Author: Adrienne Gonzalez

Adrienne is a 15-year veteran of the accounting industry, if by "veteran" you mean "vulture prowling the periphery of the profession waiting for something exciting to happen." She has been spewing vitriol on Going Concern since the site was founded in 2009. A former CPA review employee, she has sat through more FAR classes than any CPA exam candidate ever could -- even one who has failed FAR seven times -- and can still recall most of the mnemonics all these years later.

What Should You Do the Night Before You Take the CPA Exam?

Looks like we’re back in the swing of CPA exam testing as you guys have been loading me up with great questions (thanks, it means Caleb doesn’t have to fire me this week) so let’s get right to it. Today’s question comes via Twitter and if you have one, email me or toss an @ my way and I’ll get to it.

@adrigonzo What is your rec for the night before an exam section. Study till you drop that last night or get some rest? #cpaexam


This is an excellent question because for many of you who are taking the CPA exam fresh out of school, you might be used to slacking off for weeks or months on end and making one last final push at the end of the semester to get through finals. While that may have worked in college (and can also work in life if you play your cards right), it’s important to keep in mind that the CPA exam doesn’t work the same way.

Your brain learns in layers and with the exam, it’s best to digest smaller pieces of information over a longer period of time than it is to try and cram it all in there in a few days. That’s why accelerated or otherwise last-minute CPA review programs aren’t a good idea; your brain needs the layers to dig into come exam day.

Think of it like making oatmeal cookies: you start with the basics; butter, sugar, eggs, flour and oatmeal. In an exam context (we’re using FAR because it’s easiest in this example), this would be the framework of financial accounting and any heavily tested areas like bonds, pensions and inventory. Once that’s mixed up, you add in your flair: raisins, chocolate chips, chopped nuts, whatever you like. Side note: I made white chocolate chip, craisin and pecan oatmeal cookies the other night and they were absolutely fantastic. Anyway, your flair would be the lighter-tested or unfamiliar areas like some of what’s covered in advanced accounting, inflation accounting, dollar-value LIFO, etc. You use a cup and a half of flour but only half a cup of chocolate chips and regardless of how much the recipe calls for, if you sit down and eat the entire bowl of dough in one night you’re going to get sick. Got it?

I always recommend bringing your note cards or textbook to Prometric with you so you can do a last-minute review in the car and it’s absolutely appropriate to do some studying the night before but don’t overdo it. Get to bed at a reasonable hour but try not to upset your routine too much – if you’re an night owl, there’s no reason to go to bed at 8pm unless you have scheduled your exam for first thing in the morning (what were you thinking?!). As we all know, accountants don’t deal well with change so the more you can make taking the exam feel like “normal”, the better you’ll feel on exam day.

Be sure to nourish your hard-working brain with the right foods, avoid alcohol (trust us, you can get absolutely obliterated when you actually pass, first one’s on us) and, if you smoke, try to stop (nicotine withdrawal can impair cognitive performance and you aren’t going to be able to take a break at the exam to go grab a smoke) or at least create an exam-day plan to get your fix (you might want to avoid gum at Prometric).

And remember: you may never actually feel “ready” to take the exam. Focus on preparing and remind yourself that you’ve done everything you can (hopefully…) to get to ready, even if you never actually feel that way.

Women Partners at PwC: It’s Not About Numbers

PwC UK Chairman Ian Powell would like to see more women around the office (obviously he hasn’t been to the San Francisco digs lately) but is taking this new stance slow. As in really slow.

As is, 14% of PwC’s partners are women. 14%! Trailblazers that they are, Powell has decided a target of something like 20% will be reasonable to start. Obviously something is driving the ladies away, however, as P-Dubs takes on over 400 new women a year of the 1000 new grads they hire. What’s wrong, girls, not the dream career you daydreamed it would be in college? “We take on over a thousand graduates a year and the number of women is in the high forties in terms of percentage,” Powell said.


Powell is not suggesting positive discrimination, in which women are treated like the fragile little things they are and given all sorts of breaks like months off to pop out kids, flexible work schedules to allow for time with their progeny and equal pay despite these many concessions.

While the UK considers quotas to force the profession to hire on (or is that keep) more women, Powell insists it is not just a numbers game. Funny, we thought 20% was a number? “There is a lot of debate about quotas but we don’t think that is the way forward. This is not just a numbers game.”

This begs the obvious question: if we’re pushing for “diversity” and making a huge deal out of this, aren’t we ignoring more important qualities such as skill, quality of work and talent by focusing on things like sex and race just to appear to be diverse? If a man, woman, and black transsexual all have the exact same educational background and skill, I’m totally OK with a company going for the most diverse option but we all know there is no such thing as equality. Interviewees come from all backgrounds and bring a variety of talents to the table – that is what firms need to be looking for, not high heels and African ancestors. Equality means being given equal opportunity to thrive and grow, not special favors just because one happens to lack a Y chromosome.

PricewaterhouseCoopers targets women [Telegraph]

Apparently There’s a Food Chain for Satyam Blamestorming

The head of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in India seems to feel as though 2009’s massive Satyam failure was not, in fact, a failure of the auditors but levels before the auditors and then the auditors. “There were promoter shareholders, executive directors and directors, and the auditors were the last rung. On the other side, there were independent directors, one of whom was a dean of the Indian School of Business, but nobody questions the role of independent directors.”


Amarjit Chopra feels corporate governance (or should that be complete lack of…) is to blame, not the PwC auditors who somehow missed the following:

• $1.09 billion in artificially inflated cash and bank balances (psst, baby auditors, that’s called a material amount)

• $81.59 million in accrued interest that was accrued out of thin air and never existed

• An understated liability of $266.91 million

• An overstated debtors’ position of $575.27 million that was more like $106.33 million (oops)

Maybe PwC should have waited for Chopra’s comments. Had they done so, they wouldn’t have already come out and admitted they missed a few issues on the September 30, 2008 Satyam balance sheet:

The former [Satyam] chairman has stated that the financial statements of the company have been inaccurate for successive years. The contents of the said letter, even if partially accurate, may have a material effect (which is currently unknown and cannot be quantified without thorough investigations) on the veracity of the company’s financial statements presented to us during the audit period. Consequently, our opinions on the financial statements may be rendered inaccurate and unreliable.

So if that’s the case, someone remind me why we even have auditors then? Sure financial statements belong to management but aren’t auditors there to give everything a good once-over to ensure giant fraud is not staring them directly between the eyes? You’d think at least one of those brilliant Indian first years would have realized that cash was a tad high once they started doing the work.

Let’s All Give Jim Quigley a Warm Welcome to Twitter

We knew it was only a matter of time before Jim Quigley rounded up enough interns to run his Twitter account for him and it seems that day has finally come. While we won’t openly admit to hoping he immediately engaged in common Twitter faux pi like tweeting in all caps or speaking to others as if they could hear him without using the all important @, we’ve thoroughly scanned his account and can barely find anything to bag on.

It seems, however, that he’s merely pimping out the World Economic Forum and is really, really excited about it. So excited, in fact, that it’s been all he’s tweeted about in the less than two weeks he’s been sharing with us in 140 characters or less.


What he isn’t tweeting is how much his trip to Davos to hob-nob with the global elite might cost him. We of the working class, ticking and tying set might feel he could just as easily put his finger on the pulse of the economy by sitting down with any number of Deloitte’s 170,000 employees since, last we checked, the economy was people, not rich guys (and gals, it’s the 21st Century) hanging out in Switzerland.

We won’t say we’re disappointed because our standards are really low to begin with but he could have, you know, toned it down a notch.

Just how much does a trip to Davos cost a snazzy Big 4 CEO? Ask Andrew Ross Sorkin: A basic level Davos excursion will run you $71,000 for membership to the organization and ticket alone (that doesn’t include hotels, helicopters or red carpets strewn ahead of you). The “Industry Associate” level, which would get JQ behind the velvet rope to hang with other hot accounting and finance rockstars, runs $156,000. And if, say, Quigs wants to bring a buddy the “Industry Partner” level could run him around $301,000.

Well wait, it’s not fair to say he’s only tweeting about WEF, he did also throw some tweets about chicks in there. You know, for diversity’s sake.

Hey, it beats over-hashtagging I guess.

Earlier:
Deloitte Global CEO Jim Quigley Is Tweeting

The Fed’s Financial Accounting Is a Beautiful Thing

Controllers, don’t you wish you had this sort of authority? Imagine writing your own financial accounting handbook (forget GAAP, it doesn’t apply here!), plugging your financial statements with all the footnotes you want and rewriting the rules in the middle of the reporting season just because you feel like it and, maybe in this case, because it will paint a rosier picture of your financial condition.

Wouldn’t it be great if we could do this with our checking accounts? You could just take the money that is owed to others (let’s call “bills” “negative liabilities” instead, even though in strictly technical terms a negative liability would be an asset, which we know bills are not) and change its name, give it a new presentation and VOILA! Instant solvency!

On January 6th, they tried to sneak a little change in presentation that, for now, doesn’t really matter but might when interest rates skyrocket and they are no longer handing out huge amounts of “profits” to the Treasury. Read:

Effective January 1, 2011, as a result of the accounting policy change, on a daily basis each Federal Reserve Bank will adjust the balance in its surplus account to equate surplus with capital paid-in and, in addition, will adjust its liability for the distribution of residual earnings to the U.S. Treasury. Previously these adjustments were made only at year-end. Adjusting the surplus account balance and the liability for the distribution of residual earnings to the U.S. Treasury is consistent with the existing requirement for daily accrual of many other items that appear in the Board’s H.4.1 statistical release. The liability for the distribution of residual earnings to the U.S. Treasury will be reported as “Interest on Federal Reserve notes due to U.S. Treasury” on table 10. Previously, the amount necessary to equate surplus with capital paid-in and the amount of the liability for the distribution of residual earnings to the U.S. Treasury were included in “Other capital accounts” in table 9 and in “Other capital” in table 10.

So instead of counting up the amazing Fed profits to the Treasury every year like they’ve done for as long as we can remember (and lately with lots of huge fanfare and fireworks, including the last record $78.4 billion), they’ll be readjusting the numbers on a weekly basis. Why they feel this is appropriate is beyond my analytical ability but should anyone have some insight, I’d love to hear it.

In the meantime, I guess it is reassuring to know that accounting tricks or not, the Fed can’t possibly be insolvent.

Why the 120/150 Rule Matters and Why It Should Be Changed

Unless you are in one of the handful of states that allow you to sit for the CPA exam with 120 units, either you went the overachiever route and got a Masters in Accounting or you did what any good slacker would do and took an extra 30 units in crap like basket weaving and German to fulfill your state’s 150 unit requirement. If you are in the second group, you probably forgot most of what you learned in advanced accounting by the time you got those extra 30 units in electives. That sort of story is exactly why the 120/150 rule matters and why the industry needs to look at its effectiveness. Can you really protect the public interest any better if it takes you three tries to get through the CPA exam because you have been taking night school French to meet your state’s 150 rule while working in public to pay off your student loans?


The Maryland Association of CPAs supports the 120 rule for future CPAs in Maryland as it allows for accountants to sit for the exam when their college experience is still fresh in their minds. No one is suggesting we do away with the 150 rule (though don’t tell California that) but instituting the 120 rule around the country means releasing our accountants from a burdensome and, frankly, silly rule that dictates they must have a Masters level education before sitting for an entry level exam. Does that make sense to anyone?

A few years back, the Virginia Board of Accountancy realized that the 150 rule was actually making them lose CPA exam candidates, who were taking the exam in other states with less stringent requirements. Remember, because the exam is a uniform examination, you can take any other state’s exam in your state if you meet that state’s requirements (residency in the state being a big one but many states allow out-of-staters to sit for their exam). Said the Virginia Society of CPAs before the rule was approved by the governor, “the Commonwealth doesn’t want to lose its valuable CPA candidates and wants to retain those Exam takers. In addition, reducing the requirement would have a positive impact on Virginia’s budget.” In May of 2009, Governor Tim Kaine signed emergency legislation allowing Virginia CPA exam candidates to sit for the exam with just 120 hours.

NASBA issued a draft in 2008 that stated “we have found no evidence of detriment to the public interest in those states allowing candidates to sit for the CPA examination at less than 150 hours of education and later fulfilling the 150 hours.”

We agree. We also feel the 150 rule is a bit arbitrary and silly (see reference to basket weaving classes above, please let us know what bullshit courses you took to meet your jurisdiction’s 150 rule in the comments) but will save that discussion for another day.

We sincerely hope the boards of accountancy are listening.

Here’s What Happens When 150 Maryland CPAs Storm the State Capitol

What do you get when you cross 150 CPAs with the state capitol? You get the Maryland Association of CPAs’ CPA Day and, lucky me, I got to be there when a record number of MACPA members stormed Annapolis, Maryland (on Inauguration Day, none-the-less) and brought their passion (and the sun) with them.

Driving in the dark at the crack of dawn to Annapolis, I had absolutely no idea what I was in for. I’d heard about previous CPA Day successes and knew the day involved legislators and CPAs swarming their offices but I had no idea the day would be so powerful, nor did I expect the passion I gathered from those in attendance.

For the day, I got to chase MACPA vice chair and association Legislative Executive Committee head Allen DeLeon, CPA. Al is partner at Gaithersburg’s DeLeon and Stang, a 2010 Accounting Today winner for best places to work, and yet another CPA touched by MACPA CEO Tom Hood’s powerful social media message.


As Tom so eloquently stated yesterday, the MACPA’s primary legislative mission is to protect the CPA license in the state of Maryland. Their secondary level of legislative influence means keeping an eye on tax policy in the state. The association has identified the following five issues for the 428th session of the Maryland General Assembly:

1. Pass 120/150 legislation. This legislation will allow students to sit for the CPA exam after completing the accounting requirements in an undergraduate program. They would be able to get their license upon completion of the 150 credit hours. This bill (HB 1137) passed the House and Senate committee last year but ran out of time before the end of the legislative session. See our prior post about this issue.

2. Stop sales tax on accounting, tax and consulting services. The real issue here is the compliance costs to CPA firms (and their clients), as intangible services are hard to identify where and when they are delivered to and from.

3. Exempt CPAs from proposed regulation of debt counselors. The CPAs education, examination and experience requirements, along with rigorous state licensing and oversight, make it unnecessary to include CPAs in this legislation. See our prior post here.

4. Stop the lawsuit tax. Efforts by the trial bar to liberalize tort law will be detrimental to CPAs and small businesses as the basis to argue suits would increase and liability would be linked to the entities with insurance. This means more suits and more settlements, effectively creating a lawsuit tax. This is bad legislation even in a good economy.

5. Pass “safe harbor” legislation. This is a technical correction necessary since the passage of mandatory peer review legislation in 2005. This will clarify the definition of “attest” and practicing certified public accountancy in Maryland law. This will allow non-licensed CPAs to prepare compilations for clients provided that they do not use AICPA SSARS language and state that they are not required to undergo peer review.

For Al’s part in yesterday’s event, we met with Senator Rob Garagiola, Senator Nancy King, Delegate Brian Feldman and Andrew Aleshire, aide to brand spanking new Delegate Aruna Miller. Having done this several years in a row, Al wasted no time bringing up the key issues with each legislator. We cruised between the House of Delegates and the Senate buildings (he’s done this so many times he even knows of the secret underground tunnel that connects them both) discussing taxes, the 120/150 rule, reviews and compilations and regulation of CPAs as debt counselors.

I was especially impressed by Senator King’s willingness to sit down with Al and discuss current issues, including a highly controversial (Tom Hood called it “dangerous”) 2 – 3% gross receipts tax, which the state is apparently considering in lieu of a sales tax hike. Al volunteered to give any proposed legislation a good once over as a politically-independent CPA, something young CPAs getting involved in legislative issues should take note of. While MACPA members came to Annapolis to push the association’s legislative agenda, it’s also important to remember that part of protecting the public interest also means protecting the profession from unnecessary or burdensome legislation.

Comments from first-time attendees included “I was surprised at how receptive everyone was” and one Rockville CPA noted that though CPAs had invaded state buildings, they did not get the sense that they were perceived as “a bunch of people coming to bother them.”

Barrett Young, one such first-timer in attendance yesterday, stated that he was surprised at how “normal” legislators were. The 27 year old Charles County CPA (who can be found blogging at CP…eh?) attended CPA Day after Tom Hood came to his area for a town hall on these issues and, like me, didn’t realize the full impact 150 CPAs would have in Annapolis that day. He came because he wanted to meet other CPAs in the state, not because he knew it would be a legislative day of action. But now that he’s attended one CPA Day, he is both informed and inspired to take action moving forward. “The MACPA keeps us focused on a bigger picture than our revenue sources,” he said.

Did yesterday change his view on these important issues? Absolutely. “I do have a big chance of running into my delegates at the store,” he said, “and now, I have the confidence to know that they are approachable – and interested – in my views on the profession. The MACPA knows what impacts us, and is doing a great job to remain nonpartisan. [They do not favor] a specific county, but protect our license as a whole.”

Tom reminded those in attendance that making face-to-face contact with legislators allows CPAs in the state the opportunity to show lawmakers that we care enough to show up, shake hands and make our concerns known. For young CPAs like Barrett, it also gives the next generation of the industry a chance to see how powerful their profession really is. “I have a responsibility to see that the profession is greater than just me, my career, and my need to make an income. CPA Day does this by introducing me to older CPAs, and connecting me with peers from my own age group,” he told us. Who would pass up a chance like that?

“If we had two or three hundred of you, we could rule the state,” Tom joked to the audience.

Judging by the tangible buzz yesterday, I’d say Maryland CPAs are pretty close to ruling the state as is.

Once again, we have to congratulate the MACPA for a job well-done and I’m already looking forward to following along next year.

Tax Lawyer Pursuing CPA Needs to Know: Take More Classes or Cram with a Review Course?

Whenever the news is slow and you kids are quiet (I won’t expect to hear from many of you until after April but just in case, here’s my email), there’s always CPAnet to troll and here’s a good one: tax and estate lawyer pursuing the CPA wants to know if he should take a bunch of classes to prepare for the CPA exam before jumping in.

I promise to let him down gently.


Here’s the question:

I am a tax and estate planning lawyer and have been taking accounting and tax classes at UCLA extension in preparation for the CPA exam.

Since tax season is hell, I would only have the second half of the year to take a revthe exam. That means June – November (& January) 2011, 2012, or beyond. I am unsure whether I should continue taking classes such as (auditing, internal auditing, nonprofit accounting, etc.) for the next year and a half until June 2012… or whether I should just sign up for a review session this June after I take Intermediate Accting 3 & (maybe) Managerial accounting this spring quarter AND study my butt off in the review course.

Without sounding too much like an ass, I’m a fairly smart guy (top 20% in top 20 law school, passed bar exam) and a very hard worker. I have a lot of information under my belt but it may not all be relevant.

So, do I absolutely need to take the 2 auditing classes offered at UCLAX or the nonprofit accounting class or can I cram the review course material? I have heard that advanced accounting is unnecessary and I learned consolidations in Business Enterprise Taxation. I don’t know econ, but I looked at some practice questions and I got most of them. Supply and demand doesn’t seem too complex.

Am I crazy to skip these classes and rely on the review course? My experience with the bar exam was that the courses in law school were more likely to confuse than to help.

First off, my professional experience has been that whenever someone says “I’m a fairly smart guy” or “I’m no idiot” or “at least I am not like the senior who probably ate paint chips as a kid,” that candidate almost always has difficulty getting through the CPA exam. Why? Because brains have nothing to do with it, stupid.

I often explain it to candidates like this: the CPA exam simply tests your left brain’s ability to process and spit out information exactly as it was put in. We don’t need creative right-brained accountants (especially now that Lehman is kaput) so the more right brain spin your brain tries to put on CPA exam information, the worse you’ll do on the exam. “Smarts” don’t factor in, it is merely a test of entry-level knowledge and we all know you don’t have to be smart to be an entry level accountant. Hell, you don’t have to be smart to be a partner either but we’ll let that one go.

That being said, it’s important to recognize that there are two distinct universes: the CPA exam universe and the real universe. In CPA exam world, all cash flows use the direct method, accountants are always ethical bordering on neurotic and there is always a very clear answer for any query. In the real world, we use indirect to save time, have trouble passing the open-book ethics exam after four tries and sometimes have to choose the “best answer” without knowing for sure that it’s right.

While more education is almost always a good idea (unless you’re already over-burdened with student loan debt to begin with), it may be easier for our future candidate above to simply jump into a good CPA exam review and call it a day. Some of the cheaper review programs will only build on the candidate’s knowledge base or help familiarize with the exam’s format and content but the pricier, higher-quality reviews also provide the information the candidate needs to pass, regardless of their experience level.

Remember: because the CPA exam tests entry-level knowledge, you aren’t expected to be a expert in anything. Not everyone takes advanced accounting and while some of those topics are tested, any decent review course can give you just enough to scrape by if you aren’t familiar with those areas. Don’t waste your time taking extra classes unless that is a personal goal of yours and, if so, either do it before or after but not during your CPA exam attempt.

The AICPA Talks to Going Concern About the New CPA Exam

Because I genuinely care about the well-being of you little CPA exam candidates out there, I recently put aside the inflammatory nonsense for a moment and took some time out of my busy schedule to chat with the AICPA about the new CPA exam that they were proud to say launched early this month without a hitch. We’re pretty excited about that too, mostly because it means we can finally stop talking about 2011 changes and get back to talking CPA exam strategy, which is largely unchanged as a result of CBT-e.

We here at Going Concern value reader input (even if we do value chastising said reader just as equally) and therefore reached out t//goingconcern.com/2011/01/what-would-you-ask-the-aicpa-about-the-new-cpa-exam/”>your input on the sorts of questions we should ask. You spoke and we listened so let’s cut right to the chase and give you some answers.


John Mattar, Ed.D., Director of Psychometrics and Research and Mike Decker, Director of Operations and Development, both of the AICPA Examinations Team, were kind and brave enough to speak with me and give me plenty of insight on the brain behind the new CPA exam.

First of all, we need to talk scoring as that’s the one thing you guys have complained about consistently since the exam went computerized in 2004 (except for written communication but that is an entirely different issue). We’re proud to tell you that we can finally say with certainty that the AICPA will not be changing the passing score from 75 moving forward. That’s right, put down your flaming pitchforks, all you 74s who were ready to flip should the score have been lowered to 70. “In terms of the score reported to candidates, right now the passing score on that reported scale is a 75 and it’s going to remain there because we want to have consistency over time,” John told us.

That means a 75 last year might not necessarily be the same as a 75 this year but a 75 is still passing and that’s what matters. As we all know, the AICPA uses a complicated and mysterious psychometric formula to determine weights for each question and bases a candidate’s score on this formula. It isn’t for you, little candidate, to worry about how they come up with their numbers nor should you feel as though the AICPA gets some sick thrill out of seeing you get a 74. Believe it or not, they’re neutral. They don’t care if you pass or fail, they only care about overseeing a professional examination that successfully tests the knowledge base of entry-level CPAs in the United States. That’s it.

Second, while the AICPA will be using a single score release formula for at least the first three testing windows of the year, candidates can anticipate a new and improved score release system that will hopefully be introduced by the end of the year. This means all candidates who test early in their window will be eligible to receive their scores in the first release and all other candidates can expect to receive their scores in more frequent batches through the end of that window’s blackout month. So forget the Wave 1/Wave 2 nonsense. “Due to a lot of the work we’re doing on the backend, we’re going to be able to release scores faster. We’re not actually going to be able to release the scores earlier until the 4th quarter because we need to do a greater analysis in the first three quarters,” Mike said. So while you guys see the new simulations and international content on the frontend, it’s important to remember that a lot of time and effort went into improving the backend of the CPA exam and faster scoring is one such improvement that we can expect to see by the end of the year. But these changes come at a price so be patient while the AICPA works through the first three windows of this year to finalize their new scoring process.

If you haven’t already, I recommend you check out How the CPA Exam is Scored for more details on this process. Expect an update to that document when new scoring takes effect later in the year.

As for CBT-e content, I initially congratulated the AICPA for finally streamlining some questionable areas of the exam (especially BEC) in the updated CSOs/SSOs but forgot that they don’t actually come up with content on their own. You can thank an extensive practice analysis and subsequent input from practicing CPAs for the CPA exam you know and love today, a process that takes into account input from the profession on what entry-level CPAs should know. That means the introduction of international financial reporting and auditing standards is entirely independent of the SEC’s do-we-or-do-we-not IFRS roadmap. This should be a comfort to some of you who are wondering just how much IFRS will appear on the exam in coming windows as it means the exam will most likely continue to test remedial international content and will mostly focus on major differences between IFRS and GAAP. Entry-level CPAs in the U.S. are not expected to be experts in IFRS, just as they are not expected to be experts in cost accounting, government accounting, non-profit accounting or any number of areas that have been consistently tested on the CPA exam for years now.

The best news is that though the e in CBT-e stands for evolution, those expecting to take the exam in 2012 or beyond shouldn’t expect such a large overhaul as we just saw any time soon. “We don’t plan to change the exam,” John said. “What we plan to do is keep the exam current with the profession to protect the public interest. If we do have significant changes in test content we would have to let candidates know in advance.”

That being said, the largest takeaway I got from my conversation with the AICPA was that they are simply interested in providing a consistent examination that continues to evolve to meet the needs of the profession. I swear to you that they really don’t get a sick thrill out of torturing you guys with changes, scoring delays and new content though it may appear that way sometimes, especially if you’re in the 74 x 3 club. It’s their job to make sure that the CPA exam represents the best interests of the profession, which means revising their strategy to keep up with the evolution of the industry.

We applaud the AICPA on a job well done and congratulate them for a successful CBT-e launch. So far, candidate feedback I have gotten on the new exam format has been mostly positive, which means that their hard work was totally worth it.

The AICPA, NASBA and Prometric Announce Successful Launch of the New CPA Exam

Even though only two testing days passed from the time CBT-e launched and the time the press release came out, the AICPA, NASBA and Prometric are very excited to announce the successful launch of the new CPA exam.


Via the AICPA:

The American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, National Association of State Boards of Accountancy, and Prometric today launched the new Uniform CPA Examination, called CBT-e, which includes for the first time questions on International Financial Reporting Standards among other sweeping and significant changes.

Changes were approved by the AICPA Board of Examiners based on input from state boards of accountancy in response to an Invitation to Comment, and a Practice Analysis designed to ensure the exam tests the modern knowledge and skills that are relevant for today’s entry-level CPAs. The new IFRS questions and other changes to the exam are the first major revisions since the CPA exam was computerized in 2004.

Overall, more emphasis is being placed on skills assessment using case study-based questions known as Task-Based Simulations. Authoritative literature in the CPA exam incorporates use of new Financial Accounting Standards Board codifications of U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. Professional responsibilities including ethics and independence have been added to the Auditing and Attestation section.

“The testing of IFRS knowledge and other international standards is a response to change in the business world in which new CPAs operate,” said Craig Mills, vice president of examinations for the AICPA. “We are proud and excited to be introducing innovations in this evolution of the computer-based test that both validate and update the content of the exam and improve the experience for candidates. The exam is one of three key requirements, along with education and experience, that help state boards and the profession maintain the highest standards and protect the public interest.”

In related news, I will be speaking with the AICPA this afternoon about the new exam and thanks to your input, will be interrogating them on score releases, potential changes to passing scores, the integrity of the exam (since the old timer paper and pencil folks continue to rag on the new exam as too easy) and the continued evolution of exam content beyond 2011. I’d like to ask them when the hell BEC is going to be more than a junk drawer but having seen some of the new 2011 content on that section, I have to say it looks like they are working on consolidating the most random CPA exam section into a more streamlined piece of psychometric awesomeness. It isn’t too late to get me your questions for the AICPA’s exam unit so if you have one that you haven’t gotten to me yet, get on that or drop it in the comments and I’ll try to sneak it in.

I’ve also spoken to at least a handful of candidates who tested last week and so far feedback is positive on the new format as I suspected it would be. For the love of Excel, please don’t get stressed out over international standards as you shouldn’t expect to receive an exam made up of 70% new content. Try 5 – 10% max.

Update to come on Friday.

The UK Invites the PCAOB Over for Tea (and Some Audit Probing)

Convergence may not be that far off after all, here it is 2011 and now we finally have U.S. and U.K. audit harassment agencies working together to share information and polish up that whole bit about protecting investor confidence in capital markets. It may or may not have something to do with the collapse of Lehman Brothers (personally I think the paranoid mistrust in foreign accounting systems – or perhaps just ours – goes back a tad more than that) but soon enough the PCAOB will have an in (after at least one failed attempt) and get a chance to harass inspect foreign firms. We anticipate that this announcement will bring it with it a fantastic new acronym so we can all keep track of who is who.

The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board today entered into a cooperative agreement with the Professional Oversight Board in the United Kingdom to facilitate cooperation in the oversight of auditors and public accounting firms that practice in the two regulators’ respective jurisdictions.

This agreement provides a basis for the resumption of PCAOB inspections of registered accounting firms that are located in the United Kingdom and that audit, or participate in audits, of companies whose securities trade in U.S. markets. The PCAOB previously conducted inspections in the United Kingdom with the POB from 2005 to 2008, but has been blocked from doing so since that time.

Acting PCAOB Chairman Daniel L. Goelzer welcomed the arrangement, which will lay the foundation for the PCAOB and POB to work together to promote public trust in the audit process and investor confidence in capital markets.

The PCAOB can thank the Dodd-Frank WSCRA which amended SOX to permit the PCAOB to share information with foreign audit agencies under certain conditions.

In light of this event, we’re wondering what happens when the two work together sharing “information.” Does it get a brand new acronym that celebrates this new dawn in inter-obnoxious-regulatory-gossiping (IORG) or does it become a hybrid acronym like the Public Professional Company Oversight^2 Board Board or PPCO^2BB? Surely we can do better.

Party at the PCAOB DC office this evening to celebrate, bring your own acronym suggestions and IFRS pocket guide.

See also:
The PCAOB Is Finally Invited to Europe’s Financial Statement Party [JDA]

Attention Overachievers: AICPA Announces 2009 Elijah Watt Sells Award Winners

For those of you who pride yourselves on being better than everyone else, the Elijah Watt Sells Award is just about as prestigious an acknowledgment as they come for future CPAs. The award, founded in 1923 and named after one of New York’s first CPAs, recognizes the top CPA exam scores in the country and means honor, recognition and sometimes a massive bonus for those talented enough at variances and constructing statements of cash flows under a time crunch to score in the way high 90s on all four parts of the exam.

The 2009 award is unique as multiple candidates managed the same exact exceptionally high scores so this timinners. Out of 93,000 CPA exam candidates in 2009, these 15 can say they are truly special.

We doubt any of the following winners spend their time trolling Going Concern but if they do, please accept our congratulations for a job well-done!

Kimberly Anne Brant (Minnesota), a graduate of the University of Wisconsin – Madison with a Bachelor of Business Administration and Masters of Accounting, is currently employed with Deloitte & Touche LLP, in Minneapolis.

Michelle Elizabeth Burket (Virginia), a graduate of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill with a BS in Business Administration and a Masters of Accounting is currently employed with PricewaterhouseCoopers in McLean, Va.

Maria M. Goto (Hawaii), a graduate of the University of Washington with a BA in Accounting, and is currently pursuing a Masters in Business Administration from the University of Hawaii at Manoa.

Kay J. Hashimoto (New York), a graduate of Harvard University with a BA in Economics and a MBA in Accounting from Canisius College, is currently employed with PricewaterhouseCoopers in New York City.

Jeremy J. Hurwitch (Florida), a graduate of Florida Atlantic University with a BA in Accounting and Masters of Accounting, is currently employed with Deloitte & Touche LLP in Boca Raton, Fla.

Matthew Saje Kult (Wisconsin), a graduate of the University of Wisconsin – Milwaukee with a Bachelors in Accounting and Masters of Science in Public Accounting, is currently employed at Ernst & Young LLP in Milwaukee.

Isaiah L. Massey (Texas), a graduate of Wichita State University with a Bachelor of Business Administration in Accountancy, and a Master in Professional Accounting from the University of Texas, is currently employed by Deloitte & Touche LLP in Houston.

Luke T. Olson (Georgia), a graduate of Brigham Young University with a BS in Accounting and Master of Accountancy, is currently employed with Ernst & Young in Atlanta.

Ryan Christopher Ossowski (Florida), a graduate of the University of Central Florida with a BS in Business Administration – Accounting, and BS in Computer Science, is currently employed with James Moore & Co., P.L. in Daytona Beach.

Andrew N. Rebstock (Wisconsin), a graduate of Marquette University with a BS in Business Administration and Master of Science in Accounting, is currently employed with PricewaterhouseCoopers in Milwaukee.

Abigail Lindsay Richards (North Carolina), a graduate of the University of Notre Dame with a Bachelor of Business Administration in Finance, and Masters of Accountancy from the University of North Carolina, is currently employed with Duke Energy in Charlotte, N.C.

Peter William Rogers (New York), a graduate of Babson College with a BS and Master of Science in Accounting, is currently employed with PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP in New York City.

Ryan Malcolm Scadding (Massachusetts), a graduate of Bryant University with a BS in Business Administration and Masters of Professional Accountancy, is currently employed with PricewaterhouseCoopers in Boston.

Jessie D. Wagner (Oklahoma), a graduate of Oklahoma State University – Stillwater with a BS in Business Administration and Master of Science in Accounting, is currently employed with Ernst & Young LLP in Tulsa, Okla.

Ryan F. Williamson (Illinois), a graduate of Governors State University with a BS in Accounting, a BA in Mathematics and Music from Illinois Wesleyan University, and an MS in Mathematics from Illinois State University, is currently employed with Groskreutz, Schmidt, Abraham, Eshleman & Gerretse in Kankakee, Ill.

For those of you who didn’t even come close, don’t worry, no one cares anyway.