SPECIAL LETTERS SECTION SPEAK OUT!

The AICPA Council met April 29-May 2 and was scheduled to vote on whether or not the AICPA should create an affiliate organization to supervise development of its proposed global credential, and whether or not to authorize a full membership vote on the credential.

California CPA went to press before these votes. However, in February, CalCPA members were invited to Speak Out! to their AICPA California Council members on the AICPA's proposed global credential. This is what some had to say:

ANOTHER SOLUTION

Is there a constituency that will be better served with a global credential? If you doubt there is, there is no need for a global credential. However, I do support global issues being brought forth in CPE. Perhaps the better solution is a CPE requirement being met on about the same frequency as ethics.

WENDELL COTTLE, CPA

V. Sattui Winery

IT'S A POSITIVE STEP

As a member in industry, I strongly endorse the concept of a global credential. While there are many issues to consider, I believe this is a positive step in addressing our changing business environment and provides qualified CPAs with the opportunity to establish themselves as professionals that bring "value-added" skills to business. This takes our profession to the next level.

TOM GREER, CPA

Irvine

DON'T TAKE THE BARRIER DOWN

One of the most important rules of economics is that you can t make money in an industry unless there are barriers to entry. The work involved in obtaining a CPA is that barrier. Let's not be fools and take the barrier down.

TIM GOOD, CPA

Torrance

IT'S FLAWED AT THE CORE

I believe the concept of a global credential is flawed at its core. The whole idea behind a credential is to certify that the holder has mastered some body of knowledge. My understanding of the XYZ/Cognitor credential is that it covers a multitude of knowledge sets and would not require an examination to prove mastery of knowledge. Therefore I fail to see what purpose it serves.

MARY BETH ARMSTRONG, CPA

CalPoly, San Luis Obispo 

FACE IT: MDPs ARE HAPPENING

The AICPA proposal for a global credential is a good idea. If the argument for the 150 hour requirement and eliminating audit experience, is that most CPAs don't do audits anymore then maybe we do need subspecialty designations CPA-Tax, CPA-Audit, etc. with a global credential to cover "other." Let's face it, none of us can possibly be a specialist in all these fields anymore with 130+ FASB Statements plus SOPs, SABs, EITFs, etc. and tax laws that get more complicated every year. We now have in our firm one non-CPA valuation specialist who is a principal and have just added another senior non-CPA consultant whose specialty is performance measurement and profit enhancement. The multi-disciplinary practice is happening!

JAMES C. PERISHO, CPA

Perisho, TomLiar, Loomis & Ramirez

ANOTHER NAIL IN THE COFFIN

I really believe, based on what I have read to date, that the movement to a global credential is driven by national firms that are in fact no longer accounting firms. These accounting firms now have more lawyers on staff than many of their competitive large law firms. They have engineers and computer consultants. Let them go out and form their own American Institute of ______. They don't have to stand on our shoulders and cause us to sink into the quick sand.

Our profession is facing enough major problems, with college admissions to accounting classes down 40 percent. I think the global credential could be another nail in the coffin of our rightfully proud profession.

HAROLD L. KATZ, CPA

Los Angeles 

MASTER OF NONE

I think this new credential is foolish. Credentials are good if they are for a small niche practice specialty because, today, prospective clients look for specific experience and expertise in a specific area and they are willing to pay for it.

People with a general or broad-based experience are a dime a dozen and the only way they get work is to work cheap. Even if you had the credential, prospective clients would see through it and realize that you are a generalist and "master of none."

The AICPA should concentrate on getting more members from the Big Five firms to increase membership or look into a data processing/computer credential.

ANNE RENNA, CPA

Santa Monica 

PROMOTE CPA

I am against the global credential. I feel that once again the AICPA is spending its resouces on a campaign that hurts the image of the CPA. This idea and the idea of CPA designations or specializations is sending the message that being a CPA is not enough. I believe the resouces of the AICPA could be better used to promote the value and competence of the CPA. It seems to me that in the last decade the reputation of the CPA has diminished. Our non-CPA competitors certainly spend enough time and money trying to convince the public that they can do as good of a job, if not better, than any CPA. Our reputation is our biggest asset, which we will Jose if we fail to defend it.

GARRY J. BROWNING, CPA

Modesto

LEAVE IT ALONE!

I have been a CPA for 27 years. I am very proud of my profession. I work hard every day to keep and maintain my reputation as an honest, ethical, hard working and successful CPA. Everywhere I go, people know who I am and what I do. I don't need to sell myself. The initials after my name are part of who I am. Now, I may disagree with some of the tangents the profession seems to be going to. I don't particularly like the idea of CPAs peddling life insurance, annuities and mutual funds. However, I accept that But don't change the credentials to some other moniker. You might as well call us XYZ, it makes as much sense as does some of the other names I have seen. Leave well enough alone! Please keep the CPA designation. Thanks for listening! STEPHEN J DELAHUNTY, CPA

Novato

OTHER SOCIETIES HAVE

DROPPED IT

I am against the XYZ credential:

1) It includes nonCPAs

2) Current AICPA officers will gain through options in a new for-profit corporation, so its motivation is questionable.

3) Ireland and UK CAs have opted out. I understand there is some question on other accounting organizations.

4) Illinois and New York state CPA societies have opted out.

J. BEN VERNAZZA CPA, PFS 

Overseas Oversight Group

HOW WOULD IT HELP ME?

The answer to the question that nobody asked ...

Seriously, I have never heard or read a credible explanation of what the perceived market demand for such a credential would be. What is the problem we are trying to solve? Why does this credential solve it? I go to market with (i) my firm's reputation, (ii) my experience and expertise and (iii) (a distant third) my CPA qualification. How would this global credential help me? At this time we can't even cross state boundaries, let alone cross borders. I'd much rather have a global qualification that people already understand.

The AICPA should be devoting its resources to protecting the accounting profession from the SEC and its allies and their attempts to turn us into a bunch of highly-regulated auditors with no consultative services. If we lose the ability to provide valuable services to our clients, no number of fancy global credentials is going to help.

STEVE TURK, CPA

Deloitte & Touche

"XYZ" SHOULD BE "DOA"

I do not support the global credential. The "XYZ" should be "DOA." This is not in the interest of the profession. We are CPAs. The mission of the AICPA is to advance the interest of the accounting profession and of its CPA members.

This is what I expect from the AICPA. Please convey my wishes.

CARLOS QUIROZ, CPA

San Francisco 

EDUCATE THE PUBLIC ABOUT WHAT CPAs DO I feel very strongly that the AICPA should not pursue a new credential; instead they should focus on enhancing the CPA brand. I feel a global credential is not warranted at this time and is evidenced by the lack of interest among other country's associations. We need to educate the American public in what CPAs are doing these days (additional services, new service areas, consulting, etc. etc.) rather than add a new organization to push a global credential.

SANDRA L. COLLINS, CPA

CalCPA Vice President

Collins and Mason

CUT THE BUDGET

This is not a practical concept. I suggest that the ongoing budget for this project be cut to $5000 per year--that should cover an annual one week trip to London by the AICPA to "research the concept."

MARTY MONAHAN, CPA

Honolulu, HI

IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE FUTURE

I am licensed in both California and Michigan. I believe the global licensing is going to be important in the future. Even in a large local CPA firm in the Bay Area, as we are, we are seeing more resident aliens and foreign company issues. They must be addressed and I believe that we will be behind if we fail to proceed with the credential. Thank you.

EMILY BOLOGNA, CPA

Palo Alto 

GET BACK TO BASICS

Each country has its special designation for CPA. I've come to recognize several of these designations by virtue of working with "CPA's" from other countries.

In my opinion: create an awareness campaign around the world to educate business people about the different designations of "CPAs." Business people will understand this. It's a simple concept that they can absorb by bullet points. And it costs a lot less that setting up a separate organization to study a new designation then put that designation in place.

The world doesn't need a new designation to learn. Why create a new designation? Our world struggles to keep up with the designations we already have. A new designation will confuse and irritate.

DO put this out for vote to all AICPA members. This is a huge issue. The AICPA will be spending members' dues to do this work. Therefore the members should have a vote in whether to spend the money this way.

DO NOT create an affiliate organization to supervise development of its proposed global credential. It will waste time and lots of money.

Let's get back to basics. Being thrifty and streamlined will get the job done.

KATHY J. SCROGS, CPA, CVA 

Bratton, McMorrow & Kearney LLP 

COMPETITORS COULD USE IT AGAINST US

I am opposed to this global credential. Why CPAs would want to create a credential that potential competitors could then use against us is beyond me. I think our efforts would be better spent promoting and broadening CPA skills.

ROBERT LOVRET, CPA

Garden Grove 

KEEP THE C-P-A IN AICPA

I thought AICPA stood for American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. I do not see the relevancy of the AICPA's involvement in this project to its mission statement, objectives or 1998 strategic initiatives. The AICPA' sole reason for existence is to promote the professions of public accounting, not the development of an entirely new profession.

Our dues should not be used to pursue this project.

BRUCE MORRISON 

San Jose 

DEAR COLLEAGUES:

I strongly urge all of you NOT to vote for an affiliated organization to supervise development of the proposed global credential.

I also strongly urge all of you NOT to vote to authorize a full membership vote for such a credential.

Instead of embarking on this speculative and impractical adventure, the AICPA will better serve its members by devoting its resources to further enhancing the well-established and well-recognized CPA credential.

I further hope that you will be able to persuade the other AICPA Council members to abandon this disastrous course of imposing a needlessly concocted designation upon the public.

STUART R. JOSEPHS, CPA

Tax Assistance Practice--San Diego