A&A Survey Results (Non-A&A Practitioners Only)

1. Do you perform any assurance or attest work (audits, reviews, compilations or other engagements under Statements on Standards for Attestation Engagements)?

TotalQuestion 1
485No


2. Do the current Accounting and Auditing (A&A) CPE requirements need to change?

TotalQuestion 2
88No
397Yes


3. If YES to question #2, please choose only one of the following alternatives to the current 20-hour A&A requirement.

TotalQuestion 3
89 
117A: Remove the current requirement of 20 hours of Accounting & Auditing per re-licensing period and allow those hours to be used for any technical subject matter.
92B: Revise the current requirement to allow for either 20 hours of Accounting & Auditing OR Tax subject matter education OR any combination of the two.
103C: Revise the current requirement of 20 hours to the following: reduce the requirement to 8 hours of Accounting and Auditing with the remaining 12 hours to be added to the technical subject category.
57D: Revise the current requirement of 20 hours to the following: reduce the requirement to 8 hours of Accounting and Auditing and 4 hours of Fraud continuing education with the remaining 8 hours to be added to the technical subject category.
27E: Revise the current requirement of 20 hours to the following: reduce the requirement to 16 hours of Accounting and Auditing with the remaining 4 hours to be added to the technical subject category.


4. Comments

RowComments
1What are other states - the best of the best - doing? Will a change impact reciprocity?
2A CPA should know the areas that he/she needs education on and should be free to choose.
3I understand the requirement for 20 hours of accounting and auditing; however, in most practices the practitioner specializes in a particular area. For example, for those who specialize in the tax area, I can see where mandating course work in an unrelated area would seem to be an unwanted waste of valuable hours. I believe the practitioner should be able to select course work which compliments his or her practice, rather than being mandated to take classes which have little or no meaning.
4As a practitioner dealing solely with tax, the only A & A I need to keep updated on is as related to Fiduciary Income and Accounting. I feel reducing the 20 A & A requirement and adding Fraud would be beneficial to all areas of practice. With fraud on the rise and the expectation of our profession detecting fraudulent activities, any insight into where to look, or what to look for would be most helpful.
5As a CPA in government the A & A requirement is of little benefit for me. By removing the 20 hour requirement would allow me to focus on CPE that is specific to my job.
6I believe that 8 hours in A&A is very important with the remaining 12 hours to be relative to the individual's needs to excel in their area of expertise or become more diversified in their services.
7I applaud the FICPA for taking up this matter. It is long overdue and will benefit its members greatly
8Those performing attest work should be required to have 20 hours OR MORE of CPE in the reporting period. Those who perform NO attest work should be able to mix and match A&A and/or Tax subject matter, based on their assessment of their individual needs. I DO continue to believe that mandatory CPE should be retained. I would not permit CPAs to decide whether or not the needed CPE credits. I've seen work of CPAs which indicates that they probably weren't paying attention to what ever classes they took, but at least requiring the exposure is better than not. Maintaining current knowledge is a hallmark of a profession and it's imperative that this aspect of CPE be remain a requirement.
9Most who do not do any attest services do not need extensive a&a training.
10While I do no attest services, accounting theory and audit theory are valuable in the preparation of client books on the tax method. Just because I have seldom used GAAP in preparing income tax returns (maybe once or twice in 35 years) does not mean that I should not be familiar with it and the changes in the profession. Twenty hours is a minimum useful amount of A&A. Perhaps it should be increased to twenty-four. As part of that increase, perhaps there should be a minimum of eight hours devoted to detecting fraud.
11Even though I no longer perform attest work, it is good idea to keep up to date with the changes in GAAP, Ssars etc. However, 20 hours of mandatory CPE makes little sense for CPAs not involved with attest work and, personally, I end up taking CPE courses that contain repetitive, overlapping material just to meet the required hours. We would be better served being able to concentrate our CPE hours mostly in our area(s) of practice.
12I am retired from practice, but am keeping my license current, so my perspective may be in the minority.
13I do NO A&A work in my specialty (forensic accounting), but A&A is, ultimately, the core of what all accountants represent. In order to call ourselves accountants of any caliber or any specialty, we should be expected to keep abreast of and be familiar with A&A and any changes over time. It is all for the sake of public interest and perception, even if not involved in public filings and doing nothing more than litigation consulting, tax preparation, or simple debits and credits.
14Attest services are the defining and unique function that can only be provided by CPAs. Practitioners who wish to hold themselves out as CPAs have a professional obligation to maintain at least some current level of knowledge and proficiency in accounting and auditing subjects. If that proficiency is not a necessary requirement of the profession, should we extend the alternative to the CPA exam? Perhaps applicants who wish to limit their practice to exclude attest services should also be exempted from the portion of CPA exam addressing attest issue. But isn't that pretty much all of the CPA exam? If you want to be a CPA, you have to maintain the expertise. Given the complexity of current accounting and attest rules, perhaps 20 hours of A&A isn't enough. Consider requiring 50% of required CPE to be taken on A&A topics.
15Knowledge of the accounting rules and financial statements and how theya re put together is an essential startng point for return preparation and tax controversy
16I believe that having an understanding of the current A&A topics/developments makes us all more well rounded.
17I don't feel strongly either way, as you can see from my response. I don't personally think they need to change, but understand why some CPA's would desire the requirement to be not all accounting and auditing and to include tax education. I have been in industry since 1986 and have had no problem obtaining 20 hours of A&A. I do not believe that more than 60 hours should be allowed for technical business or behavorial, though, to ensure that our profession maintains its status.
18Question 2 states whether the A&A CPE requirement needs to be changed; I don't believe it NEEDS to be changed, but do believe that as a professional the 20 hours of A&A might be better spent in other more pertinent subjects now that I'm no longer performing attest services. That's not to say, that I wouldn't take any A&A as some courses could be helpful. I feel that as a professional we ought to be capable of determining the most appropriate type classes to advance within the profession.
19It's ridiculous to me that as a professional who has never done and probably never will do an attestation engagement I have to take 20 hours of A&A every two years. It is useless knowledge to me and my money would be better spent on courses that apply to my field of work.
20I believe all CPA's need to know of changes and updates to Accounting and Auditing, the core of the profession, regardless of whether they perform assurance or attest work. What should be considered instead are changes/updates to the Ethics CPE and training requirements. I have taken the SAME FICPA ETHICS COURSE MULTIPLE TIMES (at least 5, I think) to meet Florida license renewal requirements. The second time taking the course was a somewhat effective refresher; the additional times represented a waste of time and money. Please fix this requirement and the related course!
21I have been a CPA since 1996. I have a tax practice and have learned nothing useful in any of the A&A courses I have taken since that time..
22If the requirement can't be removed, then have a two tier CPA license where those that do A&A must take A&A CPE and those of us who do no A&A must certify so and then we can concentrate our CPE in areas that relate to what we do.
23The 20 hours should remain in palce gor those performing an attest function.
24First off, thank you for raising this issue. It is long overdue for a discussion. As a tax practitioner who rarely if ever is involved with a tax provision, I would suggest that the 20 hour requirement be reduced or eliminated. I suspect that option 3 above is a reasonable compromise that would satisfy many of us in the same boat. Getting 20 hours of accounting and auditing credits is difficult. I work in a large firm, and the trainings we once had in the past with the audit department are rarely if ever socialized or made available. And with a fair amount of training going to the online system, the opportunities to get 2, 4 or 8 hours at a time are virtually non existent. I rely on our firms CPE day that provides approximately 5 hours. If my schedule allows, that usually gets me to 10 hours and I fill in the other 10 as I can with online training sessions. The problem is that very little if any of this is applicable to my job and I feel that many of us are only sitting through this to comply with the rules. I would much rather have the 12 hours freed up to take something that would actually apply to what I do for a living. Clearly there are non-audit practitioners who will feel differently. But nothing will stop them from getting 20 hours if they choose to go that path.
25I know it would be difficult to police, but it would seem that there should be at least 20 hours of required CPE in the area where license holder primarily practices. For example, and I know I'm a bad example, my expertise is in the area of bankruptcy and insolvency where I serve as court appointed Trustee or receiver and the skill set required is more focused on CLE type courses structured around The Bankruptcy Code and State statutes. To be proficient it is much more important that I foster and stay current in those skills than A&A type education. I sort of feel that the "forced A&A" is not much different than requiring all certificate holders to take 20 hours of "yellow book" courses even if you have no gov't type clients. i also have sympathy for Tax practitioners who I see attending the A&A meetings with their Wall Street Journals for reading material so they don't waste their time on areas that will have no practical benefit to them.
26Believe some hours of A&A important to keep up with latest developments, at least as a broad-brush overview. Believe that California's ability to differentiate CPE requirements for those CPS involved in attestation services, vs those who are not should be looked into. Since I produce no financial statements, I have no requirements for any type of peer review - -- that data base exists, and hopefully can be used as a tool if differentiation is chosen as a solution. Thank you for trying to effect change. Steve
27A&A is a monumental waste of my time as a tax CPA. It's like asking a podiatrist to study cardiology 16 hours per year. The PUBLIC would be better served by my using those 16 hours for subjects that will benefit them. Jim Schorner Vero Beach Attorney/CPA
28Fraud is becoming a bigger issue nowadays, so thats could even be 8 AA, 8 Fraud (helps CFEs) and 4 Technical subject. So that 4 can gradually become 8 down the road. Lets put more emphasis on Fraud and Ethics for those not in attest work, because more and more of us are in non attest areas. The Attest folks already get their updates just doing their work. Its like beling a doctor but I am not a brain surgeon just a podiatrist. Let us be more in line with the 2014 occupations. Good move to ask for our opinion. Congrats on that.
29I have been in public practice for 50 years. I would estimate that for the last 25 or 30 years I have only done tax work. I do not have anything to do with audits, reviews or compilations. I generally attend the UCF Accounting Conference to get my AA hours. I sit in classes that I have no idea what they are talking about and I have no interest. What am I getting out of these classes NOTHING.
30Any of these are good - From a "selling" point, I think it is easiest to sell the tax/audit combo- CPAs tend to be experts at one or the other, but not both. Then we would take 20 hours in tax if we primarily are involved in tax, or 20 hours in audit if we are primarily a+a. Avoid doing the 4 hours of fraud, that's another bucket and it is already part of A+A. We already have 4 buckets counting ethics, we don't need 5. Another idea - have the ethics time count towards A+A since it really should, professional standards.
31It is imperative that CPA's stay abreast of A&A requirements. Since CPA's are the only professionals allowed to prepare financial statements, professionals should keep up with the changes in presentation, disclosure and reporting formats. This would be true even if only preparing a compilation.
32I believe that even a tax practitioner needs to have a basic understanding of A&A principles. I would like to see more in depth Accounting for Income Taxes courses offered. This is an area of high need for anyone that does tax provisions and works with audited financial statements.
33How can someone properly prepare a corporate tax return when one doesn't properly prepare first the trial balance (or financials)? Without A&A how can someone keep abreast of the current accounting guidelines? Even those who prepare non attest bookkeeping statements need to keep on top of the current guidance. Without A&A that cannot be done. The only way a CPA should be able to avoid taking A&A CPE classes is if they do absolutely no business (sole proprietor, corporate, s corporate, partnership) tax work. Given the difficulty of enforcement this is unworkable.
34All CPAS should know what is going on in our industry which includes the massive changes that have recently been occurring in the A&A arena. 20 hrs just keeps us informed/updated. I like this requirement. I do, however, feel that the 4 hours of so called "ethics" is a colossal waste of time. You cannot teach ethics and the current course material is useless as basically it forces CPAs to pay to sit in a class while someone reads from the Laws and Rules book. I would like this requirement removed and the exam brought back!
35I would be in favor of a reduction in the overall number of hours of CPE required. 80 hours is excessive in my humble opinion. If we, as accountants, need to read up on something, we do it while on the job. We don't wait for a CPE course. In this regard, we are actually spending time learning than 80 hours (every 2 years) because we also research things on our own time outside of CPE. Why do CPAs have the most number of hours required for continuing education of any profession? Who are we trying to impress? Doctors and lawyers have much less required hours of CPE to maintain their license. Their fields change just as much as ours does, if not more. Between the time away from work and the extra cost of obtaining more CPE than any other profession, it just doesn't seem worth it to me. So, I reiterate I would be in favor of less hours required for CPE.
36Great idea--the 20 hrs was 25% of total CPE hrs but it meant a third 8 hr day or a 4 hr self-study.
37 I wouldn't be against a requirement for substituting 30-40 hours of tax subject matter education in a 2-year period, say as a sliding requirement that failure to take 20 hours of A&A would result in a requirement for 1.5 or 2 times the number of hours in qualified tax subject matter, still within the 80 hour 2-year requirement. Example: CPA takes 8 hours A&A in 2-year period, which leaves 12 hours out of 20 hour minimum, times 1.5 or 2, or 18 or 24 hours minimum tax subject matter requirement, the balance of 80 hours to be taken in any other qualified TB courses. This would stop me from having to take A&A standards courses (because none other relevant courses are available to me) that have absolutely no relevance to my tax practice. Another possibility is to make the Ethics course part of any minimum requirement, instead of a separate requirement, or count as A&A. And qualified tax subject matter should include a required IRS Circular 230 course, a minimum of 4 hours every 2 years.
38Either 1 or 2 would be preferable to current requirement. Thanks
39I understand that what differentiates a CPA is the ability to perform assurance work. However, for those of us doing valuation work, this requirement is very tedious. I could live with a couple of hours of something related to fair value and valuation (combined) but the rest of the requirement is a total waste of my education dollars.
40Accounting and CPA work has become so specialized that the 20 hour A&A requirement does not work anymore.
41A CPA certified public accountant needs to be refreshed every year in the accounting and auditing field so at least 8 hours should be allocated to gain knowledge and refresh the memory. Many CPA 's specialize in tax work or other consulting work such as performance improvement, internal audit, assiting clients with accounting and tax software hence justification for the remaining hours to be allocated as appropriate.
42A&A is at the core of what we do. I think it should still be required.
43CPA's knowledge is a cumulative art. Why are CPE requirements of 80 hours every two years the same for a recent CPA candidate with no experience and a CPA with 25 + years of CPE education and experience. Why not credit for time served? Reduce the CPE required for CPA's with 25+ years of experience and history of meeting the CPE requirements to 40 from 80 every two years.
44Maybe there needs to be a requirement that if you do any attest or assurance work then you need to have the 20 hours of A & A and on the flip side if you do not currently do any attest or assurance work then you can't perform these services until you take the 20 hours of A & A. I believe that most CPA's would still take A & A just to stay current with financial reporting requirements.
45Even though I do not perform any assurance or attest work, I firmly believe that every CPA should continue to maintain and update their personal knowledge of the current accounting standards. Mark Burling
46The majority of my practice is in forensics and litigation support work for very complex industry specific work. Therefore, my work requires almost constant continuing education in industry specifics, governmental regulation, legal, fraud, investigative techniques, data analysis, software and a host of other disciplines. In the past the A&A has been the least helpful continuing education subjects and actually takes valuable time that could otherwise be used for training of greatest importance. Of course, I maintain my association membership and read pronouncements and changes in accounting practice requirements and issues. I congratulate the FICPA on reviewing this area particularly as the information age and sophistication of industry specific information and practices are accelerating at an accelerating rate. Changes in the CPE requirements for forensic accountants is a small way of supporting this important practice area of the profession. Thank you
47My practice does not perform any assurance or attest work therefore it is a waste of my time and money completing A&A continuing education. It would be more beneficial to my clients, our profession and my practice to spend my continuing education time and money on subject related to my practice and clients.
48I tend to not learn or retain information that does not apply to my work. I'd rather study areas that apply to my work.
49I believe CPAs are diligent enough to pick subjects in the areas they practice. If alternative 1 is not selected, Alternative 2, any combination of accounting or tax hours is good.
50Every CPA should maintain a minimum knowing of all aspects of being a CPA, which includes Accounting and Auditing. Even CPA's with that practice exclusively in taxation should be required to maintain the minimum working knowledge. Otherwise, it dilutes the meaning and credibility of the CPA license. I personally believe the requirement should be 24 hours of A&A as a minimum.
51Thanks for addressing this matter for those of us that do not do audits.
52The requirement to get A&A hours is outdated as there are so many specialties within the accounting field that spending 1/4 of the hours requirement on something that an individual may never utilize seems incredibly wasteful. In my instance, I am a state and local tax specialist. I would much rather spend my time and money going to a training in my field that I'm going profit from than sitting through 10 sessions on some form of revenue recognition that I'm going to be reading my e-mails in.
53If the purpose of CPE is to protect the public, since I perform only tax services, the public would be better off if I devote no time at all to A&A and increase the hours to technical tax courses. I have been saying this for years. Thanks for this survey.
54None
55For those of us who do not practice in auditing, I believe industry knowledge is important and required CPEs in technical would allow more training in the areas that would benefit CPAs practicing in industry. That technical training can encompass both tax and specific industry practices.
56Even though members may not perform attest or assurance engagements they are still CPA's and were required to know this supject matter when they sat for the eaxm. New CPA's had to demonstrate that they had a sufficient level of knowledge to pass the exam and attain the title of CPA. I do not think that the 20 hour requirement should be changed
57the requirement for most CPAs to take A&A credits when the loin's share of the practices will not deal with the majority of issued required by the PCAOB would lead me to believe that A&A is not as important to the CPA who is in public accounting. Internal Auditors, Public firm auditors should still be required for the minimum 20 Hours. Allowing for a combo amount would be beneficial so that if I am a tax practice drive shop, we would still be exposed to A&A thru the conferences that are attended.
58And while at it, reduce the ETHICS to about an hour a year. My practice in NO Enron!!!!!!!!! djb cpa :~)))
59Although I am involved almost exclusively in tax and related planning issues, I would feel quite remiss if I let my A & A knowledge slip more than it currently does.
60Two days of A&A is not too much to ask for when you have 8 other days of topics for your particular specialty and interests. Additionally, observations from past A&A seminars shows that this time is used by some to catch up on reading newspapers, magazines, napping and other miscellaneous things which they may not be able to do in the non-A&A seminars.
61The current environment of regulations in Accounting and Auditing is changing so fast it is very hard to keep up with the changes( Not counting what is happening in the area of tax). I feel it would be a mistake to reduce the required hours of 20 hours for Accounting and Auditing. Even if a CPA does not do attest work to be licensed he or she needs to have some knowledenge in the area of Accounting and Auditing to have the overall knowlegenge of the profession. Individulals practicing in the area of attest again with the fast changing world of Accounting and Auditing should be taking more than 20 hours of continued education to be able to stay current with all the changes. If a CPA is doing Corporate Tax Returns they also need to understand what regulations effect the structure of the financial statements. The continuing education is expensive and takes a lot of time for an individual especially for a sole practitioner but I feel it is needed to keep us competitive and the quality contorl of our practice. I hope this helps. This is my personal opinion.
62The A&A requirement is a waste of time and money for non-auditors!
63Those of us who practice exclusively in tax and are at a point in our career where a return to the world of accounting and auditing is highly unlikely, would benefit greatly by eliminating the A&A requirement. The primary benefit is additional CPE in our technical fields that would enhance our useful knowledge base. Let's face it, there are very few CPA's that are taking CPE beyond the 80 hour requirement. Those 80 hours should be spent productively!! The reality is that we tax practitioners who do sign up for A&A hours are oftentimes not focusing on the material contained in the CPE program and are simply "going through the motions" when it comes to our A&A credits. The younger CPA's practicing in tax can choose to add A&A to their CPE requirement if they wish to maintain some skills needed in the event they ever switch over to the A&A side.
64I think the current requirements are fine. Although most of my work is in tax, I think all CPAs should be familiar with current A&A requirements.
65I happened to stumble on this survey. It should be emailed to all members to get an accurate view of membership.
66If one does A & A work, then the CPA should take on the responsibility to keep up to date on A & A but not be forced or required. The A & A requirements to obtain the initial license should remain. I usually laugh as I sit through the A & A CPE seminars since some of the topics are the results of the failures of those who had not follow the standards. There seems to be this disconnect between the profession and the real world. The profession deals too much with old stuff - stale historical data. At times I think the profession has lost its way in this area yet our nation's financial info and SEC are still the best because of our profession. The reason why I may attend an A & A course is that I can identify what may be M-1 adjustments on the tax returns. But I prefer not to have the requirement.
67 This is a long time coming and I hope the rules will finally be changed. The genesis of this rule and it's popular name years ago was "The Dooner Rule". I loved Lou Dooner and was blessed to follow in his footsteps at the FICPA but Lou Dooner believed that a CPA was not really a CPA unless he was engaged in some audit work. Therefore, Lou used his influence as Chairman of the Florida State Board of Accontancy to have the A&A requirement set into motion and made a requirement that long ago outlived it's usefulness. My hat's off to those who are finally doing something about bringing the FICPA into the 21st Century. Art Stites
68As a licensed CPA in indurstry, I find it difficult to complete the 20 hour A&A requirement with material that is useful in my job. I do usually take the annual accounting update so that I stay informed of new changes, but struggle to find other usefule courses. I believe that there is a large number of CPAs that are in industry and not public accounting and there needs to be some choses for them to acquire uselful information and not just file a requirement. CPAs in public practice can of course take more than the required amount if they choose to.
69While I do only tax related work, I think a CPA should have a little continuing update of A & A.
70Auditing and Accounting updates are important to create a balance of knowledge in all areas regardless of a CPA's area of concentration.
71forty hours is too much every year, it should be 24 hours in either, accounting, tax, or auditing, or some other combinations.
72This should only be available to those who do not take peer review because they do not do financial statements.
73Because ONLY CPAs can perform attest work, ALL CPAs should have the requisite knowledge to do so. That is what the public's perception is.
74I was in Corporate accounting for 39 years after 4 years in public accounting. A&A courses are relevant to all CPAs whether an auditor or an auditee. And we are all accountants. Plus, the 20 hours of A&A is only 1/4 of the 80 hour CPE requirements. NO CHANGE IS NECESSARY.
75I usually do my education on line and do enjoy some of the accounting and auditing classes even though I am a CPA in industry and most is not pertinent to my field. I would much rather see a reduction in the number of CPE hours per 2 year reporting . For some of us in industry, we do not have the benefit to get CPE through our employer nor is the employer paying for the time out of the office and the courses. Which is why I usually cram a ton of hours in one year by taking a one year special fee course, like Surgent McCoy. ( I do enjoy their A& A classes) In comparison to other professionals, the number of CPA CPE hours is enormously more. Attorneys have 30 hours every three years, Insurance professionals have 28 every two years, nurses ( ? 20 a year) . Thank you for taking the time to review our educational requirements.
76For those practitioners that do not perform assurance services, we can be better serviced by taking other types of education in our field of practice. It would be an ethics violation to perform work that we are not competent to perform and therefore, we should not be allowed to perform assurance services unless our CPE is caught up and current in that area. Personally, I specialize in only valuation and damages work and have not performed A&A type work for over 20 years. Requiring me to take this 20 hours takes away from better areas of education that I actually get anyway but the cost of the AQ&A in time and money is a waste. If my Business Valuations work is for financial reporting, I would be taking subjects that qualify for A&A but there may not be 20 hours worth. I encourage eductaion but it should be relevant to the area of practice. Those of us that are credentialed from the AICPA or other organizations have to take education in out practice area to keep our accreditations. Hopefully, the state will recognize this is they are informed of our requirements. Thanks.
77The requirement for 20 hours is too much when no work is done that requires that function. Thank you for pursuit of this needed change. I also recommend changing the four hours of fraud.
78My practice is strictly tax returns and cash basis accounting. The 20 hours of A&A is overkill.
79I am a tax person. Having to comply with this A&A requirement has been painful. It is long past time for this to go away.
80The 'A' in CPA stands for Accountant. It stands to reason that there should be some amount of required accounting CPE. But rather than allowing CPAs to allocate the required 20 hours to A&A or tax as they choose, I also believe there should be a required amount of tax CPE. I believe that those who practice in the tax arena generally do receive a lot of tax CPE, but those who don't practice tax preparation should still be required to maintain some knowledge of taxes. We all have to have some knowledge of taxes to pass the CPA exam and receive our license; why shouldn't we have to maintain that knowledge as a requirement of maintaining the license?
81We should reduce the CPE hour requirements overall. 80 hours is much higher than the lawyers. How about 30 total hours per year
82How are the Ethics hours to be considered? The choices given do not seem to address this issue. I do think some A & A should be required as there are many changes afoot in the accounting profession and one never knows how useful the information may be in the future or the direction one's career will take. It appears this request to remove the A & A requirements is from the older accountants such as my self who go kicking and screaming but never sit in the sessions if they are attending a live CPE session.
83Thank you for reviewing the current 20-hour A&A requirement. I am in the financial advisory sector now and feel an update on A&A of 4-8 hours over 2 years is good, 4 hours on Fraud is important, and the balance of hours in other topics that would meet my needs is much better than the current rule.
84As per question 1, I do not do any A&A work. However, I do and can appreciate what the designation "CPA " means and represents. I also believe that even CPA's who do no A&A work still should have a basic understanding of debits and credits and financial reporting, etc. So I believe an 8 hour bi-annual "update" course developed just to keep us informed of the basics would be prudent. It is always good to have a basic understanding just so we don't inadvertently do something that runs us afoul of the rules. That said, I could also see an additional alternative, or an expansion of the first alternative and/or a variation of the others. Perhaps, if you do not do any A&A work the requirement could be 0 A&A hours, but then you cannot sign or do any A&A type work including compilations. If do only compilations, then have an 8 to 16 hour A&A "compilation" CPE requirement (CPE focused just on compilations ), but have a 20 hour requirement if you do reviews, audits or other A&A work. Simply put, if you do not take any "specific" A&A CPE course, you cannot sign an A&A report of any kind. Make the CPE fit what you do. If you have skipped a few years (i.e. taken no A&A courses because all you planned to do was tax work, for example), but then want to go back into doing A&A work, you could have a rather stringent "re-certification" requirement, so to speak, for say 32 hours of A&A before you can begin signing A&A reports of any kind.
85I am a sole practitioner. I only do tax work. currently 50% of my CPE courses do not deal with tax. this does not help me or my clients. I would prefer to be able to take more tax courses and less auditing and accounting subjects.
86The Florida statute Section 473.302 (8)(b) has significantly broadened the definition of the practice of accounting to include many non traditional A&A areas including "services involving the use of accounting skills, or one or more types of tax, management advisory, or consulting services" Indeed many Florida CPAs are not practicing in the traditional A&A areas and instead only do tax, management advisory services and/or consulting services. It is thus, in my humble opinion, an outdated approach to require 20 A&A hours on all. This requirement does little or nothing for those who don't practice in A&A areas. I hope and pray the AA CPE requirement is adjusted to recognized the diversity in the practice of accounting as is delineated in the definition of the practice of accounting.
87Since A&A are not a significant portion of my practice I would like to have the ability to take courses in the areas I presently concentrate on in my work, as well as take courses which will improve my leadership, writing and speaking skills.
88For those of us that just do taxes, 20 hours of A & A is a waste of time and money.
89I think that it should continue to be 20 hours of A&A if you do any manner of AUDIT work. The adjustment / reduction of A&A should only be available to those who do no Audit work. I don't do any accounting work for clients, but I believe that if you hold yourself out as a CPA, you do need to stay abreast of the latest general trends in accounting. I believe my selection, above, was the closest to this interpretation.
90I agree that there probably does need to be a minimal standard (core hours) for general knowledge throughout all areas, but 20 hours of A&A for a non A&A practitioner is too much. Possibly we could develop a system similar to Lawyers where we become "Board Certified" in the various practice areas. I vaguely recall that the AICPA and the GA Society of CPAs attempted something like this concept. A Board Certified Tax practitioner may be required to have 60 hours of Tax during each period. A Board Certified Audit member could be required to have at least 60 hours of A&A during each period. It could be a minimal standard that all members have the other 20 hours: 4 hours of Ethics, 4 hours of A&A, 4 hours of Tax, 4 hours of Fraud awareness, and 4 hours of behavioral. If a member wanted to be Board Certified in both Tax and A&A, they would be required to obtain 140 hours (20 core hours, + 60 hours Tax + 60 hours A&A) during each reporting period. I afraid, with the rapidly changing standard and tax laws, that the days of being a generalist are over, any CPA who thinks they can adequately perform both Audits and Tax are deceiving themselves and probably doing their client a disservice.
91Every CPA needs a baseline understanding of GAAP and GAAS
92I could live with a change in the number of hours of A&A required (but probably no fewer than 15). However, I am opposed to eliminating the requirement. I'm an accounting educator and perhaps I'm old school, but I know that the only real service a CPA can perform that no one else, by law, can perform is attest work. A CPA license is a nice credential for a corporate accountant or tax provider (etc.), but is not required. To me, anyone with a CPA license should be up to date on change to GAAP, regardless. Not sure how you can be a certified public ACCOUNTANT without keeping up with A&A, at least at some level. I don't find the current requirement overly onerous.
93Knowledge of current accounting standards is critical to every aspect of what a CPA can do. The current requirement doesn't make anyone take auditing courses if they don't perform attest functions. Keeping the A&A requirement continues to keep us focused on the bedrock of the profession. Taking this away would make all the tax practitioners no different than non licensed tax preparers.
94In my practice, I do NO auditing. It is a waste of time and money to require me to do 20 hours of AA. I would rather be spending my dollars on an area that would be beneficial to me, such as tax. Tax should have as much weight as AA.
95Even though we do not perform attest services, we have an obligation to stay current on the audit and financial reporting standards that our license is based on. One does not need a college education to do taxes or keep books, that can be done by training. We must be very cautious not to become mere technicians - India is as close as your Electronic device of choice.
96Due to the varied areas of the profession, I believe more flexibility should be allowed so professionals have more of a choice.
97Getting the minimum accounting and auditing hours is time consuming, can be expensive and oftern involves taking courses that have no useful application to the work I perform.
98While I wouldn't object to a requirement to attend an annual 4 hour accounting / auditing update class, the problem is the remaining 16 hours for the current requirement. You end taking some random accounting class that you never use just to get the hours where you could be spending those hours in the area in which you practice.
99Every self-respecting accountant should keep up with accounting and auditing, even if all they do is tax work. Otherwise, we have nothing to distinguish us as a group from enrolled agents. There is nothing wrong with being an enrolled agent, but a certified public accountant should be just that.
10020 hour requirement should not change at all.........CPA's are accountants first
101There are many CPA's who choose to maintain their license and not perform attest work. It seems silly to require those folks to sit through 20 hours of A & A when that time could be better spent updating their skills in more relevant topic areas.
102I think that the younger CPA's who may not have set their path towards one area of practice over another would still benefit from required education because they are more likely to need a broader base of knowledge. I also agree that we should keep one level of licensing . Even a tax man produces a financial statement here and there and can still benefit from some A&A.. There are enough choices from online and face to face classes that make A&A relevant to everyone's practice.
103The reality of CPA practice today is that CPAs have become specialized. With the complexities of tax and auditing practice today, no one should try to be a jack-of-all-trades. There is simply too much to know. Requiring a tax CPA to take A&A is wasteful of his or her time, ignores these realities, and is not beneficial to the profession.
104I have been a practitioner in tax only for the last 20 years and I HATE having to do A&A. You don't require auditors to have a certain number of tax hours!!! I moved from North Carolina in 1997 to Florida and refused to transfer my license to Florida because of the A&A requirement. I finally had to because I left a large corporate tax department to start my own tax practice, so I had to transfer my license at that point, now I dread the 20 hours of A&A I have to do every year!! PLEASE change it!!!!
105 It is a bit frustrating that I am required to take A&A CPE hours when I've earned 158 hours in 2014 to date. I obtained my CFE and have completed 3 of the 4 ASA course requirements in the process. I decided to go this route because it is relevant and adds value to my career on a daily basis. Further, both designations will be extremely beneficial for my career long-term. I think the requirements should allow for CPAs to fulfill what is needed through interest in the many career paths chosen. I think we are using an outdated model with the set subject topics and need to evolve along with our profession.
106The existing 20 hour required A&A should be maintained if and only if you or your firm/employer are engaged in audit work or preparation of financial statements. If you or your firm/employer do not do audits/preparation of Financial statements and do not carry malpractice insurance for the same, then no CPE should be required.
107Although I primarily prepare individual and busuness tax returns I consult regarding tax planning and the best business form to use. I find that taking GAAP update and review courses allows me to keep up with required asset classification and income recognition methods. Also, I believe it keeps up the CPA professional image and respect. I prefer the 16 hour requirement as it allows me to satisfy it with two 8 hour courses. I would also like the remaining 4 hours to be the Fraud CPE. With the 80 hour requirement I have ample hours to get tax preparation CPE. NOW, if you want to consider reducing the required hours to 60 every two years I am all for it!
108I don't really like any of the options under #3 even though I selected the second option. I think the CPE should have a general focus on A&A and tax for every licensee, perhaps 16 to 24 hours divided equally. Then licensees should have a secondary requirement for additional hours in a specific subject matter. For instance, if the licensee is primarily a tax professional then another 24 hours in specific tax topics. Or if the licensee is primarily an assurance professional then another 24 hours in A&A. The licensee should be required to indicate on their annual license renewal what proportion of their time is spent on assurance, tax, or other services and then report hours consistent with that breakdown. No change in the total hours per period and no change in the ethics requirement either. One change I think is necessary is to require a passing grade on a quiz given at the end of a training program to get the CPE hours for the program. I have seen too many people attending training with their laptops going and not, apparently, listening to the presentor. I have seen others sign in for the day then leave. That behavior really bothers me. It strikes me that some practioners feel as though the are just buying the CPE credit to meet a requirement without even attempting to enhance their skills, which is the main intent of the CPE requirements. I also think license holders that are not in public practice should only be required to meet the minimum for A&A. However, should a not in public practice licensee return to public practice they should be required to get a heavy dose of A&A during their first period back in public practice. Perhaps twice the standard requirement. I don't favor having two kinds of CPA licenses, one for assurance and one for tax. But I do think the CPE requirements ought to reflect the licnesees primary focus.
109The A&A requirement is not relevant to my practice, which is 100% tax planning & preparation. The A&A requirement represents a cost to my practice, because I must pay for CPE that I cannot use. I would much rather take 80 hours of tax CPE, which would be of greater benefit to me and to my clients, especially with all of the recent changes in tax law. I am also a licensed New Mexico CPA and they do NOT have the A&A requirement.
110I suggest that if a member performs ANY accounting and/or auditing services or is responsible for review of such, that the 20 hours be mandatory.
111The A&A requirement should be required only for professional issuing audited financial statements in public practice. A&A requirement for CPAs specializing in tax, IT, MAS or Private industry is a poor use of time. The required A&A training is wasted time and greatly reduces the effectiveness of the CPE training for those who specialize in audit work. More and more individual CPAs are moving away from auditing because of the risk both professionally and financially. CPAs are, or should, be professionals and able to select CPE courses that pertain to their particular field of professional interest.
112As CPAs what distinguishes us from other accountants is strictly the attest function. The question is not if we perform attest engagements the question is do we have the ability to do so. If we have the ability to do so we should be knowledgeable enough to know how to perform or when to decline. 20 hours is not much in view of the whole.
113I'm not wedded to the particular hours in the choices, though I understand you had to create discreet choices. Spirit of the Law from my perspective: for non-attest (tax, PFP & consulting) CPAs, 20 hrs of hard-core A&A topics is a waste. I see the merit in requiring some A&A, and I definitely like the idea of fraud awareness.
114This will permit the CPA to at least have an update on the accounting and auditing changes and then provide additional hours for CPE in the area that his/her practice is providing to the their clients.
115If a change should occur it should be to increase the A&A requirement not to reduce.
116We should be required to have some A&A to keep abreast of standards. However, for the tax CPA, it's difficult to meet the requirement and doesn't give real value.
117am a tax guy but find times where I need to have A&A knowledge to answer client questions. A level of A&A is good for all practitioners no matter what we specialize in. The CPA certificates all look the same.
118I picked what I hoped would be the most reasonable and popular response but I would personally happier with choices 1 or 2. Lawyers only need an average of 10 hours a year and CPA have 40, no reason why the legislature should not be willing to make a change. I think this survey would have been much more useful if you had allowed us to rank our choices of 1 to 5 and if you dont' get a clear picture from this you might want to send it out again with that format. Lynn
119 Florida Attorneys need 30 credit hours every 3 years - that is ONE QUARTER the requirement of CPAs. Florida Medical Doctors need only 40 credit hours every 2 years - that is HALF of what CPAs need. Forty (40) hours every year is too high for CPAs. I am a strong advocate of education - and firmly believe it should never stop - In fact - I personally have to date averaged much more than that over my career - I have already spent more than a full year of my life getting continuing education - but the education should relate to the subject matters of my work. And the market place will sift through the competent vs. the incompetent professionals. I have taken class after class to satisfy the requirement that has absolutely nothing to do with my work, then turned around and taken more classes that are relevant. As the rules stand now - a CPA that works only in the tax area, could get only Accounting and Auditing (and ethics) classes - with NO TAX updates - and comply with the rules -but would you want that person preparing taxes? And what about a controller or CFO of a company in industry? Sure they could benefit from a brief update in accounting, auditing and tax - but what they probably need most are classes that relate specifically to their industry, motivational and personnel issues - with industry probably being the most beneficial. Continuing Educational Requirements should better the person in his/her career - not just be a file stuffer. Other areas of work could be listed, but I trust you get the point. You did not give this choice, but what I would have voted for is a total of 20/year like Doctors - 2 of which should be Accounting/Auditing; 2 should be Tax and the rest should be discretionary to the individual but relate to their job/career.
120I believe that those who will be performing audits will have to be taking A&A anyway, and I would hope that Peer Review would be looking at that information as well...while not as a requirement for CPE, but as an indication of whether or not the individual and/or firm is doing their part to continually improve. Those of us CPAs involved in consulting endeavors would be able to use that time to become more proficient in our field of expertise as well...providing a better quality product to our client and reinforcing the importance of the designation.
121My comments reflect that 8 hours would be the minimum for A & A but additional A & A hours can be allowed. This change would allow CPAs who practice accounting and auditing to obtain more A & A while at the same time allow CPAs in Industry to obtain additional Technical Business in areas that are of interest and relevancy to them.
122As an alternative to the general CPE requirement, please adopt a 24 hr concentration in a particular field such as auditing, fraud, taxation,governmental, non-profit, etc. This will enable accountants who specialize in an area to effectively use their CPE in the area in which they work.
123I think it is important for all CPAs to "brush up" or at least get a review of current A&A topics, regardless of the amount of time spent applying this knowledge. Eliminating the A&A requirement completing or drastically reducing it would devalue the CPA license.
124SINCE 90% OF MY CPA WORK IS TAX, IT WOULD BE MORE BENEFICIAL TO MY PRACTICE TO USE A PORTION OF THE 20 A & A REQUIRED CREDITS TO STUDY TAX OR TECHNICAL SUBJECT MATTER.
125While not involved in assurance work, still believe 8 hours every two years to be necessary just to stay on top of developments in the area.
126Your practice will dictate the CPE that you need to take in any year. A requirement of a certain field of study id not necessary.
127There should be more flexibility since there's no need for 20 hours of A&A for CPAs not performing assurance or attest work.
128The current cpe requirement for A & A is not applicable to many small or one-person firm practices.
129I do not perform any attest functions. While it is important to be current on this subject I believe 20 hours is overkill. I have a license in both FL and OH. In Ohio you get your majority CPE in the discipline that you are working. I currently don't practice at all but I chose to maintain both licenses because I worked very hard for my credentials and I don't want to let them go. Forcing 20 hours of AA on someone like myself that would have NO impact on the profession and NO impact on my current employment seems very restrictive. I believe they should look at the services provided by the CPA and assign the requirements from there.
130The profession has expanded to many areas beyond tax and a&a and the educatijn requirements need to keep up.
131If you want to be a C.P.A., and the body of knowledge requires expertise in A&A, you should be ready to complete work product with sufficient knowledge. You never know what tomorrow will bring. If you are not practicing, go to inactive status and do whatever is necessary to maintain your license. I would even support a higher percentage of hours in A&A.
132It is important that the CPA be able to educate/reinvent his or herself in an area of need. Many of us are specialized in this day and age. It no longer is prudent for us to spend 20 hours in A&A education classes, when our practice and/or specialty is not in this area.
133For those CPAs who do not perform any audits, reviews or compilations, the A&A requirement serves no practical purpose. It would be much more beneficial to be able to take courses that apply to the work we do. Thank you for your consideration of this long-overdue issue.
134We know what cpe would be beneficial so let the CPA decide
135Although the public generally perceives CPA's to be "auditors", a vast number of CPA's do not perform any assurance or attest work. I believe the 20 hour requirement is too much for those CPA's. I also believe that the 20 hour requirement should not be eliminated entirely. As CPA's, even though no attest work is performed, we should at least be "aware" of changes in that area. I would suggest possibly a 10 hour requirement.
136As a 30+ year tax accountant, any time I spend in A&A is a waste of time better spent elsewhere.
137Since I no longer perform attest work, I would prefer to use those 20 hours in tax education.
138I would like to see the A&A hours remain at 20 with an additional 4 required in Fraud or fraud related guidance. There are still too many issues, and as with SSARS 21 and the preparation engagement for those not aware, would they even know about the new type of engagement if they hadn't done CPE?
139Even people who do not perform auditing work need accounting updates; however most A&A update classes talk about philosophical issues surrounding proposed changes to accounting standards. Most people just want to learn what has actually changed since they last went to school. The reality is that people must have continuing education so they will seek out what is most useful to them in their respective positions. It is hard to sit through 8 hours of a topic that doesn't apply to them.
140I do like the idea of adding a continuing education requirement on Fraud.
141I am a CFO for a private company and during the current reporting period I had over 100 hours of CPE, unfortunately none under A&A. I have had to take another 20 hours of CPE to fulfill this requirement.
142While I specialize in tax, I feel that the A&A requirement is necessary. There are plenty of A&A classes that are still applicable to tax such as internal control and forensics. We sometimes need to be forced out of our box to maintain perspective.
143I think that 20 hours is a good number of credits to keep all of us abreast of any changes. Even though I do not perform any audit nor attestation functions it is good for me to have a basic knowledge in this area.
144As a professional with over 46 years of experience who has worked initially with the audit department of an international accounting firm and later on as a professional solely in a tax practice, I feel that the individual is well qualified to determine what continuing educational program will benefit the most for his/her needs..
145An elimination of the 20 hours of A&A requirement would be more in line with the new SSARS 21.
146I support reducing the Accounting and Auditing requirement because I do not do any assurance or attest work with financial statements. I always have a difficult time finding AA hours. If a CPA does assurance or attest work, then the requirement should continue.
147I work in industry and the 20 hours of A&A needed is excessive. I have a hard time finding enough courses relevant to my needs.
148Thank you for doing this. We are not all 'big 4' firm CPAs. I like to tailor my CPE to the needs of my practice, to the extent possible. Keeping in mind that as a CPA, with the inherent responsibility of the privilege, any assurance or attest work would be preceded by voluntary education fitting the need. You might want to create a requirement for compilations, as this work may be more prevalent.
149Many CPAs do not do tax or audit work. My primary business is forensic and audit and accounting cpe is irrevelant to my work and is a waste of time and money.
150I opened my sole proprietor practice in 1985 and have never had any form of attest engagement and never expect to in the future.
151Too many ignorant, uninformed and obviously non-current CPAs do not need another excuse to learn nothing and know nothing. Leave the requirement alone and hope those who complain actually stay awake in the CPE sessions they are "forced" to attend.
152As a tax practitioner I get nothing out of the A&A CPEs. You can always tell who is in tax at those presentations - the ones who are not paying attention because they neither know, nor care, about the topic. We do not make auditors sit through 20 hours of tax CPE so I do not understand how this makes sense or is even fair.
153A large number of members no longer perform attest work due to liability invoved and the requirement could remain for those who wish to practice in this area.
154I have been a Florida CPA for 30 years. I have a substantial practice that is totally devoted to tax, business consulting, estates and trusts. It is a total waste of valuable time to spend 20 hours every two years on A&A when I could be devoting more CPE time to the field of accounting that I totally devote all my time. When I take A&A seminars, I look around the room and sadly see the vast majority of the class either doing work on their laptops, answering emails or reading the newspaper. When I am in the tax update seminars, the overwhelming majority of the class is actively engaged in the topic, asking questions, etc. It is time for our licensing bureau to take its head out of the sand and address reality. Sincerely, Jeffrey Hahn, CPA
155Allow us to choose how we get our CPE. Even though a person may not do any assurance work, they may find a course to be interesting and want to attend anyway.
156As a professional you should be aware of whats happening within your profession and that's all that this requirement is doing. It certainly will not provide the in depth training to do auudits or prepare complex financial statements. Many non audit or non attest clients are are sophisticated. Financial statements , the PCAOB and accounting changes are covered in the business section of most major daily newspapers as well as financial publications. We should at least have a general knowledge of these matters and that is all this training does. It may also create opportuniities for practitioners to go to the next level.
157Good luck on the law change. It is really needed!
158Twenty hours of A&A is a lot for a tax person who does no audit work. I can usually find accounting or fraud topics that fit into the category but at least one or two of the sessions is a waste of my time, and I would rather spend my time on a tax topic. I like the idea of having fraud in the mix because it has become a hot topic. My second choice would be to make it 20 hours of either A&A or tax.
159I am a Florida CPA and Florida Attorney. I do tax planning and estate planning. I think all CPA's should have 8 hours dealing with the attest function including fraud, and the balance of the hours should be technical.
160I believe ALL CPAs should have A&A understanding and education every year. The current requirement is adequate.
161More and more, there is a segregation between tax, audit and consulting as with the increased complexity and cost of compliance practitioners are becoming one or the other but not both. I am predominately tax, but also do business valuation work, which has a CPE requirement, and to meet the needs of all that I do, and including the A & A hours, I am immersed in CPE each year. Practitioners who need CPE in specific areas generally seek it, and should be allowed to structure their own CPE to meet their practice needs.
162I am a CPA with a Masters in Tax Law and I never have any need for any hours in A&A. I was licensed in Massachusetts where they did not have a minimum for A&A and I could enjoy new management business type programs which were very helpful to any partner in a firm with several employees. The 20 hour requirement is a waste of my time and my money. Sharon Ryan, CPA
16320 hours is way too much A&A for someone who does not do and assurance or attest work.
164It would also seem that one should not be limited in the areas of other business and technical CPE because in today's rapidly changing world, we as CPAs need to have a basic understanding of so many areas. I also think we should be able to take more behavioral CPE depending on the job.
165We all need to keep abreast of current standards and pronouncements. I believe that a course should be required within the first six months of each year reviewing all new standards that have been officially adopted during the prior year. If there are no new adoptions in a given year, then the course could be replaced with a course of the licensee's choosing.
166The ONLY exclusive service that the CPA license bestows is the ability to provide assurance on financial information. When the CPA license holder no longer has education in the ONLY exclusive area that the license provides then the reason to have the license evaporates. While other jurisdictions have bowed to the whims of those vocal folks who just "don't want to take A&A", many of which are lawyers and tax people, the long view is that the license becomes meaningless if the license holder no longer knows about the ONLY exclusive subject matter licensed. When A&A is taken out of CPA then the value of the CPA becomes much more like the CMA, CFP, CVA, CFA and other "trade association" designations - none of which have a state issued license. In the not to distant future lawmakers will become aware that the CPA license does not require A&A and will then move to limit the licensees to those that just do financial statements. The loss of membership for both state and national CPA "associations" will be huge as large numbers of current CPAs are no longer licensees. The long view from my point of view is that the license provides many benefits but ONLY assurance is exclusive to the CPA. In order for the CPA license to be relevant then the licensee needs to remain current in the ONLY thing the license exclusively provides.
167I am fine with 8 hour requirement but fine if it is optional. In what I do, it is not necessary for me to have A&A.
168I perform only litigation and oil-gas accounting related consulting. I am licensed as a CPA in Texas and generally take only enough accounting hours to remain current on reporting topics related to oil and gas. A rule change in FL would allow a much more efficient use of my CPE time and dollars. Thanks
169THANK YOU VERY MUCH!
170CPAs that do no compilation, review or audit work should not have to study areas that do not concern them.
171I believe we need at least 8 hours of A&A to maintain the relevance of being able to perform attestations.
172As a tax practitioner, anything to reduce that 20 hrs would be great - I like the idea of 4 hrs of fraud, also.
173I would like to add that the 20 hours of A&A include the 4 hours of Ethics, 8 hours of A&A, and the remaining 8 to be tax, technical subject at the CPA's choice or Change A&A to be 24 hours of A&A to include 4 hours of Ethics, 8 hours of AA and the remaining 12 to be tax, technical subject at the CPA's choice
174My choice stresses that tax is a needed requirement for all CPAs, even Auditors.
175Technology is a large component of the work most CPA's perform, whether in public accounting, industry or government. I would like to be able to spend more of my CPE hours keeping abreast of the latest technological developments and a little less on the still very important topics covered in A&A CPE.
176While I agree that all licensed CPAs should maintain their primary skill of A&A, I believe that 20 hours is excessive for those who do NO attest or financial statements engagements. Perhaps this portion of the CPE requirement could remain at 20 hours for those in the peer review program, but reduced for those whose practice is limited to Tax.
177If carefully selected, 8 hours should be enough to get a cursory review of what is going on with A&A for those of us that perform no attest function engagements.
178I think the Tax experts need to be able to focus on their area, and the Financial side on the AA area.
179Not performing audits or reviews, and with the increasing time pressures of having a tax intensive practice, I find myself searching for the cheapest,easiest A&A CPE just to satisfy the requirement. Those 20 hours could be better spent learning about subject matter that I would apply to my practice.
180I have no interest in performing any A&A services for clients. I think my CPE hours would be better spent getting additional education in tax, which is the area that I practice in.
181The current requirements are ridiculous as it applies to me.
182I do not do any A&A work. But I believe it is still my responsibility as a CPA to be aware of the A&A provisions because they might impact aspects of my tax return practice. One meaningful A&A update seminar per biennial period should be enough for those not engaged in A&A practice.
183Unfortunately the way most courses are set up, if a CPA not interested in A&A education can get their 20 hours of A&A without paying any attention to the material. Therefore there is no real A&A education occurring. I'm not sure you can correct it though, no matter what you change it to.
184We are CPA's. Quit diluting the designation. Yes, public accountants should be current on accounting issues.
185Good move folks!
186For myself the removal of any auditing requirement would be very meaningful. I only do Write-ups and tax returns for my clients. I am semi-retired and have not intention of do any audits, reviews or compilations nor have I do any in the past 35 years. I would rather take more tax, computer and technical course which would better meat my needs in the profession. I hope that the change will be made very quickly.
187I am a PFS credentialed CPA and do not perform A&A services for my clients. My tme is wasted going to TWENTY HOURS of A&A classes each two year cycle. My CPE education could be greatly enhanced if I could take more classes dealing with financial planning to improve my planning skills in the areas of cash budgeting, retirement and estate planning. I agree some A&A should be required but 8 Hours would be sufficient to keep me abreast of changes occurring in the A&A area. I take several hours of courses beyond the 80 hours every two year cycle to maintain my knowledge in the ever changing field of financial planning. If it were necessary, I would be sign a statement that I do not perform A&A services if necessary to reduce the hours I waste sitting in A&A classes. Besides the time lost out of my office to attend the A&A classes, I incur costs (registration and transportation costs) to attend these classes. Would it not be better to be in my office productively helping my clients plan, execute and monitor their spending habits (budgeting), investments and retirement resources? The change to reduce the A&A hours would result in a win-win: more time to serve the public from professionals who have been able to attend relevant education to become more proficient in the services we offer to the public!
188 Reduce total required hours from 80 to 40 with 4 hours of Accounting and the remaining 36 hours in any other subject. Those of us in the accounting and tax business need to keep up with the changes in the tax law and would do so without a requirement. My study group meets for 2 hours 20 times a year with 1 hour devoted to A & A and 1 hour to tax. We watch a tape by Bisk as subject matter and there is great interest in the hour of tax but not much in the hour of A&A. The most interest is when we exchange between ourselves our experiences with tax subjects or what is going on with the IRS and the State of Florida Department of Revenue. At today's session we discussed how the State is performing wage and hour exams on S corps and classifying all S distributions as wages, and assessing payroll taxes, penalties, and interest without regard to the fair and reasonable standard the federal courts have applied to S wages v distributions. I would favor making those CPA's who want to provide auditing, review, and compilation services to have different education requirements than the rest of the profession and a more intensive peer review as well as recertification requirements every few years. Those of us who do not meet the requirements would be barred from performing those services.
189 All of us are adults and are aware of the requirement to be proficient in those areas that we practice. Therefore, the choice of subject matter should be left to the individuals so that they can make the best use of their time and their dollar expenditures.
190As a tax specialist, there is no redeeming value to me in obtaining 20 hours of A&A. Those 20 hours would be beneficial to me and those who I service. By taking all my CPE is tax, I would be better informed about matters that my clients are expecting.
191In my business, for the past 35 years is do monthly bookkeeping, financial planning (PFS) and tax services. I do no audits, reviews or compilations. Its time for a change. when I do my 20 A & A, I take the classes for just the hours, not the knowledge, like I do in Taxes and Financial Planning. Thanks for considering a change.
192Although I don't do attest or audit work, I am a corporate controller and my books are audited. I need to know the latest A&A changes but 20 hours is overkill. I normally get my A&A hours with Fraud classes so I'm only in favor of this choice if Fraud classes will still count for A&A .
193In response to this comment quoted in the 12/17/15 NewsFlash: "Key to this is the concept that the CPA credential differentiates us from accountants and bookkeepers by allowing us to perform the attest function, which those without a license cannot do. Therefore, completing proper education in A&A subject matters each licensing period is necessary to retain the expertise that makes us CPAs." As a CPA who has practiced solely in TAX for her entire 25+ year career: although my CPA licensure might "allow" me to perform attest functions, 20 hours of A&A CPE every two years is NOT sufficient for me to perform attestation. My doing so would be malpractice, whether allowed by our licensing and CPE requirements or not. From a practical perspective (as noted by another commenter), CPAs tend to choose continuing education that is relevant to their professional practice; those that perform attest functions focus on auditing and accounting education, those that are tax practitioners focus on tax law areas of specialization and general law updates, etc. Florida should also take into account the educational requirements in other states. Do other states require ALL CPAs to obtain a minimum amount of auditing and accounting continuing education, regardless of whether or not they perform attestation? I have friends with CPA licenses from several other states, and none of them have similar CPE requirements for A&A to Florida. Bottom line: we are professionals. Let us decide which technical areas of continuing education are appropriate for our specific job responsibilities. Thank you.
194I am the compliance officer for my company, yet maintain my CPA license. Since I am not practicing as a CPA, the A&A hours are largely wasted on me: it would be much more beneficial to my company (and my own professional development) if I used some of those hours on continuing education that is more relevant to my career.
195My real response is to reduce the number of hours required to 40 per reporting period. No other profession (attorneys, doctors, teachers) that I know of requires the number of hours of CPE that this profession does. I don't think it's necessary.
196The 20 hour requirement is different from all of the other states and need to be at least the same not more than all other states.
197I would prefer to be able to obtain credits that apply to my daily job functions. As EVP & CFO of a Foundation, accounting is only a small portion of my job responsibilities. A change should be made to align with the AICPA and CIMA's partnership which realizes we are more valuable than just looking at and recording the numbers.
198I do not perform any A&A & therefore the CPE time spent on those is wasted.
199I think being licensed means that you meet the requirements of the designation whether you do attestation services or not. Therefore, remaining current on accounting and auditing standards is paramount to holding one's self out as a CPA. I think a reduction in A&A to 8 or 12 hours would still provide sufficient exposure to the subject matter. I think a part of the dissatisfaction is also because so many conferences offer technical hours rather than A&A hours and the A&A coursework has not been as readily available to obtain. I also feel that there are limited opportunities to obtain ethics hours. I think 80 hours over such a short period has become a burden for many and consideration should be given as to how to best proceed with this requirement. It may be that you keep the same hour requirements but lengthen the time to a 36 months licensure period.
200We must remain mindful of what sets us apart.
201Having knowledge of issues impacting CFO's of private companies, especially small businesses, is infinitely more meaningful.
202CPA's should not have to designate on license what king of practice they have; will lead to specialization issues, advertising claims etc If CPA's do not want to keep up with A & A, they should give up the CPA license and just become accountants/bookkeepers/tax preparers. without the higher designation Dilutes the license/brand/designation!!
203There is no more value to me as a tax practitioner of 20 hours of A and A than an A and A practitioner required to have 20 hours of Tax Updates. I always try to take courses that have value to me in practice, and because I do not provide Assurance or Attestations Services it is a waste of time and money to be required to have 20 hours of A and A. It is time to change because the technical skills in each segment of practice has advanced so much in the past 4 decades. Other than Ethics, practitioners should be permitted to choose those courses that best serve their own practice areas.
204I am the Managing Partner of a tax only CPA practice. The 20 hour A&A requirement is a waste of my time and money, my partner's time and money ,and my associates time and money. This requirement should be eliminated.
205I think that many tax courses contain A&A components and should qualify for joint credit i.e. tax and A&A so as to allow practitioners that are most tax still get A&A credit for the courses that enhance and are necessary for their specialty of practice. As I understand it, it is judgement as to what part of a course qualifies for A&A but if it had dual credit that might help solve the problem. Also, giving credit for writing articles and reviewing articles should provide incentive for members to do research and write articles for the CPA Today Magazine and are a special benefit to all members of the FICPA. There are many activities that are technical in nature that CPAs do that they don't get CPE credit for or don't know if it is available. There seems to be confusion out in the hinterland about what does and does not qualify so the question of A&A credit is broader than what you have outlined.
206This needs to be changed. If you are doing no compilation or review or audit work, it is truly a waste of time and money.
207I believe the technical hours option for the full 20 hours should be allowed for CPAs not performing assurance or attest work. For example my practice is heavily in business valuation and forensic accounting with separate AICPA CPE requirements.
208I wouldn't object to an 8-hour standardized A & A course (similar to the standardized ethics course) to provided a general update of changes in the last couple of years. But for me, at least, 20 hours every two years is a waste of about 10 - 12 of those hours.
209DOCTOR OR ONLY REQUIRED 24 EVERY 3 YEARS
210I'm a member of the SWFL chapter and we used to have more monthly meetings that were A&A which made getting the 20 hours easier. Lately, the participation at the meetings has diminished and there has been less A&A and more TB. Part of the problem (of diminished attendance), it seems, is that the FICPA has started offering more online CPE so there's less of a benefit to attend the monthly meetings. Which is unfortunate for me because I prefer to get my CPEs from attending meetings rather than doing online CPEs. I also encourage students to attend FICPA chapter meetings so they can network with local professionals. In the past it was a good networking opportunity...not so much lately. The 20 hours of A&A is beneficial. It would be nice if it was easier/less expensive to get the hours. I can get 2 hours of CPE at an FICPA meeting for $30 ($15 per CPE), which includes a meal. I do not fully understand why the cost per CPE online from the FICPA is so high.
211I strongly believe that cpe must even include a higher dosis of AA in order to be called a cpa.
212my specialty is litigation support, and the A and A requirement shpould be repalced by other technical courses, not A and A.
213If anything, should be more. Learning is more limited for CPA's in industry relating to A&A.
214All the questions are about maintaining or reducing the A&A requirements...The survey ignores the potential to increase the requirement and further represent the value of ongoing A&A education. With the increasing complexity of financial reporting, the potential impact if IFRS and scrutiny upon the profession, is now the right time to water down the education requirements? The page prior to the survey almost brags about the work experience. The reality is one year of work under supervision of a CPA does not necessarily make one qualified to carry the credentials. Instead of watering down the requirements of the profession, we should challenge our colleagues to step up. Let's not turn the CPA into another CGMA or other ridiculous, meaningless "credential"...Show me a CGMA, and I'll show you someone who paid for a certificate that in no way represents any value that individual can provide, he simply paid the membership dues prior to the exam implementation. Now is not the time to water down the value of the CPA license. I welcome your response. Aharon Yoki, Tampa.
215Taking Accounting & Auditing (A&A) classes when my practice consists of 100% of tax engagements is a waste of my time and money. With the continuous increase Fraud and Due Diligence being required by the IRS in completing tax engagements I believe we should have an option to opt out of all attestation engagements (confirm this at each renewal) and be allowed to take education courses that will be more beneficial to us. By still requiring 20 hours of A&A to those firms not doing this type of work makes the classes extremely boring and I believe most CPA's are doing other things throughout the seminar.
216Those who want to hold a Certified Public Accountant certification should continue to be held to a higher standard than accountants and bookkeepers and therefore required to maintain at least a familiarity with all regulations affecting their profession and professional certification. Whether CPAs are performing assurance or attest work, industry work, or tax work, the public perceives the CPA to be knowledgeable in all aspects of the profession. The elements of accounting and auditing, fraud prevention and detection, and tax law overlap in each branch of accounting, i.e. assurance and attest work, industry, and tax work. A CPA should be well rounded and at least marginally familiar with legislative and regulatory changes to the profession. This could be accomplished each renewal period with: 8 hours of Accounting and Auditing 4 hours of Fraud 4 hours of Tax 4 hours of Communication, written or oral All other Certified Professional Education requirements could remain the same.
217More flexibility should be added to allow CPAs to focus on areas of CPE which are most applicable to them. As a tax preparer that does not engage in any A&A work, I would like to focus more on tax or other technical business related CPE.
218I think those who prepare and review attest work need to keep up and should keep up with A&A hours. My firm does A&A but I do not review this work minutely, We have specialists do it. I sign off on tax returns and the burden of getting 20 A&A is simply that- a burden.
219I have no problem taking the current 20 hrs. of A&A. I do mostly tax and consulting or teaching clients staff to do their own accounting. The hours of A&A actually just keeps me abreast of anything coming up. In particular, there seems to be more and more discussion about thorensic accounting. This topic seems to be more and more relevant to all our client businesses.
220I feel that minimal number of A&A hours should be required, but if one does not work in the attest arena, 20 is too many.
221I think the current standards are fine,
222With the additions of the ethics requirements its more like the current requirement is 24. The board should consider having a higher (20 or even more) A&A requirement for those individuals performing attest function work for compensation, such as audits and review level work. I rather see the CPAs handling my firm's tax work able to take more tax seminars and less A&A.