NNN lease audit as a CPA service line: positioning, pricing, and delivery guide
CPAs who serve commercial tenants are already inside the financial relationship where CAM audit value lives. They review operating costs, produce financial statements, advise on lease decisions, and in many cases handle ASC 842 lease accounting. Adding CAM audit is not a pivot; it is an extension of work CPAs already do, applied to a document set they have often already reviewed. I built CAMAudit to make that extension practical: the detection work is software-based, the findings report is generated under the partner firm's brand, and the engagement does not require a CRE specialist on staff. This guide covers how to position the service, which clients to target, the practice economics at different volume levels, and the specific licensing question CPAs ask most often.
CAM Reconciliation Audit: A systematic review of a landlord''s annual CAM reconciliation statement against the terms of the tenant''s executed lease. The audit identifies charges that exceed the contractual limits defined in the lease, based on lease clause citations and the landlord''s expense documentation. It is a document analysis engagement, not an attest engagement, and does not require CPA licensure under AICPA attestation standards.
How CAM audit fits within a CPA practice
Commercial tenant clients typically receive an annual CAM reconciliation statement from their landlord. The statement shows: total CAM expenses for the property, the tenant's pro-rata share percentage, the estimated payments made during the year, and the true-up amount owed or credited. Most tenants pay the true-up without review.
CPAs who have already reviewed the client's lease for ASC 842 purposes have a significant head start. The lease document that defines the right-of-use asset also defines the CAM obligations, the excluded expense categories, the management fee cap, the pro-rata share calculation basis, and the audit rights window. In many cases, the CPA has read these provisions already.
Where CAM audit fits in existing CPA workflows:
| Existing CPA Work | CAM Audit Connection |
|---|---|
| ASC 842 lease accounting | Same lease documents; CAM obligations defined in the same lease |
| Year-end financial review | Occupancy cost review includes CAM true-up assessment |
| Cash flow advisory | Overcharge recovery improves operating cash flow |
| Business valuation | CAM liability affects occupancy cost normalization |
| M&A due diligence | Lease liability review includes CAM exposure assessment |
The natural introduction point is the year-end financial review. When reviewing occupancy costs, the CPA is already looking at the CAM line. The audit is the next logical step: verify that the CAM line is correct before it becomes a permanent number in the financial record.
CPA competitive advantages
CPAs bring several advantages that other CAM audit providers do not have.
GAAP fluency for ASC 842 implications: A confirmed overcharge finding may affect the lease liability calculation under ASC 842. If a tenant has been paying charges above the contractual limit and disputes them, the future cash flow assumption in the lease liability model changes. The CPA can identify this accounting implication and address it within the same engagement.
Client trust for financial findings: Clients receive financial findings from their CPA with a level of trust they do not extend to unfamiliar vendors. A findings report delivered under the CPA firm's brand, by the accountant who already reviews the client's financials, carries a credibility advantage that specialist audit firms without an existing relationship cannot replicate.
Existing engagement scope for cost discovery: CPAs already have access to the client's financial records, lease documents, and operating cost history. Document collection for a CAM audit engagement adds minimal friction because the CPA is already working in the same document environment.
Lower client acquisition cost: CPA firms do not need to prospect for new clients to launch this service. The existing client base provides an addressable market of NNN tenants who already trust the firm and have already provided the relevant documents.
CPA practice positioning matrix
Who to offer it to (offer proactively):
| Client Profile | Qualification |
|---|---|
| Client with signed NNN lease(s) and annual CAM reconciliation statements | Core target |
| Multi-location operator with 3 or more NNN lease locations | High-value target; service scales across locations |
| Client approaching lease renewal or expiration | Findings inform renewal negotiation; timing is critical |
| Client who has never audited CAM statements despite having audit rights | Backlog of prior-year statements may be available |
| Client with annual CAM exposure above $15,000 per location | Finding potential justifies engagement fee |
Who to skip (do not offer proactively):
| Client Profile | Reason to Skip |
|---|---|
| Gross lease clients | Landlord absorbs all expenses; no CAM reconciliation |
| Clients with no signed reconciliation statement outstanding | No current audit target |
| Clients with expired audit rights (window closed per lease) | Findings are not actionable |
| Clients where CAM exposure is below $5,000/year | Finding potential does not justify engagement cost at standard billing rates |
AICPA attestation standards: the licensing question
The most common concern CPAs raise is whether providing CAM audit creates an attest obligation that requires adherence to AICPA Statements on Standards for Attestation Engagements (SSAEs). The answer is no, for a specific reason.
SSAE engagements require the CPA to express a conclusion about whether subject matter or an assertion conforms to criteria. CAM audit findings are factual document analysis: the charge in the reconciliation statement is X; the lease says the contractual ceiling is Y; X minus Y is the variance. The CPA is not opining on whether the landlord's financial statements are fairly presented. The CPA is not providing assurance. The CPA is comparing one document against another and reporting what the documents show.
This distinction matters in practice: CAM audit does not require audit independence, engagement letter language referencing SSAE standards, or peer review compliance related to the engagement. It is analytical and advisory work, the same category as lease review commentary, operating cost benchmarking, or financial model review.
CPAs should confirm the specific position with their state board if they have jurisdiction-specific concerns, but this categorization is consistent with AICPA guidance on advisory services.
"After testing reconciliation samples through CAMAudit with CPA partners, the engagement that resonates most with their clients is the ASC 842 cross-check. The CPA already reviewed the lease. The CAM audit confirms whether the landlord''s charges match what the CPA built into the right-of-use asset model. It''s not a separate engagement for the client; it''s a completeness check on work already done." — Angel Campa, Founder, CAMAudit
Service line economics: 20, 40, and 60 engagements per year
The practice economics for a CPA adding CAM audit as a service line are straightforward because the software cost is fixed and the analyst time per engagement is predictable once the workflow is documented.
Economics at three volume levels:
| Volume | Billing Rate | Gross Revenue | Software Cost | Labor Cost | Net Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20 engagements/year | $600/audit | $12,000 | $2,100 (Growth) | $2,250 (1.5 hr @ $75/hr x 20) | $7,650 |
| 40 engagements/year | $700/audit | $28,000 | $2,100 (Growth) | $4,500 (1.5 hr x 40) | $21,400 |
| 60 engagements/year | $750/audit | $45,000 | $4,500 (Scale) | $6,750 (1.5 hr x 60) | $33,750 |
Labor assumptions: 1.5 hours per engagement at a $75/hour internal staff cost. This covers document collection and upload, findings review, report generation, and the delivery call. Some engagements will run longer (complex multi-year audits); most first-year partner firms land at 1.5 to 2.5 hours once the workflow is documented.
At 60 engagements per year, the service generates approximately $33,750 in net contribution with no specialized staff, no new office infrastructure, and no client acquisition cost beyond communication to existing clients. The software costs $4,500 per year at the Scale tier. The ROI on the software investment at this volume is above 600%.
For a detailed ROI model with your specific billing rate and volume assumptions, use the White-Label Margin Calculator.
How to introduce CAM audit to existing clients
The introduction conversation works best when it is positioned as a gap in the existing financial review, not as an additional service being sold. The framing that resonates with existing CPA clients:
Conversation starter: "While reviewing your 2023 occupancy costs, I noticed your NNN lease at [property address] includes an annual CAM reconciliation. You have audit rights under Section [X] of your lease, and the window to audit the 2022 and 2023 reconciliations is still open. We now offer a review of these statements as part of our occupancy cost advisory work. Given that your annual CAM exposure is approximately $[amount], it's worth confirming the charges are consistent with your lease terms."
If the client asks how long it takes: "Once you share the reconciliation statements and the expense ledger, the analysis runs within a business day. We'll schedule a 30-minute call to walk through findings."
If the client asks what it costs: "[Your fee structure]. If we find overcharges, the fee typically pays for itself multiple times over. If we find nothing, you have a documented clean reconciliation on file, which is useful when the lease comes up for renewal."
The most effective presentations pair the introduction with a concrete number: "Your annual CAM is approximately $28,000. If overcharge rates hold consistent with what we typically see in [this property type], there may be $5,000 to $15,000 in recoverable charges."
Continuing education and credential options
CPAs adding CAM audit to their scope do not need a new credential. The relevant knowledge base draws on GAAP fluency, lease reading skills, and basic real estate accounting, all of which are within standard CPA competencies.
Relevant CPE and resources:
- AICPA: Real estate industry CPE, lease accounting updates (ASC 842 amendments and practice aids)
- State CPA societies: Real estate advisory tracks offered by state societies in high-volume commercial markets
- BOMA: Building Owners and Managers Association publishes practitioner-level lease interpretation guides (not CPE-accredited but useful as reference material)
- ICSC: International Council of Shopping Centers maintains educational resources on retail lease structures and CAM calculation standards
- CAMAudit partner documentation: covers the detection methodology for all 14 rules, the document collection workflow, and the findings report structure
The fastest path to competence is running 3 to 5 pilot engagements with existing clients, using the partner onboarding documentation and workflow guides. Practical experience with real reconciliation statements and real lease documents develops judgment that no CPE course delivers.
For a foundational understanding of NNN lease structure before your first engagement, see what is a NNN lease and what is a CAM audit.