minimum applies.
- We determine the correction path. When the facts support an accounting-method change, we can prepare Form 3115 and the Section 481(a) workpapers. When an amendment, superseding return, or current-year schedule is proper, we scope that route instead.
- We reconcile prior filings. Older properties are reviewed against depreciation schedules and filed returns before a catch-up amount is proposed.
- The study serves a plan. Depreciation interacts with entity choice, reasonable compensation, retirement plan contributions, and your eventual disposition and recapture exposure. Those are decided together or they are decided badly.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is CSSI a good cost segregation company?
CSSI is an established cost segregation provider, but the decision should turn on its current written proposal. Compare methodology, source support, basis reconciliation, deliverables, exclusions, implementation roles, revision terms, audit support, and total delivered cost.
How much does CSSI charge for a cost segregation study?
Confirm CSSI's current fee and scope directly in its proposal. Compare the study fee plus any separate charges for Form 3115, fixed-asset conversion, federal and state return implementation, report revisions, travel, and audit support. AE's study price is $1 per square foot with a $2,000 minimum; other tax work is scoped separately.
Does CSSI file Form 3115?
Do not assume Form 3115 preparation is included; ask CSSI to identify the preparer and signer in the current proposal. An older property's correction path depends on the method and filing history. AE can prepare Form 3115 and Section 481(a) workpapers when the facts support an accounting-method change.
CSSI vs AE Tax Advisors: which is better for a short-term rental?
Choose the engagement that addresses both the study and the owner's return facts. Average stay, services, material participation, basis, at-risk limits, state conformity, and personal use can affect the result. AE may be a better fit when the owner needs that return analysis and implementation under the same engagement.
Can I get a cost segregation study without changing accountants?
Yes. AE can perform a standalone study, but the owner and existing accountant should assign responsibility for Form 3115 when applicable, fixed-asset conversion, Form 4562, the owning return, state treatment, and future depreciation before the engagement begins.
How long does a cost segregation study take?
Turnaround depends on property complexity, document quality, inspection needs, open assumptions, and each provider's workload. Require the proposal to state document deadlines, inspection timing, draft review, final delivery, and the separate date by which return implementation will be complete.
What documents do I need for a cost segregation study?
Gather the closing statement, purchase agreement, appraisal, land support, prior depreciation schedules and returns, placed-in-service records, plans, invoices, change orders, renovation records, photographs, ownership details, and both the study provider's and tax preparer's written scopes.
Keep Comparing
Disclosure: this page is published by AE Tax Advisors, so we are not a neutral party. We have tried to describe the other firm accurately and fairly using their own public materials, and we say plainly where they are the better fit. Firm details, service menus, and pricing change, verify anything that matters to your decision directly with the firm before you engage. Nothing here is tax advice for your specific situation.
Get the Study and the Filing From One Team
Book a free discovery call. We will confirm whether the deduction is usable in your situation before you spend anything on a study.
Frequently Asked Questions
AE Tax Advisors vs CSSI: which is better?
Neither is better in every case. CSSI may fit when its written study scope is strong and the owner's accountant accepts the remaining implementation work. AE may fit when the owner wants deduction-usability review, the study, and agreed return implementation assigned under one engagement.
How does AE Tax Advisors pricing compare with CSSI?
AE's study price is $1 per square foot with a $2,000 minimum, while return and advisory work is scoped separately. Confirm CSSI's current price directly. Compare total delivered cost, including method-change work, fixed-asset conversion, return preparation, state filings, revisions, and audit support.
Should I switch from CSSI to AE Tax Advisors?
A switch may make sense when responsibility for loss usability, Form 3115, fixed-asset conversion, state treatment, or return implementation is unassigned. It may not make sense when the current study provider and accountant already cover those tasks clearly at a competitive total cost.