American English: Firm vs. Company

I'm American but I don't know the difference. The "firm that he works for" vs. "the company that he works for". When do you use which. I know you would say law firm but I have heard it in reference to other businesses.

Thanks!

I usually say the organization he works for, as business efforts can be set up differently.

Isn't a company in the Latin languages said as "Firma"? Possible derivation?

I can't speak for American English, but from the point of view of a lawyer in Australia I would:

- "company" essentially has a legal/technical meaning - it is a business organisation that is legally incorporated (i.e. it has independent legal identity, directors, shareholders, etc).
- "firm" is just a general word for a business organisation without any technical meaning.

So, most companies could also be regarded as firms, but not all firms are companies. Particularly in the professions (e.g. lawyers, accountants, etc), there are many business organisations which are either legally prevented from incorporating or traditionally have not incorporated, but instead operate as partnerships. That's why law firms and accountancy firms are referred to as "firms" - in many cases they are not companies, but operate as partnerships instead. I suppose technically you could refer to Walmart as a firm, but it is in reality a company.

I would use this distinction quite strictly, but maybe that's just because it was drummed into me at law school. I have a feeling the distinction is not that strictly observed among the more general population - on a number of occasions non-lawyer friends have referred to the firm I work for as a "company", and I want to retort that its not a company, but I just bite my tongue.

I agree with #1 that, at least within business circles, "organisation" is often used because it is far more general and non-specific. "Firm" still implies that a for-profit business is being carried on, while there are many entities which are not profit making - e.g. charities, government regulators and authorities, etc, some of which may be incorporated, some of which may be statutory, some of which have no separate legal identity at all. "Organisation" is a completely neutral word that covers them all.

secretcover1, In Spanish "firma" is normally understood to be a signature and the verb "firmar" means to sign something. "Firma" can also mean firm/company as in English, but only if it is used directly in conjunction with the name of the firm/company.

The distinction isn't as clear in the US as #3 says it is in Australia. An entity can call itself a company even if it's not incorporated, that is, even if it doesn't have a charter from the state making it a legal person. So a partnership or even a sole proprietorship can call itself a company. But it is true here that you come across the word firm mostly in connection with lawyers and acountants, who in the past were not allowed to incorporate thier businesses. So generally here you would hear "the company I work for"; if you haar "the firm that I work for" it's probably lawyers or accountants. But that's not a hard and fast rule.

It seems to me that in the US in recent decades we have had a proliferation of initials suffixing various organization names. I've had it explained that far beyond the old "Co." and "Inc." new organizational structures have been created, most attempting to separate the branch with assets, from the branch with liabilities. The Global Economy may also have had it's cross-fertilizing influence. Meanwhile, colloquial use has few rules.