The evidentiary and non-evidentiary versions of the accountant-client privilege are, as a general rule, creations of Federal or state statute.
In the United Kingdom in particular the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 actually requires accountants (and solicitors, insolvency practitioners, etc.)
The privilege does not apply to any written communication before October 22, 2004, between a federally authorized tax practitioner and a director, shareholder, officer, employee, agent, or representative of a corporation in connection with the promotion of the direct or indirect participation of such corporation in any tax shelter.
The FATP privilege does not generally apply to accountants who are not CPAs or EAs (unless they qualify as enrolled actuaries).
The FATP privilege might not apply to certified public accountants who are not licensed to practice in the state in which the client lives (for example, in a situation where the client lives in New Jersey but works in New York, where he consults a CPA who is licensed in New York but not in New Jersey).
Under the argument accepted by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, communication pertinent merely to preparing a tax return does not involve giving or receiving legal advice (see e.g., United States v.
[12] The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, meanwhile, has held that tax returns are not privileged.
[16] On balance, however, the weight of authority is that communication in connection with tax return preparation is probably not protected by the privilege.