Not be outdone by their crosstown1 rivals, Crowe Horwath announced earlier this week that not only can their employees wear whatever they want, they can work wherever they want, too (subject to approval of course):
The firm's new mobility strategy, which was rolled out in December, includes two policies integral to the firm's approach to attracting and retaining the profession's best talent. The first initiative, "What to Wear," dictates that if you're in the office and aren't meeting with clients, you can keep it casual and wear jeans any day of the week. The second, "Where to Work," allows personnel to work wherever it's convenient and they're most productive, with support from their performance manager.
If you're keeping score at home, the firm would like to point out that it is "the first top 10 public accounting, consulting and technology firm to foster casual dress in the workplace with jeans being part of the everyday experience and a flexible work location policy for all employees." Noted!
Why go this route? The firm says it's because, "Younger people have grown up doing homework online, working on tablets, holding meetings in coffee shops and fielding job interviews via Skype," so I guess that means, the internet loves denim? Also, Crowe will be hosting clothing drives, so all its employees can donate their business to Goodwill. That's kinda nice.
I think if this trend of dress code deregulation continues in the accounting profession, we'll have to embark on a search for the most casual work outfit deemed acceptable. First CPA to send us a picture of her/himself in a velour tracksuit while in the office on a weekday wins $10 and our undying respect.
~ The manifesto has been pulled from embeddedart.com. You can see the note in its entirety at the Smoking Gun.
~ UPDATE, 5:11 pm: Statement from the IRS
By now you’ve probably heard about the plane crashing into a building in Austin, Texas that housed around 200 IRS employees. So far reports are that the IRS is still trying to account for all the employees (see statement below). We left a message with the IRS that hasn’t been returned yet.
Everything is “preliminary” of course but apparently the alleged pilot, Joseph Stack s fire, stole the plane and flew it into the building:
Return to the early ‘80s, and here I was off to a terrifying start as a ‘wet-behind-the-ears’ contract software engineer… and two years later, thanks to the fine backroom, midnight effort by the sleazy executives of Arthur Andersen (the very same folks who later brought us Enron and other such calamities) and an equally sleazy New York Senator (Patrick Moynihan), we saw the passage of 1986 tax reform act with its section 1706.
For you who are unfamiliar, here is the core text of the IRS Section 1706, defining the treatment of workers (such as contract engineers) for tax purposes. Visit this link for a conference committee report (http://www.synergistech.com/1706.shtml#ConferenceCommitteeReport) regarding the intended interpretation of Section 1706 and the relevant parts of Section 530, as amended. For information on how these laws affect technical services workers and their clients, read our discussion here (http://www.synergistech.com/ic-taxlaw.shtml).
SEC. 1706. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN TECHNICAL PERSONNEL.
(a) IN GENERAL – Section 530 of the Revenue Act of 1978 is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new subsection:
(d) EXCEPTION. – This section shall not apply in the case of an individual who pursuant to an arrangement between the taxpayer and another person, provides services for such other person as an engineer, designer, drafter, computer programmer, systems analyst, or other similarly skilled worker engaged in a similar line of work.
(b) EFFECTIVE DATE. – The amendment made by this section shall apply to remuneration paid and services rendered after December 31, 1986.
Note:
• “another person” is the client in the traditional job-shop relationship.
• “taxpayer” is the recruiter, broker, agency, or job shop.
• “individual”, “employee”, or “worker” is you.
Admittedly, you need to read the treatment to understand what it is saying but it’s not very complicated. The bottom line is that they may as well have put my name right in the text of section (d). Moreover, they could only have been more blunt if they would have came out and directly declared me a criminal and non-citizen slave. Twenty years later, I still can’t believe my eyes.
The note goes on to rail against CPAs:
After my experience with the CPA world, following the business crash I swore that I’d never enter another accountant’s office again. But here I am with a new marriage and a boatload of undocumented income, not to mention an expensive new business asset, a piano, which I had no idea how to handle. After considerable thought I decided that it would be irresponsible NOT to get professional help; a very big mistake.
It appears that Stack was being audited by the IRS and that things had take a turn for the worse, “To make matters worse, [my accountant] knew all along this was missing and I didn’t have a clue until he pointed it out in the middle of the audit. By that time it had become brutally evident that he was representing himself and not me. This left me stuck in the middle of this disaster trying to defend transactions that have no relationship to anything tax-related (at least the tax-related transactions were poorly documented).”
His ominous sign off leaves little doubt about his own demise, “Well, Mr. Big Brother IRS man, let’s try something different; take my pound of flesh and sleep well.”
IRS Statement:
We can confirm that a small plane hit a building in Austin, Texas that includes IRS offices. This is the Echelon 1 Building, which houses about 190 IRS employees. We are still in the process of accounting for all of our employees. We will be providing updates as more information becomes available.
Sometimes when there is a dispute among partners of an accounting firm, things can get a little ugly. Sure there’s the sleeping with the other’s spouse/pool boy problems that crop up from time to time but that’s nothing compared to a situation when there’s actually a business reputation, financial considerations and possible federal criminal charges at stake.
Such is the case involving a former tax director at TCBA Watson Rice LLP with the firm’s managing partner. Patrick Largie tasked with preparing the firm’s 2009 tax return and when he got to the “Other Deductions” (line 20, for those of you scoring at home) he noticed a suspicious $1.8 million figure. After investigating further, he determined the amount was ‘inaccurate and false’ that could possibly bring “an IRS investigation and possible criminal charges.” As a result, he brought it to managing partner Bennie Hadnott’s attention. Hadnott didn’t feel it was anything worth raising a fuss over and demanded that Largie sign the return and go on his merry way.
Largie refused and was promptly fired. And yes, of course he sued. But Bennie Hadnott is treating the lawsuit much like he treated the $1.8 million Other Deductions – it’s NBD:
Hadnott labeled the claims “a nuisance lawsuit” and said the dispute was going into mediation on February 4.
“You get those filed all the time,” he said. “You can’t control what people go out there and do. We filed an answer to that, but there was no merit to it. He got mad because he was terminated with cause. People get emotional and go out there and try to sue the whole world, which he did. You have no control over people going out there and filing actions like that.”
So, despite his former colleague sullying the fine TCBA Watson Rice name and also accusing him of misappropriating $500k through bogus loans, Hadnott won’t have it, is taking the high road even though he could make Largie’s life difficult:
Hadnott hinted that Largie’s lawsuit came in retaliation after the firm learned of his actions and dismissed him, but he declined to elaborate on the firm’s claims. “I can really prosecute him for smearing our name, but we are just trying to be cool about it,” he said. “We don’t want to drag him through the mud.”
Other than the part where you make him look like a perfectionist, litigious, asshole crybaby, his name should be just fine.
That’s the question put forth by a reader across the pond to the group and since the Academy Awards have come and gone with nothing more than the cliché PwC jokes, it seems worth discussing.
But first, the Brit with the beef:
I watched the brillant [sic] Untouchables yesterday. This triggered the point about portryal [sic] of accountants by Holloywood [sic]. It is very poor in comparision [sic] to other professions.
Most accountants in the movies are either pathetic (think Rick Moranis in Ghostbusters) or despicable (Ed Begley Jr. as the sleazeball accountant who crosses a vengeful Roseanne Barr in She-Devil).
Other professions like, firefighters, doctors, and lawyers (Julia Roberts in the Oscar-winning Erin Brockovich), get their fair share of heroic roles. But when it comes to accountants we are pushed aside.
Well, for starters, comparing the work of firefighters and doctors to accountants makes as much sense as sending a team of interns into an audit committee meeting. If you’re looking for heroics, there are few opportunities for accountants in Hollywood; even a crook-turned-crime-fighter like Sam Antar would be a anti-hero at best. One exception would be Ben Kingsley as Itzhak Stern in Schindler’s List.
As for Morris in Ghostbusters, he scores with Annie Potts in Ghostbusters 2, so that hardly qualifies as pathetic. As for motive behind the unflattering portrayals, maybe enough people working in Hollywood have been ripped off by their own accountants that a slight vein of villainy is always written into their characters. The most recent muse being Ken Starr.
Despite that possibility, there are plenty of accountants in film that we like:
• It’s on the small screen but George Wendt as Norm Peterson on Cheers
Whether you see these characters as flattering or not, is your call but their awesomeness is not in question (I’m partial to Stella, frankly). We’re missing some, surely, so feel free to chime in with others.
Before you go!
Are you Looking for a fresh accounting career opportunity?
Going Concern now has thousands of open accounting jobs.
That’s the