Pricing questions, answered neutrally.

Because traditional firms sell a different delivery model, not a different product. A $12,000 invoice at a traditional firm typically breaks down as:

The IRS study output — the 5/7/15-year asset reclassification with supporting documentation — is substantively the same as an automated study on comparable property. The premium pays for an engineer on-site, a commissioned salesperson, and firm overhead. All three are real costs; none are quality requirements.

At a minimum, any compliant study includes: (1) an engineering report documenting the methodology and findings, (2) a detailed asset listing with cost basis, MACRS class life, and allocation source, (3) supporting photographs and documentation references, (4) a depreciation schedule for the first year and projected recovery period, (5) audit support for the life of the IRS examination window.

Most automated providers include Form 3115 preparation or Form 3115 guidance if the property was placed in service in a prior year — confirm before you buy. Some traditional firms charge separately for Form 3115 ($500–$2,000).

Not typically included at any price: actual filing with your return (your CPA does this), Form 3115 filing fee (none — IRS does not charge), amended return preparation, or multi-year tax modeling.

Yes. The study fee is an ordinary and necessary expense for determining the correct tax treatment of your property. It is deductible in the year paid, on the same schedule as other professional fees (Schedule E for rental property, Schedule C for operating businesses).

Net cost math: at a 32% federal bracket, a $1,495 study costs $1,017 after tax deduction. At a $500K basis with a typical Year-1 deduction of $60K and 100% bonus depreciation, that $1,017 net cost returns ~$19,200 in Year-1 tax savings. A 18× net return on the study fee alone, before considering ongoing accelerated depreciation.

No. The IRS Audit Technique Guide for Cost Segregation enumerates thirteen principal elements of a quality study. An on-site inspection is not among them. The ATG contemplates studies prepared from plans, specifications, cost invoices, photographs, and other documentation — provided that documentation is sufficient to support the allocations.

Site visits add $1,500–$4,000 in engineer time, travel, and scheduling. They are sometimes the most efficient way to gather documentation on older or unusual properties — but when plans, invoices, and photographs are already available (as on most post-2010 residential properties), a site visit is a cost line item, not a quality requirement.

The published ranges are 25th–75th percentile bands — by definition, 50% of quotes fall outside them. Common reasons an individual quote deviates:

If your quote is above the 75th percentile for your property type and no factors above apply, ask the provider for their basis — there is no methodology reason for a same-property premium.

It's reasonable, but the ROI falls off quickly. The price delta between two same-tier providers is typically 10–20%. The delta between tiers (automated vs. traditional) is 3–10×. Choosing the right tier matters far more than choosing within a tier.

One practical approach: use an automated provider's published pricing as the baseline (they'll quote in minutes, no call required), then get one traditional quote only if you have a specific reason to want traditional delivery. If the traditional quote is not 5–10× the automated quote for the same property, it may be a strong signal about the traditional firm; if it is 10×, that is the market.

The four most common surprise line items, in order of frequency:

Automated providers typically quote fixed-fee with Form 3115 included, no travel, and free audit defense for the examination window. Read the engagement letter before signing.

The breakeven math is dominated by your marginal tax rate and the Year-1 bonus depreciation rate (100% for PY 2025). At a $150K basis SFR, automated providers quote $495–$795. Typical 5-year reclassification is 18% = $27,000. At 32% federal bracket with 100% bonus depreciation, Year-1 deduction is ~$8,640 — a 10–17× return on study cost. Even at a $100K basis, the math usually clears.

Below ~$75K basis, the study fee approaches the deduction value and the case weakens. Most providers decline below $100K basis; automated caps typically start there.

No — not as a function of price. Audit risk on cost segregation correlates with (a) aggressiveness of allocations relative to comparable properties, (b) documentation quality, and (c) whether the preparer is qualified. Price is not on the list.

A well-documented $495 study with conservative allocations has materially lower audit exposure than an $8,500 study with aggressive personal-property reclassifications and thin documentation. The IRS examines methodology and support, not invoices.

What does correlate with audit outcomes: whether the preparer responds to the IRS, whether audit defense is included in scope, and whether the engineer on the report is available for examination questions. Confirm all three before signing any engagement.