As we've discussed, the AICPA-CIMA merger vote has a lot of people talking. Mostly, the AICPA is talking about how members should approve it and that it has unanimous support among the state societies. Around these parts, there's quite a bit of skepticism about the merger. As I've said before, I don't have a dog in this fight (Full disclosure: Caleb Newquist, CPA [inactive]), but the motives behind the merger and benefits to members aren't clear to me.
Greg Kyte is similarly suspicious and he wonders if the point is "that one big group is more powerful than two not-as-big groups [and if so] maybe they should just say that."
So he voted no:
The CPA brand tells people that we’re “trusted business advisors.” And the AICPA is supposed to advise CPAs regarding what’s in the profession’s best interest. So the AICPA is the trusted business advisor’s advisor. Unfortunately their weird handling of this CIMA merger crap makes me question whether the AICPA is my trusted trusted business advisor advisor?
Voting is open through June 16.
Studying for the CPA exam
As we mentioned yesterday, many people will take the CPA exam this summer, which means many beautiful days and nights will be ruined by studying. Of course it helps to have a plan…maybe get a dog-racing team like Ryne Olson?
Olson said that structure is key. Fortunately, that’s something that owning a dog-racing team helps with. She gets up early in the morning to feed the dogs and clean the yard, a process she repeats at night. That structure helps eliminate procrastination.
“There’s no sleeping in until noon, watching Netflix for an hour, and then saying, ‘I guess it’s time to get up and do something,’ ” she said.
Wait, what if sleeping until noon and watching Netflix for an hour is the structure? "Since everybody is different, it’s important to develop and commit to a personalized plan," the article says. I feel like we're not giving the late-sleepers and bingewatchers any credit. They can be achievers, too.
The PCAOB's Standing Advisory Group is meeting next week and among the topics discussed will be, yes, "auditor involvement with company performance measures." That includes non-GAAP accounting metrics.
This originally came up last fall, specifically that the "reporting, use of, and reliance on non-GAAP measures have increased over time, but the auditor’s responsibilities with respect to such measures have not changed." There are discussion questions including: "Should auditor responsibilities be expanded to include specific procedures for company performance measures?" and "What obstacles, if any, exist to expanding auditor responsibilities to include specific procedures for company performance measures, including non-GAAP financial measures?" Sounds like it'll be a hoot.
Previously, on Going Concern…
I wrote about Big 4 firms and legal services.
In other news:
- "'Blockchain' technology seems to promise major change for capital markets and other financial services – some say it may ultimately prove to be as important an innovation as the internet itself – but few can say exactly how or why."
- Economists Say No Justification for Tax Havens in Oxfam Letter
- ICIJ Offshore Leaks Database.
- Coffee and donuts.
- Make dating great again.
Get the Accounting News Roundup in your inbox every weekday by signing up here.