Advertising for regulated professionals in Quebec: ethics rules to consider

Your code of ethics prohibits practices that any vendor will recommend to you. Client testimonials are banned for lawyers. Accountants must keep every ad for 36 months. These rules do not block your marketing: they change its form and its cost.

On this page

What professional ethics change

This article is written for partners and management teams of firms governed by a professional order in Quebec: accountants, lawyers, engineers, architects, notaries, health professionals. It describes the framework; it replaces neither reading your own code nor advice from your order.

The starting point is simple. The Professional Code is the framework law of Quebec's professional system, and each order also adopts its own code of ethics. These codes regulate advertising far more strictly than the general law.

The usual agency recommendations therefore often do not apply to you. Client testimonials, promises of results, promotional one-upmanship, insistent automated follow-ups: they are the most heavily sold tactics, and several are prohibited in your profession.

A firm's marketing is not blocked for all that: it rests on other levers, and the vendor must know these rules before proposing anything.

The cost of not knowing them is double. A firm that applies the usual recommendations funds a campaign it will have to pull, and it alone bears the disciplinary risk. On a $4,500 monthly budget, three months of non-compliant production represent $13,500 spent with nothing to show for it, plus the partner time spent correcting.

Testimonials, banned for lawyers

It is the rule that surprises the most, because it targets the most recommended tactic in services marketing, the one that ties up large budgets.

The Code of Professional Conduct of Lawyers provides at section 145 that a lawyer may not, in their advertising, use or allow to be used an endorsement or statement of gratitude concerning them. The wording is broad: it covers the written testimonial on a website, the quote in an ad, and the video of a satisfied client.

Scope matters here: this rule is the Barreau du Québec's. Other orders regulate the question differently, and several are less restrictive. An accounting or engineering firm should check its own code rather than assume the prohibition also applies to it.

When testimonials are banned, what replaces them is more demanding to produce and more durable: factual descriptions of mandates, explanations of a method, and content that demonstrates understanding rather than having a third party assert it. That content costs more and does not expire, which makes it an asset rather than a campaign expense.

No self-conferred qualities

This rule decides half of the writing work, and therefore a significant share of the production cost of a website.

The CPA Code of Ethics in force since May 9, 2024 provides at section 20 that a CPA avoids any misrepresentation with respect to their level of competence or the efficiency of their own services. The former section 70, on specific qualities or skills a member could not support, was not carried over as such into the 2024 code. Section 91 also prohibits any advertising that is false, misleading, incomplete or likely to deceive, or derogatory to the honour or dignity of the profession.

On the copy, the effect is immediate: the promotional one-upmanship that fills most services websites becomes unusable. Claims of superiority, self-awarded qualifiers, promises of results.

At Falia we keep a list of words we never use, for reasons of style rather than law. The overlap with what professional ethics prohibit is striking: promotional vocabulary does not add credibility, it removes it, regulation or not.

Verifiable description, on the other hand, remains allowed and effective. Naming the mandates handled, the sectors served, the makeup of the team, the publications produced. Those are facts, not self-conferred qualities, and they do more to convince a client comparing two firms before entrusting a file.

Insistent or repeated solicitation

The Code of Professional Conduct of Lawyers provides at section 9 that a lawyer must not, directly or indirectly, insistently or repeatedly urge anyone to retain their professional services. Section 8 further prohibits any representation that amounts to coercion or that seeks to take advantage of a person who is vulnerable due, in particular, to their age or condition.

Those two sections directly touch common mechanics. Retargeting that follows a visitor for weeks. Automated sequences with multiple follow-ups, covered in our article on the fatigue threshold. Messages that play on urgency or distress, delicate ground in family law, criminal law or insolvency.

The prudent reading caps repetition and rules out any emotional lever that exploits a situation of vulnerability. Concretely: a frequency cap on retargeting, a short follow-up sequence, and a review of the content through an ethics lens before it runs.

These limits have a measurable side effect on the budget. Capped retargeting costs less and often converts just as well, because excessive repetition mostly produces irritation. The ethical constraint therefore saves you a budget that others waste.

The 36-month retention duty

It is the least known obligation and the heaviest to apply.

The CPA Code of Ethics in force since May 9, 2024 provides at section 94 that a CPA shall keep, for 36 months, a complete copy of all advertising in its original format along with any changes made, details on the media used, and the dates on which the advertising was published, modified or withdrawn. The Professional Code also requires every professional to hand over documents on request to the professional inspection committee, an inspector or a syndic.

Set that requirement against the reality of a digital campaign. Forty active ad variants per month represent 480 pieces over a year, not counting landing pages, newsletters and social posts. Each one must exist, in its original form, for three years.

Without a process, the obligation becomes untenable and the catch-up costs more than the campaign itself. With a process, it costs a few minutes a month: a dated folder, a capture of each variant, the full text, and the run period. The math is clear: a few hours a year against a risk the partner bears personally.

It is a point to write down in black and white in the vendor's mandate. Who archives, in what format, where, and what happens at the end of the relationship. The subject connects to that of digital asset ownership.

Advertising your fees is still allowed

Contrary to a widespread belief, publishing your fees is not prohibited for lawyers.

Section 146 of the Code of Professional Conduct of Lawyers allows advertising the fees charged, provided among other conditions that the advertising is sufficiently precise as to the nature and extent of the services offered in exchange for each advertised fee.

The constraint is therefore not the price, it is the precision of what the price buys. It is the logic developed in our article on pricing visibility: a range only has value if it says what it includes and what it excludes.

For a firm, it is an underused commercial opening. In a market where almost no one advertises prices, a firm that publishes a clear flat fee for a well-defined mandate qualifies its inquiries upstream and stands out without breaking anything. The gain is measured in partner hours saved every month.

What works within this framework comes down to five levers, all compatible with the constraints above.

This framework favours substantive work and penalizes volume tactics. It is a constraint for a firm in a hurry, and a durable advantage for a firm willing to build: your competitors face the same rules, and most respond by doing nothing.

Building the budget that carries these decisions is detailed in splitting the budget across channels.

Frequently asked questions about professional advertising