The 2027 Numbers Landed on 11 September and Your Clients Will Read Them Somewhere

Bloomberg Tax and Accounting published its projected 2027 US tax rates on 11 September 2026. The headline is a 3.2% inflation adjustment, noticeably larger than the 2.7% adjustment that applied for 2026. The projected standard deduction rises to 33,200 dollars for married couples filing jointly, 24,925 dollars for heads of household, and 16,600 dollars for single filers.

The projected alternative minimum tax exemptions follow the same pattern: 144,700 dollars for married couples filing jointly, 93,000 dollars for unmarried individuals, 72,350 dollars for married filing separately, and 32,500 dollars for estates and trusts.

There is one methodological wrinkle worth knowing, because a client will eventually ask. The Bureau of Labor Statistics did not report consumer price index data for October 2025, so the chained CPI calculation behind these projections was computed on an eleven-month average rather than the standard twelve.

That is the technical picture. The commercial picture is simpler. Every business owner and high-earning individual in the country will encounter a version of these numbers over the next eight weeks, most of them in a general-interest news article that tells them what changed and nothing about what to do. The firms that convert that attention into planning work are the ones that published something useful while the attention existed.

Why do projected figures matter before the IRS publishes?

Because planning decisions get made in the gap. The IRS typically releases official inflation adjustments in the autumn, and the projections arrive weeks earlier with a strong track record. Clients making year-end decisions about timing income, bunching deductions, or realising gains need a working number now, not a confirmed one in December.

That gap is the entire opportunity. A firm that can say what the projected numbers mean for a specific client situation is useful in September. A firm that waits for the official release is useful in December, by which point several of the decisions have already been made badly.

What is the 3.2% figure actually telling clients?

That thresholds are moving up faster than they did last year. A 3.2% adjustment against 2026's 2.7% means brackets, the standard deduction and AMT exemptions all widen more than clients have become used to, which changes the arithmetic on any decision about whether to take income this year or next.

For most individual clients the effect is modest. For clients sitting near a threshold, for those with large one-off events, and for anyone managing AMT exposure, it is the difference between two reasonable choices. That is precisely the conversation a planning engagement is built on.

Which clients should hear about this first?

Anyone with a timing decision in the next hundred days. Business owners deciding on equipment purchases or bonus timing, individuals planning a large charitable gift, clients considering a Roth conversion, anyone with concentrated stock and a gain to manage, and estates and trusts where the 32,500 dollar AMT exemption projection is relevant.

That is a segmentation exercise, and it is the highest-return marketing activity available to a CPA firm in September. It does not require a campaign. It requires a filtered list and a short, specific message that says what changed and offers a conversation.

What happens if a firm publishes nothing?

The client reads a national article, forms a rough impression, and makes the decision alone or asks somebody else. The relationship does not break. It just quietly fails to deepen, which is how compliance-only firms stay compliance-only for a decade while wondering why advisory revenue never materialises.

The cost is invisible, which is why it persists. Nobody calls to say they made a year-end decision without you. They simply do it, and you see the result on the return in April.

What should a firm actually publish about this?

One page that states the projected figures clearly, explains what the larger adjustment means in practice, names three or four specific situations where it changes a decision, and offers a planning conversation. It should be written for a business owner rather than a tax reviewer, and it should exist before the official IRS release rather than after.

The temptation is to wait for confirmed numbers so the page is accurate. Resist it. Label the figures as projections, say who published them and when, and update the page when the official numbers arrive. A page updated in November outranks a page first published in November.

How does this become search traffic rather than a newsletter nobody opens?

By naming the year and the thing in the title, because that is what gets typed. Terms built around projected 2027 brackets, standard deduction amounts and AMT exemptions carry genuine search volume each autumn, and the competition for them is national publishers rather than firms, which means a firm page can rank on specificity.

Specificity is the lever. National coverage explains the numbers to everybody. A firm page that explains what they mean for a construction business in one state, or for a client with a large capital gain, answers a question the national coverage structurally cannot. That difference is visible to a reader within a few seconds.

Why year-end is the wrong time to start

Because the work that makes a page findable takes weeks, and the demand curve for year-end planning peaks in November and collapses in January. A page published in late November has no time to be indexed, linked and ranked before the season it was written for ends.

This is the single most common timing mistake in accounting firm marketing. The content is right, the audience is right, and it arrives three weeks after the decisions were made. September is not early for this. It is the correct time, and it is already slightly late.

What does the OBBBA context change?

The projections incorporate adjustments made under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, including modifications to employer-provided child care credits and information reporting thresholds. For firms with employer clients, that is a second conversation sitting inside the same news event.

Two distinct advisory conversations from one publication date is unusually efficient. Most firms will use it for one, or for none. Splitting them into separate client segments, with a separate message for employers, roughly doubles the response from the same underlying work.

How do you know whether any of it worked?

Count booked planning conversations, not page views. A year-end planning page that produces twelve conversations for a firm with two hundred business clients has done its job. The same page producing four thousand views and no conversations has a copy problem or a missing call to action, and those are different faults with different fixes.

Set the measurement up before publishing rather than afterwards. The analytics and reporting work needed to attribute a booked call to a page is not complicated, but it has to exist before the traffic arrives or the season passes without an answer.

What does the segmented version of this look like in practice?

Four short messages rather than one long one. Business owners get the bracket and timing angle. Employers get the OBBBA reporting and child care credit changes. High-income individuals get the AMT exemption movement. Trustees get the estates and trusts figure and nothing else.

Each message is three or four sentences and links to the same page. The segmentation is not about writing four articles. It is about making sure the first line of the message is about the reader, because that is the only part most of them will read before deciding whether to open it.

Firms consistently overestimate how much content this takes and underestimate how much the targeting matters. A generic message to the full list produces a handful of replies. The same content, split four ways with a relevant opening line, produces several times that from the same effort.

Where the seasonal calendar usually breaks

Between the publishing and the following up. A firm writes the page, sends the messages, gets a dozen replies, and then loses four of them because nobody chased a client who said they would call back after a trip. That is not a marketing failure, it is an operations one, and it is the most expensive point in the whole sequence.

Decide before you publish who owns the replies and what happens to a client who does not respond within a week. A named owner and a single follow-up recovers most of what would otherwise fall through, and it costs nothing beyond deciding it in advance.

The pattern underneath this

Every year produces a handful of dates when a firm's clients are simultaneously paying attention to tax. Projected rates in September, official adjustments in the autumn, filing deadlines, and whatever legislation lands. Firms that treat those dates as a publishing calendar build visibility that compounds. Firms that treat each one as a surprise start from nothing every time.

The technical knowledge is not the constraint. Almost every firm reading this can explain what a 3.2% adjustment does to a client near a bracket edge. The constraint is that the explanation lives in the partner's head and in phone calls, rather than on a page that can be found by somebody who has not yet become a client.

We set out how that publishing habit is built, and what it produces, in our guide to digital marketing for accounting firms. The US accounting and CPA firm marketing page covers how it fits alongside the rest of a firm's visibility, and the search engine optimisation service covers getting a seasonal page indexed while the season still exists.

The 2027 numbers are public. The question for the next eight weeks is only whether your clients hear them from you.

FAQs