Basis vs. KPMG on Cost Segregation: A Side-by-Side Fit Comparison

Quick comparison

What KPMG is, based on its public site

KPMG is one of the Big Four global professional services networks, organized around four main service lines: Advisory, Audit & Assurance, Tax, and Law, serving industries from financial services and government to healthcare and industrial manufacturing. Cost segregation and fixed-asset depreciation review are the kind of specialized work that sits inside the Tax service line for clients already engaged with the firm on broader corporate tax matters. KPMG does not market a dedicated standalone cost segregation page the way a specialty tax firm does, which reflects how the work typically reaches clients: as part of an existing enterprise relationship, not a self-serve engagement.

That distinction shows up clearly on the firm's own public site, which organizes its offerings around industries (Financial Services, Government, Healthcare, Industrial Manufacturing) rather than around individual tax mechanics an owner might search for directly, a structure built for institutional buyers navigating a large organization, not for an individual owner comparing options.

The individual owner problem this creates

A single commercial building owner or a short-term rental host generally does not have, and does not need, an existing enterprise advisory relationship with a Big Four firm. Approaching a firm structured around institutional clients for a one-off study on a single property runs into friction: engagement minimums, timelines built for larger scopes, and a sales process that assumes a longer relationship rather than a single transaction. That friction is not a flaw in KPMG's model; it is a mismatch between what the firm is built to sell and what the individual owner is trying to buy.

What working with a network firm like KPMG typically involves

KPMG operates as a network of member firms across many countries, which is a genuine advantage for a multinational corporation coordinating tax positions across jurisdictions, or a domestic institutional client that wants consistency across a large, complex real estate portfolio. That structure supports long engagement cycles: scoping calls, coordination across service lines (Tax working alongside Audit or Advisory on the same client relationship), and reporting built to satisfy institutional governance requirements. None of that is unnecessary for the clients it is built for. It is simply more process than a single-property engagement calls for.

How Basis is structured for that gap

Basis is built around the individual owner as the default client, not the exception. A short-term rental study runs from the existing Airbnb or VRBO listing photos, no site visit required. A free Preliminary Benefit Estimate at /qualify takes about 60 seconds and models the likely first-year number before any payment, which matters for an owner deciding whether a single study is worth the fee, a decision an enterprise client folding the cost into a larger advisory budget does not face the same way. Every study also carries a guarantee, at least 20 times the fee in first-year deductions on commercial property or 30 times on a short-term rental, or the study is free. Both a budget engineered tier and a full engineered tier are available, letting an individual owner match scope to the size of the property rather than absorbing an enterprise-scale engagement fee for a single building.

What stays the same regardless of which firm performs the study

Whichever firm ultimately does the work, the classification rules do not change. Carpet, most flooring, decorative lighting, cabinetry, and certain electrical or plumbing serving equipment fall into the 5-year bucket. Land improvements, paving, fencing, landscaping, site utilities, outdoor lighting, fall into 15-year. The structural shell and central HVAC stay on the long schedule regardless of firm size or client relationship. A KPMG-produced study and a Basis-produced study, done correctly, both follow the same IRS Audit Techniques Guide framework. The difference this comparison focuses on is not the tax mechanics; it is which firm's process actually fits a given owner's situation.

A worked example: medical clinic property

On a delivered medical clinic study, the building basis was $1,404,500. The engineered study identified $241,839 in first-year deductions for a $10,000 fee, a 24.2 to 1 ratio, above the guarantee floor. A single medical practice owning its building is exactly the kind of individual commercial owner the broker model targets: real basis, real depreciation opportunity, but not part of an institutional portfolio and not an existing enterprise tax client of a Big Four firm.

Turnaround expectations differ with client structure

An engagement inside a large advisory relationship typically moves on a scoping and approval timeline set by the broader relationship, not by the property alone. A standalone engagement built for individual owners can move faster because there is no larger relationship to coordinate around: a study at Basis typically takes 4 to 6 weeks in peak tax season and 2 to 3 weeks in January and February, starting from the point documents are submitted, not from the point a larger advisory engagement gets scoped and approved.

Choosing between the two

An owner already inside a KPMG advisory relationship, managing an institutional portfolio, gains efficiency from keeping the work in-house. An individual commercial owner or STR host without that relationship is generally better matched to a firm built specifically for single-property engagements. The full landscape comparison covers where every model fits, and the broader decision framework walks through the criteria in more depth.

Details about KPMG come from its public materials as of August 2026; tell us if something is out of date.

Frequently asked questions

Does KPMG offer cost segregation studies for individual property owners?

KPMG's tax practice is structured around large enterprise and institutional clients, with fixed-asset work like cost segregation typically delivered inside that broader relationship. Confirm directly with the firm whether it takes standalone individual-owner engagements.

Is KPMG's cost segregation methodology different from a specialty firm's?

The underlying classification rules and IRS Audit Techniques Guide (Pub 5653) apply the same way regardless of firm. What differs is the client relationship structure and process built around the engagement, not the depreciation math itself.

Why would a small commercial owner not go with a Big Four firm?

Big Four engagement structures, minimums, and timelines are generally built around large institutional portfolios. A single building owner is often better matched to a firm built specifically for individual-property engagements.

Can I get a cost segregation estimate without a big advisory relationship?

Yes. A free Preliminary Benefit Estimate at /qualify takes about 60 seconds and requires no existing advisory relationship, just basic property information.

Does Basis serve larger commercial properties too, or only small ones?

Basis serves individual commercial properties across a range of sizes, from smaller office buildings to properties with several million dollars in building basis, as long as the engagement is a single property rather than an institutional portfolio.