EY cancels ‘Project Everest’ after months of wrangling

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

EY cancels ‘Project Everest’ after months of wrangling

Warsaw/Poland, April 8, 2018: View on EY (formerly Ernst&Young) logo on headquarters

The ‘big four’ firm had wanted to separate tax services between two new audit and consulting businesses, but its global leadership still thinks a split might be necessary.

EY has cancelled ‘Project Everest’ due to opposition from the US executive committee, reported the Financial Times yesterday, April 11.

The global leadership told partners in an internal note that the project had been cancelled, suggesting the group would pursue a different deal. Project Everest would have separated EY’s audit and consulting functions with tax services divided between the two new businesses.

“We have been informed that the US executive committee has decided not to move forward with the design of Project Everest. Given the strategic importance of the US member firm to Project Everest, we are stopping work on the project,” the global leadership told partners in the internal note.

“We acknowledge the challenges with separating some of our businesses that have the deepest technical expertise in a way that gives both organisations the capabilities they need to compete in the market effectively,” they explained.

However, the debate about the future of accounting is not over, especially for auditors and tax professionals. A separation of services is one way to try to prevent conflicts of interest between audits and tax advice.

EY’s global leadership told partners: “We also recognise that we need more time to make the necessary investments to prepare the businesses for a separation.”

The firm’s global leadership decided to go ahead with Project Everest in September 2022, though the early work had already begun in November 2021.

EY originally planned to sell about 15% of the consulting business for more than $10 billion, with another 15% being reserved for staff equity incentives, leaving 70% for partners. Consulting would have dropped the partnership model and become a public company under the plan.

A new consulting company, called NewCo, would have gained 60% of EY’s projected revenue of $42 billion in 2023. The audit arm, named AssureCo, would have taken the remaining 40%. But this division became a focus of intense negotiation in the firm.

The future of tax services was a fundamental question for Project Everest. Auditors stood to gain just 14% of tax services, but US auditors argued for a greater share of up to 20% or 25%. Meanwhile, US consultants had their own arguments for why they should walk away with most of the tax offering.

Yesterday’s announcement was not entirely unexpected – in March, after months of negotiation, EY hit ‘pause’ on the project amid reports of infighting over the details of the separation.

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

Luxembourg’s reform agenda continues at pace in 2025, with targeted measures for start-ups and alternative investment funds
Veteran Elizabeth Arrendale will lead the new advisory practice, which will support clients with M&A tax structuring, post-deal integration, and more
MAP cases keep increasing, and cases closed aren’t keeping pace with the number started, the OECD’s Sriram Govind also told an ITR summit
Nobody likes paperwork or paying money, but the assertion that legal accreditation doesn’t offer value to firms and clients alike is false
Ryan hopes the buyout will help it expand into Asia and the Middle East; in other news, three German finance ministers have called for a suspension of pillar two
SKAT, which was represented by Pinsent Masons, had accused Sanjay Shah and other defendants of fraudulent dividend tax refund claims
TP managers must be able to explain technical issues in simple terms, ITR’s European Transfer Pricing Forum heard
Prudential had challenged HMRC over VAT group relief; in other news, Donald Trump unveiled timber and wood tariffs, and the European Commission published a ViDA implementation strategy
Australia’s CbCR rules have ‘widespread support’ and do not put American companies at a competitive disadvantage, the FACT Coalition said
Baker McKenzie advised two of the member firms involved, while several advisers provided transaction counsel to US-based Grant Thornton Advisors
Gift this article