Part 2 is where EA candidates hit the wall. here's the data to prove it
I have 1,329 practice attempts to look at. Across 663 unique questions. And the pattern is so clear I don't need a larger sample.
Part 1 accuracy: around 80-88%.
Part 2 accuracy: around 55%.
That's not a small gap. That's a different test.
The numbers
eadojo tracks every answer. Every question has a correct count and a total attempt count. When you group by exam part:
- Part 1 (Individuals): The questions people practice most. filing status, dependency, income types. Most candidates have done tax returns before. The material is familiar even when it's deep.
- Part 2 (Businesses): Partnerships, corporations, basis calculations, entity classification. The accuracy drops off a cliff.
- Part 3 (Representation): Mixed, but trending low. 46% on some sections. The procedural stuff is memorization-heavy and people treat it as an afterthought.
Part 2 is the gatekeeper. Always has been. The IRS knows it. The prep providers know it. And now the data from actual practice sessions confirms it.
What Part 2 questions look like when they kill you
The 25% business travel question I covered in the hardest questions post is a Part 2 question. So is the partnership audit regime question at 33.3%. The corporate stock transfer question at 33.3%. The MFS partnership classification at 33.3%.
All Part 2. All below 35%.
Part 1's hardest questions bottom out around 50%. Part 2's hardest are at 25%.
Why Part 2 is fundamentally different
Part 1 tests whether you understand how individual taxes work. Most EA candidates have done a 1040 before. The concepts are familiar. you're learning precision on top of existing intuition.
Part 2 tests whether you understand structures that don't exist in your personal life. You've never been a partner in a partnership. You've never transferred property to a controlled corporation. You've never calculated stock basis after a distribution. There's no intuition to build on. You're starting from zero.
That means flashcards and multiple choice drills work differently for Part 2. In Part 1, you can often reason your way to the answer even if you don't perfectly remember the rule. In Part 2, if you don't know the rule cold, there's no reasoning your way out.
How to approach Part 2 differently
Stop using the same study method for all three parts. Part 2 needs more time on entity classification flowcharts and basis calculation reps than Part 1 needs on filing status.
Draw the structures. Partnerships, S-corps, C-corps. draw the ownership, draw the basis flow, draw what happens on formation vs distribution vs liquidation. The visual is what creates the intuition you're missing.
Practice the traps. The MFS question about Andrew and Camille's restaurant? The trap was assuming a Qualified Joint Venture election changes entity classification. It doesn't. Those are the edges Part 2 exploits.
The data says Part 2 is harder. Treat it like it is.
Related: