Commitments and Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2016
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Lease Commitments The Company leases office facilities, including its headquarters and other facilities, and equipment under non-cancelable operating leases. The Company also leases certain software and furniture, fixtures, and equipment under capital leases. The lease agreements generally provide for rental payments on a graduated basis and for options to renew, which could increase future minimum lease payments if exercised. The Company recognizes rent expense on a straight-line basis over the lease period and accrues for rent expense incurred but not paid. Rent expense for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015 was $3.8 million and $3.1 million, respectively. Operating Covenants To meet various states’ licensing requirements and maintain accreditation by the Employer Services Assurance Corporation, the Company is subject to various minimum working capital and net worth requirements. As of March 31, 2016, the Company believes it has fully complied in all material respects with all applicable state regulations regarding minimum net worth, working capital and all other financial and legal requirements. Further, the Company has maintained positive working capital throughout the period covered by the financial statements. Contingencies On or about August 7, 2015, Howard Welgus, a purported stockholder of the Company, filed a putative securities class action lawsuit arising under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The case has not been certified as a class action, although it purports to be filed on behalf of purchasers of the Company’s common stock between May 5, 2014 and August 3, 2015, inclusive. The name of the case is Welgus v. TriNet Group, Inc. et al., Case No. 3:15-cv-03625. No stockholder other than Mr. Welgus submitted a motion for appointment as lead plaintiff to represent the putative class, and, on December 3, 2015, the Court appointed Mr. Welgus as lead plaintiff. On February 1, 2016, Mr. Welgus filed an amended complaint. The defendants named in the case are the Company and certain of its officers and directors, as well as General Atlantic, LLC, a significant shareholder, and formerly majority shareholder, of the Company. Shortly before the scheduled date for the Company’s motion to dismiss the consolidated complaint, Mr. Welgus sought leave to further amend the consolidated complaint. The amended complaint was deemed filed by Mr. Welgus on April 1, 2016. The amended complaint expanded the class period to March 27, 2014 through February 29, 2016, and added as defendants the underwriters of the Company’s initial public offering and additional directors of the Company. The amended complaint generally alleges that the Company and other defendants caused damage to purchasers of the Company’s stock by misrepresenting and/or failing to disclose facts generally pertaining to alleged trends affecting health insurance and workers compensation claims. Under a stipulated revised briefing schedule approved by the Court, the Company intends to move to dismiss the amended complaint no later than June 20, 2016. The Company believes that it has meritorious defenses against this action and intends to continue to defend itself vigorously against the allegations of Mr. Welgus. The Company is and, from time to time, has been and may in the future become involved in various litigation matters, legal proceedings and claims arising in the ordinary course of its business, including disputes with its clients or various class action, collective action, representative action and other proceedings arising from the nature of its co-employment relationship with its clients and WSEs in which the Company is named as a defendant. In addition, due to the nature of the Company’s co-employment relationship with its clients and WSEs, the Company could be subject to liability for federal and state law violations, even if the Company does not participate in such violations. While the Company’s agreements with its clients contain indemnification provisions related to the conduct of its clients, the Company may not be able to avail itself of such provisions in every instance. While the outcome of the matters described above cannot be predicted with certainty, management currently does not believe that any such claims or proceedings or the above mentioned securities class action will have a materially adverse effect on the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. However, the unfavorable resolution of any particular matter or the Company’s reassessment of its exposure for any of the above matters based on additional information obtained in the future could have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. In addition, regardless of the outcome, the above matters, individually and in the aggregate, could have an adverse impact on the Company because of diversion of management resources and other factors.

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Lease Commitments

The Company leases office facilities, including its headquarters and other facilities, and equipment under non-cancelable operating leases. The Company also leases certain software and furniture, fixtures, and equipment under capital leases. The lease agreements generally provide for rental payments on a graduated basis and for options to renew, which could increase future minimum lease payments if exercised. The Company recognizes rent expense on a straight-line basis over the lease period and accrues for rent expense incurred but not paid. Rent expense for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015 was $3.8 million and $3.1 million, respectively.

Operating Covenants

To meet various states’ licensing requirements and maintain accreditation by the Employer Services Assurance Corporation, the Company is subject to various minimum working capital and net worth requirements. As of March 31, 2016, the Company believes it has fully complied in all material respects with all applicable state regulations regarding minimum net worth, working capital and all other financial and legal requirements. Further, the Company has maintained positive working capital throughout the period covered by the financial statements.

Contingencies

On or about August 7, 2015, Howard Welgus, a purported stockholder of the Company, filed a putative securities class action lawsuit arising under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The case has not been certified as a class action, although it purports to be filed on behalf of purchasers of the Company’s common stock between May 5, 2014 and August 3, 2015, inclusive. The name of the case is Welgus v. TriNet Group, Inc. et al., Case No. 3:15-cv-03625. No stockholder other than Mr. Welgus submitted a motion for appointment as lead plaintiff to represent the putative class, and, on December 3, 2015, the Court appointed Mr. Welgus as lead plaintiff. On February 1, 2016, Mr. Welgus filed an amended complaint. The defendants named in the case are the Company and certain of its officers and directors, as well as General Atlantic, LLC, a significant shareholder, and formerly majority shareholder, of the Company. Shortly before the scheduled date for the Company’s motion to dismiss the consolidated complaint, Mr. Welgus sought leave to further amend the consolidated complaint. The amended complaint was deemed filed by Mr. Welgus on April 1, 2016. The amended complaint expanded the class period to March 27, 2014 through February 29, 2016, and added as defendants the underwriters of the Company’s initial public offering and additional directors of the Company. The amended complaint generally alleges that the Company and other defendants caused damage to purchasers of the Company’s stock by misrepresenting and/or failing to disclose facts generally pertaining to alleged trends affecting health insurance and workers compensation claims. Under a stipulated revised briefing schedule approved by the Court, the Company intends to move to dismiss the amended complaint no later than June 20, 2016. The Company believes that it has meritorious defenses against this action and intends to continue to defend itself vigorously against the allegations of Mr. Welgus.

The Company is and, from time to time, has been and may in the future become involved in various litigation matters, legal proceedings and claims arising in the ordinary course of its business, including disputes with its clients or various class action, collective action, representative action and other proceedings arising from the nature of its co-employment relationship with its clients and WSEs in which the Company is named as a defendant. In addition, due to the nature of the Company’s co-employment relationship with its clients and WSEs, the Company could be subject to liability for federal and state law violations, even if the Company does not participate in such violations. While the Company’s agreements with its clients contain indemnification provisions related to the conduct of its clients, the Company may not be able to avail itself of such provisions in every instance.

While the outcome of the matters described above cannot be predicted with certainty, management currently does not believe that any such claims or proceedings or the above mentioned securities class action will have a materially adverse effect on the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. However, the unfavorable resolution of any particular matter or the Company’s reassessment of its exposure for any of the above matters based on additional information obtained in the future could have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. In addition, regardless of the outcome, the above matters, individually and in the aggregate, could have an adverse impact on the Company because of diversion of management resources and other factors.