Annual Administrative Fees
All firms enrolled in the peer review program and required to undergo a peer review in accordance with AICPA Peer Review Standards or other regulatory requirements are assessed an annual administrative fee to cover the costs of administering the program. The amount of the annual fee is based on the specific number of professionals currently employed by your firm. Each firm is invoiced for the annual fee upon enrollment in the program based on a progressive billing structure. Subsequent years’ fees are assessed in July/August of each year.
The base fee of $225 includes one professional. There is a $75 charge for each additional professional, ($2000 maximum total). The term “professional” refers to all personnel who perform professional services for which the firm is responsible whether or not they are CPAs (AICPA Professional Standards, vol. 2, QC sec. 10). This includes all personnel (including leased and per diem employees) and excludes administrative/operations support personnel***
Non-member surcharge Fees
If there are no AICPA and FICPA members in the firm a $100 non-member fee will be added to the annual fee.
Non-AICPA firms will be charged an annual $68 PRIMA User Fee.
|
Administrative |
AICPA or FICPA Member Firm* |
Non-Member **Firm |
|
1 professional |
$225 |
$393 |
|
2 professionals |
$300 |
$468 |
|
3 professionals |
$375 |
$543 |
|
4 professionals |
$450 |
$618 |
|
5 professionals |
$525 |
$693 |
|
6 professionals |
$600 |
$768 |
|
7 professionals |
$675 |
$843 |
|
8 professionals |
$750 |
$918 |
|
9 professionals |
$825 |
$993 |
|
10 professionals |
$900 |
$1068 |
|
Over 10 professionals |
There is a $75 charge for each additional professional*** |
There is a $75 charge for each additional professional*** and |
|
Cap (Maximum Due) |
$2,000 |
$2,000 |
* Firms having at least one member of AICPA or FICPA.
** Non-member surcharge (Non-AICPA or Non-FICPA firms will be charged a $100 non-member fee) (Non-AICPA firms will be charged a $68 PRIMA User Fee)
*** The term “professional” refers to all personnel who perform professional services for which the firm is responsible whether or not they are CPAs (AICPA Professional Standards, vol. 2, QC sec. 10). This includes all personnel (including leased and per diem employees) and excludes administrative/operations support personnel
Reinstatement Fee
If for any reason a firm rejoins the AICPA or FICPA Peer Review Program after it had previously been dropped or terminated from any program, a $500 reinstatement fee must be paid to the FICPA prior to reinstatement in either program. In addition, any annual administrative fees that have not been paid from the time of being dropped or terminated to reinstatement must be paid.
Other Fees
A non-member fee of $100 is charged to firms which are not members of the FICPA or the AICPA.
A $68 annual AICPA PRIMA-user fee is charged to firms enrolled in a non-AICPA peer review program. In 2017 the AICPA Peer Review Board (PRB) approved a change to the Standards to allow firms (and individuals) without AICPA members to enroll in the AICPA Program.
Reviewer Fees
How much will my peer review cost?
The direct cost of a System Review will vary depending on firm size/region, number of engagements, partners, offices and nature of your firm’s accounting and auditing practice. Firms with audits in various specialized, complex or high-risk industries, such as banking, governmental, and employee benefit plans will normally pay more than a firm with the same number of audits that are all in one industry or in lower risk areas. There may be other factors that influence the cost of a System Review including the design of and compliance with the firm’s quality control system.
There are also the indirect costs of getting ready for a review that vary based on the condition of your firm’s existing system of quality control. Many firms are concerned about these non-chargeable hours. However, if the system of quality control is suitable for your firm’s practice, the preparation cost should be minimal. If, on the other hand, your firm finds the opposite is true, it should consider the time well spent since making needed changes should result in your firm providing better services to its clients, and, in most cases, providing those services more efficiently.
The estimated cost of an Engagement Review will vary based on the size of the practice and the number of owners responsible for the issuance of review, compilation and attestation engagement reports as well as preparation engagements. The cost also varies based on the type of peer review and peer review team selected to perform the review. In addition to the review costs that will be incurred every three years, firms may also pay an annual administrative fee to the AE to cover the costs of running the program and, in some states, in the review year, fees for scheduling the review and evaluating the results of the review. For additional cost information, contact your AE. Finally, firms that are enrolled in the Program and perform engagements requiring the firm to undergo a system review are required to pay a national peer review administrative fee to the AICPA for each year in which they perform such engagements. The fee varies based on the number of CPAs employed by a firm and will be used to support the Program’s new and ongoing initiatives to drive audit quality.
How can I reduce the costs of my peer review?
The best way to reduce costs is to provide complete, accurate information to the reviewer(s) early enough, such as 30 to 40 days before the review is set to begin, so it can be completed by the review due date. Firms that are committed to establishing, maintaining, and improving the quality of their accounting and audit practice tend to have a more efficient peer review. Prepare for the review early by making sure everyone in your firm understands the importance of performing engagements in accordance with professional standards, and properly documenting engagement planning issues, key procedures and conclusions. If procedures are properly documented and effectively organized, it will improve the reviewer’s ability to evaluate what was done without waiting for engagement staff to recall what they did from memory and should result in less time to complete the review. In addition, a properly designed environment of quality control and adherence thereto also results in less time devoted to discussing and responding to matters, findings and deficiencies.