Commitments and Contingencies	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2014
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	11. Commitments and Contingencies Acquisitions The purchase price that CBIZ normally pays for businesses and client lists consists of two components: an up-front non-contingent portion, and a portion which is contingent upon the acquired businesses or client lists’ actual future performance. The fair value of the purchase price contingency related to businesses is recorded at the date of acquisition and remeasured each reporting period until the liability is settled. Shares of CBIZ common stock that are issued in connection with acquisitions may be contractually restricted from sale for periods up to one year. Acquisitions are further disclosed in Note 19. Indemnifications CBIZ has various agreements in which it may be obligated to indemnify the other party with respect to certain matters. Generally, these indemnification clauses are included in contracts arising in the normal course of business under which CBIZ customarily agrees to hold the other party harmless against losses arising from a breach of representations, warranties, covenants or agreements, related to matters such as title to assets sold and certain tax matters. Payment by CBIZ under such indemnification clauses are generally conditioned upon the other party making a claim. Such claims are typically subject to challenge by CBIZ and to dispute resolution procedures specified in the particular contract. Further, CBIZ’s obligations under these agreements may be limited in terms of time and/or amount and, in some instances, CBIZ may have recourse against third parties for certain payments made by CBIZ. It is not possible to predict the maximum potential amount of future payments under these indemnification agreements due to the conditional nature of CBIZ’s obligations and the unique facts of each particular agreement. Historically, CBIZ has not made any payments under these agreements that have been material individually or in the aggregate. As of December 31, 2014, CBIZ was not aware of any obligations arising under indemnification agreements that would require material payments. Employment Agreements CBIZ maintains severance and employment agreements with certain of its executive officers, whereby such officers may be entitled to payment in the event of termination of their employment. CBIZ also has arrangements with certain non-executive employees which may include severance and other employment provisions. CBIZ accrues for amounts payable under these contracts and arrangements as triggering events occur and obligations become known. During the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, payments regarding such contracts and arrangements were not material. Letters of Credit and Guarantees CBIZ provides letters of credit to landlords (lessors) of its leased premises in lieu of cash security deposits which totaled $2.3 million and $2.5 million at December 31, 2014 and 2013. In addition, CBIZ provides license bonds to various state agencies to meet certain licensing requirements. The amount of license bonds outstanding was $1.9 million and $2.4 million at December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. CBIZ acted as guarantor on various letters of credit for a CPA firm with which it has an affiliation, which totaled $1.9 million at December 31, 2014 and 2013. CBIZ has recognized a liability for the fair value of the obligations undertaken in issuing these guarantees, which is recorded as other current liabilities in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets. Management does not expect any material changes to result from these instruments as performance under the guarantees is not expected to be required. Legal Proceedings In 2010, CBIZ, Inc. and its subsidiary, CBIZ MHM, LLC (fka CBIZ Accounting, Tax & Advisory Services, LLC) (the “CBIZ Parties”), were named as defendants in lawsuits filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona and the Superior Court for Maricopa County, Arizona. The federal court case is captioned Robert Facciola, et al v. Greenberg Traurig LLP, et al, and the state court cases are captioned Victims Recovery, LLC v. Greenberg Traurig LLP, et al, Roger Ashkenazi, et al v. Greenberg Traurig LLP, et al, Mary Marsh, et al v. Greenberg Traurig LLP, et al; and ML Liquidating Trust v. Mayer Hoffman McCann PC, et al. Prior to these suits CBIZ MHM, LLC was named as a defendant in Jeffery C. Stone v. Greenberg Traurig LLP, et al. The Stone case was subsequently voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiff. These lawsuits arose out of the bankruptcy of Mortgages Ltd., a mortgage lender to developers in the Phoenix, Arizona area. Various other professional firms and individuals not related to the Company were also named defendants in these lawsuits. Mortgages Ltd. had been audited by Mayer Hoffman McCann PC (“Mayer Hoffman”), a CPA firm that has an administrative services agreement with CBIZ. The lawsuits asserted claims against Mayer Hoffman for, among others things, violations of the Arizona Securities Act, common law fraud, and negligent misrepresentation, and sought to hold the CBIZ Parties vicariously liable for Mayer Hoffman’s conduct as either a statutory control person under the Arizona Securities Act or a joint venturer under Arizona common law. CBIZ is not a CPA firm, does not provide audits, and did not audit any of the entities at issue in these lawsuits, nor is CBIZ a control person of, or a joint venture with, Mayer Hoffman. In June 2011, the Facciola court, in which the plaintiffs were seeking to certify a class of all Mortgages Ltd. investors, granted the motions to dismiss filed by the CBIZ Parties and Mayer Hoffman. After that dismissal order, the plaintiffs moved the court to amend their complaint in an attempt to state a claim against the CBIZ Parties and Mayer Hoffman. In November 2011, the Facciola court denied the plaintiffs’ request to amend the complaint as to the CBIZ Parties and Mayer Hoffman. In June 2012, the remaining defendants in the Facciola case reached a class action settlement, which the court approved in October 2012. Eighteen class members, however, opted out of the settlement before it was finalized and, in September 2012, filed a new case against all of the defendants in the Facciola case, including the CBIZ Parties (Rader et al v. Greenberg Traurig, LLC, et al). In December 2012, the Facciola plaintiffs filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit of the dismissal of their case against the CBIZ Parties and Mayer Hoffman. On February 23, 2015 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the dismissal in its entirety. The plaintiffs, except for the ML Liquidating Trust, alleged that they directly or indirectly invested in real estate mortgages through Mortgages Ltd. The Victims Recovery, Ashkenazi, Rader and Marsh plaintiffs sought monetary damages equivalent to their alleged losses on those investments. The ML Liquidating Trust asserted errors and omissions and breach of contract claims and sought monetary damages. The Ashkenazi complaint alleged damages of approximately $92.0 million; the Victims Recovery complaint alleged damages of approximately $53.0 million; the Rader complaint alleged damages in excess of $15.0 million; the Marsh complaint alleged damages in excess of $115.0 million; and the Facciola, and ML Liquidating Trust complaints alleged damages in excess of approximately $200.0 million. The plaintiffs in these suits also sought pre- and post-judgment interest, punitive damages and attorneys’ fees. The CBIZ Parties filed motions to dismiss in all remaining cases. On March 11, 2013, the court issued a ruling dismissing the securities fraud and aiding and abetting securities fraud claims against the CBIZ Parties and Mayer Hoffman in the Marsh, Victims Recovery and Ashkenazi lawsuits, and also dismissed certain other claims in the Ashkenazi and Victims Recovery cases. On April 12, 2013, the court denied the CBIZ Parties’ motion to dismiss the remaining claims in the Ashkenazi lawsuit. On May 7, 2013, the court in the ML Liquidating Trust lawsuit issued a ruling dismissing claims for deepening insolvency damages, negligence and breach of contract and holding that any claims related to the 2004 and 2005 Mayer Hoffman audits were barred by the statute of limitations. The court denied the motion as to the negligent misrepresentation claim. On June 14, 2013, the court dismissed the RICO, fraud and consumer fraud claims in the Marsh lawsuit, and denied the CBIZ Parties’ motion as to the negligent misrepresentation and aiding and abetting breaches of fiduciary duty claims. The CBIZ Parties and Mayer Hoffman, without admitting any liability, have executed final settlements in the Victims Recovery, Ashkenazi, Rader and Marsh lawsuits. The CBIZ Parties did not pay any monetary amounts as part of these settlements. With the exception of claims held by two plaintiffs from the Ashkenazi lawsuit, all claims against the CBIZ Parties in the Victims Recovery, Ashkenazi, Rader and Marsh lawsuits have been dismissed with prejudice. The CBIZ Parties and Mayer Hoffman have reached a settlement in the ML Liquidating Trust lawsuit that is conditioned upon the approval of the United States bankruptcy court adjudicating Mortgages Ltd.’s bankruptcy. Two plaintiffs from the Ashkenazi lawsuit (“Baldino Group”) were not part of that settlement and their claims, which allege damages of approximately $16.0 million, are proceeding. At this time limited discovery is proceeding in the Baldino Group matter and no trial date has been set. The CBIZ Parties deny all allegations of wrongdoing made against them in these actions and are vigorously defending the remaining proceedings. In particular, the CBIZ Parties are not control persons under the Arizona Securities Act of, or in a joint venture with, Mayer Hoffman. The CBIZ Parties do not have, in any respects, the legal right to control Mayer Hoffman’s audits or any say in how the audits are conducted. The Company has been advised by Mayer Hoffman that it denies all allegations of wrongdoing made against it and that it intends to continue vigorously defending the matters. The Company cannot predict the outcome of the above matters or estimate the possible loss or range of loss, if any. Although the remaining proceedings are subject to uncertainties inherent in the litigation process and the ultimate disposition of these proceedings is not presently determinable, management believes that the allegations are without merit and that the ultimate resolution of these matters will not have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial condition, results of operations or cash flows of the Company. In addition to those items disclosed above, the Company is, from time to time, subject to claims and suits arising in the ordinary course of business. Although the ultimate disposition of such proceedings is not presently determinable, management does not believe that the ultimate resolution of these matters will have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial condition, results of operations or cash flows of the Company.

11. Commitments and Contingencies

Acquisitions

The purchase price that CBIZ normally pays for businesses and client lists consists of two components: an up-front non-contingent portion, and a portion which is contingent upon the acquired businesses or client lists’ actual future performance. The fair value of the purchase price contingency related to businesses is recorded at the date of acquisition and remeasured each reporting period until the liability is settled. Shares of CBIZ common stock that are issued in connection with acquisitions may be contractually restricted from sale for periods up to one year. Acquisitions are further disclosed in Note 19.

Indemnifications

CBIZ has various agreements in which it may be obligated to indemnify the other party with respect to certain matters. Generally, these indemnification clauses are included in contracts arising in the normal course of business under which CBIZ customarily agrees to hold the other party harmless against losses arising from a breach of representations, warranties, covenants or agreements, related to matters such as title to assets sold and certain tax matters. Payment by CBIZ under such indemnification clauses are generally conditioned upon the other party making a claim. Such claims are typically subject to challenge by CBIZ and to dispute resolution procedures specified in the particular contract. Further, CBIZ’s obligations under these agreements may be limited in terms of time and/or amount and, in some instances, CBIZ may have recourse against third parties for certain payments made by CBIZ. It is not possible to predict the maximum potential amount of future payments under these indemnification agreements due to the conditional nature of CBIZ’s obligations and the unique facts of each particular agreement. Historically, CBIZ has not made any payments under these agreements that have been material individually or in the aggregate. As of December 31, 2014, CBIZ was not aware of any obligations arising under indemnification agreements that would require material payments.

Employment Agreements

CBIZ maintains severance and employment agreements with certain of its executive officers, whereby such officers may be entitled to payment in the event of termination of their employment. CBIZ also has arrangements with certain non-executive employees which may include severance and other employment provisions. CBIZ accrues for amounts payable under these contracts and arrangements as triggering events occur and obligations become known. During the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, payments regarding such contracts and arrangements were not material.

Letters of Credit and Guarantees

CBIZ provides letters of credit to landlords (lessors) of its leased premises in lieu of cash security deposits which totaled $2.3 million and $2.5 million at December 31, 2014 and 2013. In addition, CBIZ provides license bonds to various state agencies to meet certain licensing requirements. The amount of license bonds outstanding was $1.9 million and $2.4 million at December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively.

CBIZ acted as guarantor on various letters of credit for a CPA firm with which it has an affiliation, which totaled $1.9 million at December 31, 2014 and 2013. CBIZ has recognized a liability for the fair value of the obligations undertaken in issuing these guarantees, which is recorded as other current liabilities in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets. Management does not expect any material changes to result from these instruments as performance under the guarantees is not expected to be required.

Legal Proceedings

In 2010, CBIZ, Inc. and its subsidiary, CBIZ MHM, LLC (fka CBIZ Accounting, Tax & Advisory Services, LLC) (the “CBIZ Parties”), were named as defendants in lawsuits filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona and the Superior Court for Maricopa County, Arizona. The federal court case is captioned Robert Facciola, et al v. Greenberg Traurig LLP, et al, and the state court cases are captioned Victims Recovery, LLC v. Greenberg Traurig LLP, et al, Roger Ashkenazi, et al v. Greenberg Traurig LLP, et al, Mary Marsh, et al v. Greenberg Traurig LLP, et al; and ML Liquidating Trust v. Mayer Hoffman McCann PC, et al. Prior to these suits CBIZ MHM, LLC was named as a defendant in Jeffery C. Stone v. Greenberg Traurig LLP, et al. The Stone case was subsequently voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiff.

These lawsuits arose out of the bankruptcy of Mortgages Ltd., a mortgage lender to developers in the Phoenix, Arizona area. Various other professional firms and individuals not related to the Company were also named defendants in these lawsuits.

Mortgages Ltd. had been audited by Mayer Hoffman McCann PC (“Mayer Hoffman”), a CPA firm that has an administrative services agreement with CBIZ. The lawsuits asserted claims against Mayer Hoffman for, among others things, violations of the Arizona Securities Act, common law fraud, and negligent misrepresentation, and sought to hold the CBIZ Parties vicariously liable for Mayer Hoffman’s conduct as either a statutory control person under the Arizona Securities Act or a joint venturer under Arizona common law. CBIZ is not a CPA firm, does not provide audits, and did not audit any of the entities at issue in these lawsuits, nor is CBIZ a control person of, or a joint venture with, Mayer Hoffman.

In June 2011, the Facciola court, in which the plaintiffs were seeking to certify a class of all Mortgages Ltd. investors, granted the motions to dismiss filed by the CBIZ Parties and Mayer Hoffman. After that dismissal order, the plaintiffs moved the court to amend their complaint in an attempt to state a claim against the CBIZ Parties and Mayer Hoffman. In November 2011, the Facciola court denied the plaintiffs’ request to amend the complaint as to the CBIZ Parties and Mayer Hoffman. In June 2012, the remaining defendants in the Facciola case reached a class action settlement, which the court approved in October 2012. Eighteen class members, however, opted out of the settlement before it was finalized and, in September 2012, filed a new case against all of the defendants in the Facciola case, including the CBIZ Parties (Rader et al v. Greenberg Traurig, LLC, et al). In December 2012, the Facciola plaintiffs filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit of the dismissal of their case against the CBIZ Parties and Mayer Hoffman. On February 23, 2015 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the dismissal in its entirety.

The plaintiffs, except for the ML Liquidating Trust, alleged that they directly or indirectly invested in real estate mortgages through Mortgages Ltd. The Victims Recovery, Ashkenazi, Rader and Marsh plaintiffs sought monetary damages equivalent to their alleged losses on those investments. The ML Liquidating Trust asserted errors and omissions and breach of contract claims and sought monetary damages. The Ashkenazi complaint alleged damages of approximately $92.0 million; the Victims Recovery complaint alleged damages of approximately $53.0 million; the Rader complaint alleged damages in excess of $15.0 million; the Marsh complaint alleged damages in excess of $115.0 million; and the Facciola, and ML Liquidating Trust complaints alleged damages in excess of approximately $200.0 million. The plaintiffs in these suits also sought pre- and post-judgment interest, punitive damages and attorneys’ fees.

The CBIZ Parties filed motions to dismiss in all remaining cases. On March 11, 2013, the court issued a ruling dismissing the securities fraud and aiding and abetting securities fraud claims against the CBIZ Parties and Mayer Hoffman in the Marsh, Victims Recovery and Ashkenazi lawsuits, and also dismissed certain other claims in the Ashkenazi and Victims Recovery cases.

On April 12, 2013, the court denied the CBIZ Parties’ motion to dismiss the remaining claims in the Ashkenazi lawsuit. On May 7, 2013, the court in the ML Liquidating Trust lawsuit issued a ruling dismissing claims for deepening insolvency damages, negligence and breach of contract and holding that any claims related to the 2004 and 2005 Mayer Hoffman audits were barred by the statute of limitations. The court denied the motion as to the negligent misrepresentation claim. On June 14, 2013, the court dismissed the RICO, fraud and consumer fraud claims in the Marsh lawsuit, and denied the CBIZ Parties’ motion as to the negligent misrepresentation and aiding and abetting breaches of fiduciary duty claims.

The CBIZ Parties and Mayer Hoffman, without admitting any liability, have executed final settlements in the Victims Recovery, Ashkenazi, Rader and Marsh lawsuits. The CBIZ Parties did not pay any monetary amounts as part of these settlements. With the exception of claims held by two plaintiffs from the Ashkenazi lawsuit, all claims against the CBIZ Parties in the Victims Recovery, Ashkenazi, Rader and Marsh lawsuits have been dismissed with prejudice. The CBIZ Parties and Mayer Hoffman have reached a settlement in the ML Liquidating Trust lawsuit that is conditioned upon the approval of the United States bankruptcy court adjudicating Mortgages Ltd.’s bankruptcy. Two plaintiffs from the Ashkenazi lawsuit (“Baldino Group”) were not part of that settlement and their claims, which allege damages of approximately $16.0 million, are proceeding. At this time limited discovery is proceeding in the Baldino Group matter and no trial date has been set.

The CBIZ Parties deny all allegations of wrongdoing made against them in these actions and are vigorously defending the remaining proceedings. In particular, the CBIZ Parties are not control persons under the Arizona Securities Act of, or in a joint venture with, Mayer Hoffman. The CBIZ Parties do not have, in any respects, the legal right to control Mayer Hoffman’s audits or any say in how the audits are conducted. The Company has been advised by Mayer Hoffman that it denies all allegations of wrongdoing made against it and that it intends to continue vigorously defending the matters.

The Company cannot predict the outcome of the above matters or estimate the possible loss or range of loss, if any. Although the remaining proceedings are subject to uncertainties inherent in the litigation process and the ultimate disposition of these proceedings is not presently determinable, management believes that the allegations are without merit and that the ultimate resolution of these matters will not have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial condition, results of operations or cash flows of the Company.

In addition to those items disclosed above, the Company is, from time to time, subject to claims and suits arising in the ordinary course of business. Although the ultimate disposition of such proceedings is not presently determinable, management does not believe that the ultimate resolution of these matters will have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial condition, results of operations or cash flows of the Company.