AICPA under the U.S. Chamber of Commerce

Since anyone can call themselves an entrepreneur these days, I’m not even going to bother debating whether formal education should be a prerequisite for anything.

We spend our time tracking business moves made by people who—let's face it—might not have even finished middle school. More often than not, they have little to no grasp of the law, and frankly, they don't care to learn it. Entrepreneurs are the ones driving the market, not accountants. We’re just here to document the wreckage or the wins they leave behind.

Regardless, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is active, the association is coming together, and I really hope my colleagues step up. We need to be the ones actually sitting at the table shaping the rules for the accounting profession, rather than just watching from the sidelines.

Henry Edwards33 I couldn't agree more! This is exactly what I’ve been advocating for years: the issue isn't really about the accountants; it's about the incompetent and uneducated entrepreneurs. Half of them don't even know how to fill out a basic debit/credit entry correctly, they can't calculate sales tax to save their lives, and they have no clue how to manage company funds. Despite all our seminars explaining exactly what to do and how to do it, they just insist on doing things their own way. Then, at the end of the day, they start complaining that the accountant isn't smart enough or that they've been ripped off—even though we've told them for the hundredth time exactly what is allowed and what isn't.
Before anyone is even allowed to open a business, the Secretary of State or the Department of the Treasury should require some kind of qualifying exam. There needs to be a standard to ensure someone actually knows what they are doing before they are permitted to launch a company. Right now, any random person can start any type of business without knowing even the most fundamental basics. It's truly exhausting...

NOTICE regarding the postponement of the AICPA founding session

🤦 nothing to say here 🤦

Arthur Thomas5 said:If the benefits from an AICPA under the U.S. Chamber of Commerce are going to be just as hollow as the perks entrepreneurs get from the Chamber itself, then why even bother having such an association?

You’re forced to pay them, yet the return on investment is zero. In fact, they’re actively working against you—you’re stuck with a mandatory membership fee, but you won't see any actual value now, or ever.

It looks like just another bureaucratic entity designed for endless meetings about nothing. What’s the point? Other than providing a convenient way for some Republican Party or Democratic Party cronies to hitch themselves to state funding? Maybe they'll even use the Chamber's budget to fund a quick safari to Africa to hunt buffalo, much like their former president did. Honestly, the whole thing should be dismantled—the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, all its sub-associations, the lot. Abolish the membership fees entirely. If these organizations actually provided anything useful, people wouldn't be fleeing the country in droves. I don't see how this new association could possibly be any different; even if the people involved have the best intentions, they aren't going to achieve anything of substance.

Anyone lacking specific education—say, an economics degree or a specialized accounting track in high school—plus a requisite number of years of professional experience, should be legally barred from practicing accounting. Period. If practicing law without a license is both illegal and punishable for everyone except lawyers, why on earth would we allow a hair stylist or a chimney sweep to handle accounting? Can I suddenly decide to perform neurosurgery just because I *think* I know what I'm doing?

And let’s stop with this tired narrative that professionals with actual degrees are incompetent while these less-educated outsiders are somehow "visionaries." You can take that argument and throw it in the trash. I’ve worked with both groups, and in over 95% of cases, those with legitimate training—I'm talking real vocational schooling or a university degree, not some two-week crash course—are superior to those coming from outside the field, regardless of what other degree they might hold. There are exceptions, sure, but they're rare. Usually, the professionals are better.

Sure, a trained accountant might mechanically record entries correctly most of the time, but the second a non-standard situation arises, you realize they have no clue what they’re doing and can't see the big picture. Accounting isn't a skill you pick up in a fortnight. And for heaven's sake, people, stop conflating everything with accounting. Law is not accounting, no matter how many statutes and regulations an accountant memorizes every single day.

If everything were fine with accounting in America, it wouldn't be a field composed of 90% women and 10% men. For context, in the United Kingdom, the average male participation in this profession was above 70% for many years. Only recently has the enrollment for certified accountants become balanced, and it's expected to take another 20 or 30 years to reach parity there.

In America, however, it has been viewed as an unambitious path. It's seen as a fallback for failed hairdressers or waitresses who think office work sounds great: just finish a course and start filing papers.

I think it's fine if such individuals work as hybrid administrative data entry clerks, but it is tragic when they are the ones leading the accounting profession in America and drafting legislation!

Honestly, your perspective is incredibly negative—I’d even go as far as saying it’s insulting. Luckily, I haven't had the misfortune of dealing with people like you.

I’m genuinely curious: who exactly should be regulating this profession, and what specific things would they even regulate?
How many negative audit reports actually turn up at companies that have been audited, or how many fines are issued because of a bad report when it wasn't the management's fault, but rather the accountant's?
Trashing the entire profession and generalizing problems like this just shows a total lack of knowledge, information, and insight into how things actually work. It’s a trivial way to diminish the value of people based on the work they do.
It's not like I failed at being a hairdresser or a waiter. I've been working in accounting for quite a few years now, and I am extremely happy with my job and my income.
I believe things can be better, and that’s exactly why I’m involved in this. My commitment goes much deeper than just sitting behind a keyboard and anonymously spitting venom on a forum.

The gender split—whether it's 90% women versus 10% men—doesn't actually change my point. If you have 90% women in high school or college pursuing a specific major, then obviously that ratio carries over into the workforce. But what I still find absolutely baffling is this phenomenon where, specifically within accounting firms rather than just general corporations, there are so many people performing the job who aren't even trained for it. Does any other profession exist where you see this many people doing the work without having the actual credentials? It’s absurd.

In my estimation, maybe only 20-30% of the people working in accounting firms actually hold a formal degree.

And as for those folks at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce—if they have even an ounce of integrity—they really ought to postpone this founding assembly. I was already on the verge of calling this whole thing a farce. What kind of "founding assembly" is it when only 100 or 200 hand-picked individuals get a seat at the table, while there are thousands of accounting firms out there? Anyone who wants to participate should actually have the opportunity. There is zero logic in being forced to pay membership dues if you aren't even allowed to participate. On top of that, they could have at least notified professional firms properly, instead of just burying some obscure notice deep on their website. Who has the time to refresh their homepage every five minutes just to see if there's an announcement? Regardless, I don't see myself participating, whether they reopen applications or not.

I "have all the time in the world" 😁
It’s a shame you won't be getting involved, because in my experience, things only actually get better when people who truly know their stuff step up—people who aren't just looking for a quick handout.
If we don't take the lead, someone else will step in and make decisions for us, and that’s just a losing game. 😉

Henry Edwards33 said:Honestly, your perspective is incredibly negative—I’d even go as far as saying it’s insulting. Luckily, I haven't had the misfortune of dealing with people like you.

I’m genuinely curious: who exactly should be regulating this profession, and what specific things would they even regulate?
How many negative audit reports actually turn up at companies that have been audited, or how many fines are issued because of a bad report when it wasn't the management's fault, but rather the accountant's?
Trashing the entire profession and generalizing problems like this just shows a total lack of knowledge, information, and insight into how things actually work. It’s a trivial way to diminish the value of people based on the work they do.
It's not like I failed at being a hairdresser or a waiter. I've been working in accounting for quite a few years now, and I am extremely happy with my job and my income.
I believe things can be better, and that’s exactly why I’m involved in this. My commitment goes much deeper than just sitting behind a keyboard and anonymously spitting venom on a forum.

What exactly is the insult here? The truth is that accounting is one of the few professions in the USA where the majority of practitioners didn't actually start out in the field. It’s mostly former hairstylists, servers, failed lawyers, and administrators.

I'm not sure if you realize that this isn't exactly a normal situation, nor is it how things work in other countries. In fact, when it comes to accounting standards, Canada is actually a few levels ahead of America.

"Quote:"

I'm genuinely curious: who should be responsible for regulating this profession, and what exactly should fall under their scope?

We need to certify the individuals authorized to sign off on financial statements, but more importantly, we need to establish actual accountability. While the specific requirements for certification are open to debate, we absolutely cannot allow these "associations" to hold a monopoly on expertise. Right now, we have a situation where certain figures in the audit chamber refuse to recognize some of the most prestigious accounting credentials in the world. It’s funny how those same qualifications are considered more than sufficient for executives at the largest global corporations, yet they aren't quite good enough for us. I suppose it's easier to protect the chamber's bottom line that way.

Accountability is non-negotiable. If you participate in an intentional violation of the law—whether for your own gain or someone else's—you are liable, period. That means being barred from the profession and facing criminal charges. After all the investment in college and voluntary certification, people should at least have the integrity not to act as bookkeepers for some small business owner's theft. $167If we can't step in to stop it at a higher level, then there isn't much else to be done.

How many negative audit reports actually surface for companies that undergo an audit? Specifically, I'm curious about how often fines are issued due to poor reporting when the fault lies with the accountant rather than the company's executive leadership.

Do you actually understand how an audit works? Unintentional errors that serve no one's interest get corrected during the process. What is done intentionally, however, almost never makes it into the sample. If an auditing firm doesn't want to take on the risk, they simply walk away from the engagement, and the owner pays someone else to issue a clean opinion. More often than not, fraudulent activity just misses the sampling entirely by pure chance. The audit itself is conducted strictly according to law and standards; it is impossible to review every single transaction, so sampling is a necessity. The working papers remain spotless, and any reconstruction of the audit process would only confirm that everything was performed properly. Even the Big Four were cleared of all charges in court following the Enron scandal—the largest bankruptcy in history. They couldn't prove anything against them; they collapsed because of their reputation, not due to proven malfeasance. And of course, those professionals just moved on to work at other firms. It’s the same story with Walmart—the auditors were dissolved, and nothing happened. Any attempt to pursue criminal charges against an auditing firm is just a waste of time and money.

When was the last time you heard about an audit reporting State Attorney Financial Malfeasance in America? It’s hard to ignore that roughly 90% of privatized companies here are involved in blatant criminal activity and looting. Yet, from 1991 through 2018, despite this entire era of plunder, every single audit opinion remained positive. I can look at a balance sheet and an income statement for two minutes and tell you exactly whether a small business is operating under the table. It’s hard to believe that an organized audit firm, with full access to all documentation, just "happened" to miss decades of systematic theft. Pure coincidence, clearly.

The defense is always "that's not auditing's job." Well, obviously not. Their actual job is to issue a clean opinion and collect their fees in a way that keeps them shielded from any legal fallout. It’s a fine art.

Attacking the entire profession and generalizing the issue just shows a total lack of knowledge, information, and insight into the matter. It trivializes the work and devalues people based on their profession.

How exactly am I devaluing the profession? If anything, I might take it more seriously than others do, simply because this is my career. In every firm I've worked for, I've been told, "your department isn't the most important one." Fine, maybe not, but it is essential. I don't cut corners; if you want things done poorly, do them yourself.

So, because I won't accept that "hairdressers" are running the show in accounting, suddenly I'm against the whole profession? I'm entitled to my opinion, and if you don't like it, that's your problem.

I wasn't a failed hairdresser or a waitress. I've been in accounting for a decent number of years and I'm quite happy with my work and my salary.
I believe things can be better, which is why I'm engaged in this—it goes beyond sitting behind a keyboard and venting anonymously on a forum.

I haven't called anyone out by name. Besides, regulations aren't written for you or me; they're written so that in 10 or 20 years, accounting actually looks like something.

Moving on...

Tell me, how is it possible that after this massive scandal in America, no one questioned the accountability of the accountants and auditors? Who carried out this financial heist? Who prepared the reports and signed off on them? Who conducted the audit and how? Where are those people now? Did anyone face consequences, criminal prosecution, or a ban from practicing? Or are they just passing their experience in fraud along to the next job, well-paid for it? Take Walmart, for example—who is responsible for the fact that citizens' retirement funds were gambled away? The leadership stole, sure, but who falsified the statements? What is the point of all those official seals, signatures, documents, and reports then?

If a doctor unmasks even a single patient, they face criminal charges or, at the very least, lose their license. But in finance and accounting, there is zero accountability; instead, we see public campaigns and petitions asking "hairdressers" to sign stuff! Everyone needs to step up and realize you're turning this profession into a circus just to serve your own petty interests.

Based on my experience in auditing and accounting, the implementation of HSFI is incredibly poor in small and medium enterprises, and frankly criminal in some large corporations that should be following MSFi. There are countless reasons for this. In America, bookkeeping dominates rather than true accounting. Most people just "record entries," largely because they don't sign off on their work or hold themselves accountable to a professional association or the state for what they've certified. Even the regulatory bodies aren't much better. In America, accounting isn't treated as a profession; it’s treated as a trade. You can practically walk off the street, grab a manual, and $167 start booking entries every month. Generally speaking, there is zero accountability here, which I suspect is a byproduct of fifty years of communism where individual responsibility simply didn't exist. All I hear is people claiming they didn't know, weren't informed, or never saw anything. I believe the CFO of Walmart once mentioned he only saw reports after they were published in the public registry or something similar. While it's good that people are organizing, this doesn't feel like the kind of organization seen with the AICPA, ACA, or CPA, where professionals unite to advance the field and establish ethical standards and expectations. I fear this current movement is more like a union—just a group fighting against anything that disturbs the swamp and the status quo...

Has everyone gotten their registration in yet?

Plenary Session

NOTICE, August 27, 2018

Dear members of the AICPA,

Pursuant to Article 52 of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Bylaws, a plenary session of the AICPA is being convened and will take place

on Thursday, September 27, at 12:00 PM
at the Westin Chicago Crystal Hall,
Chicago, America, ground floor
(Mandatory registration for all attendees begins at 11:00 AM.)

We invite all U.S. Chamber of Commerce members registered under the professional, scientific, and technical services sector—specifically Section 69 (Legal and Accounting Services), Group 69.2 (Accounting, Bookkeeping, and Auditing; Tax Advisory); Class 69.20 (Accounting, Bookkeeping, and Auditing) according to the National Classification of Activities—to attend this session.

To register, please complete the online registration form provided below no later than Friday, September 21 (by 12:00 PM).

The proposed AGENDA for the session is as follows:

Adoption of the association bylaws
Election of members to the Association Council
Election of the President, Vice President, and Secretary of the Association
Miscellaneous items
Please keep an eye on this page, as we will be posting all major updates here.

If you have any questions, please send them to udruzenjeracunovodja@hgk.hr.

Anyone actually planning on showing up? 🎉

Douglas Reed3 said:Based on my experience in auditing and accounting, the implementation of HSFI is incredibly poor in small and medium enterprises, and frankly criminal in some large corporations that should be following MSFi. There are countless reasons for this. In America, bookkeeping dominates rather than true accounting. Most people just "record entries," largely because they don't sign off on their work or hold themselves accountable to a professional association or the state for what they've certified. Even the regulatory bodies aren't much better. In America, accounting isn't treated as a profession; it’s treated as a trade. You can practically walk off the street, grab a manual, and $167 start booking entries every month. Generally speaking, there is zero accountability here, which I suspect is a byproduct of fifty years of communism where individual responsibility simply didn't exist. All I hear is people claiming they didn't know, weren't informed, or never saw anything. I believe the CFO of Walmart once mentioned he only saw reports after they were published in the public registry or something similar. While it's good that people are organizing, this doesn't feel like the kind of organization seen with the AICPA, ACA, or CPA, where professionals unite to advance the field and establish ethical standards and expectations. I fear this current movement is more like a union—just a group fighting against anything that disturbs the swamp and the status quo...

That is all quite accurate, though I think the issue isn't just about the "hairdressers"—as Nathan Kelly5 puts it—but rather that almost nobody actually feels the need for a legitimate accountant, auditor, or tax advisor.

The reason is simple: there is zero oversight. For most, basic "record-keeping" is sufficient. If the IRS were a serious institution, similar to how they operate in other developed nations, everyone would be forced to seek out professional accounting, financial, and tax advisory services.

Until that changes, anyone can keep the books with very little risk. Occasionally, a good bookkeeper is helpful, but the odds of being hit by a tax audit or an inspector who actually knows what they are doing are about the same as being struck by lightning.

The market share held by these "hairdressers" would shrink drastically if there were actual scrutiny regarding the legality and logic of financial statements—ranging from legal compliance and standards down to checking reported turnovers to see if they are even realistic enough to support a living.

So, why would anyone pay for professional services that nobody seems to require?

Only 113 people signed up. I really hope they actually show up, but honestly, this is a total joke.
I guess it’s just fine with everyone letting someone else call all the shots.

urbanwalker72 said:That is all quite accurate, though I think the issue isn't just about the "hairdressers"—as Nathan Kelly5 puts it—but rather that almost nobody actually feels the need for a legitimate accountant, auditor, or tax advisor.

The reason is simple: there is zero oversight. For most, basic "record-keeping" is sufficient. If the IRS were a serious institution, similar to how they operate in other developed nations, everyone would be forced to seek out professional accounting, financial, and tax advisory services.

Until that changes, anyone can keep the books with very little risk. Occasionally, a good bookkeeper is helpful, but the odds of being hit by a tax audit or an inspector who actually knows what they are doing are about the same as being struck by lightning.

The market share held by these "hairdressers" would shrink drastically if there were actual scrutiny regarding the legality and logic of financial statements—ranging from legal compliance and standards down to checking reported turnovers to see if they are even realistic enough to support a living.

So, why would anyone pay for professional services that nobody seems to require?

It should be in the state's interest to fix this to develop the market and attract capital. Because with the current quality of financial reporting here in America, you can't do much with them. From Walmart-sized entities down to small local shops.

But of course, we are still trailing thirty years behind the developed world in almost everything. Here, oversight seems focused solely on ensuring the bureaucrats get their cut, and that's about it.

Don't let it get you down; everyone in the market needs your expertise, even if they don't realize it yet. They are living in a delusion. In the West, more accountants are moving into executive roles for obvious reasons. I believe there was a recent stat showing that the number of people with accounting backgrounds serving as CEO has surpassed 30% among the top X corporations in London. Ultimately, no matter what you want to achieve in business, it all comes down to the numbers. Whether you want to benchmark against industry peers, analyze investment viability, evaluate your own operations, cut costs, or forecast... whatever decision needs to be made, there is simply no one else in the company who can match your level of knowledge. In our neck of the woods, maybe some marketing or sales gurus can sell smoke to owners, but even that won't last long. Plus, with the way people skip foundational experience nowadays—hiring analysts and controllers who have never actually performed accounting—they will never have the full picture. How can someone who has never done the books truly understand what drives the financial indicators? You could let a child compare ratios; numbers are one thing, but understanding the reality behind them is another. I wouldn't advise anyone to invest even three cents based on that kind of shallow analysis. I don't see how anyone can make informed decisions today without the expertise we possess.

Though, what you are saying applies mostly to small businesses and sole proprietorships. To them, professional services are just a burden. They've always viewed it that way and always will; they just want to get paid for their work and survive. Anything beyond that is just a nuisance and an expense.

Nathan Kelly5 said:It should be in the state's interest to fix this to develop the market and attract capital. Because with the current quality of financial reporting here in America, you can't do much with them. From Walmart-sized entities down to small local shops.

But of course, we are still trailing thirty years behind the developed world in almost everything. Here, oversight seems focused solely on ensuring the bureaucrats get their cut, and that's about it.

Don't let it get you down; everyone in the market needs your expertise, even if they don't realize it yet. They are living in a delusion. In the West, more accountants are moving into executive roles for obvious reasons. I believe there was a recent stat showing that the number of people with accounting backgrounds serving as CEO has surpassed 30% among the top X corporations in London. Ultimately, no matter what you want to achieve in business, it all comes down to the numbers. Whether you want to benchmark against industry peers, analyze investment viability, evaluate your own operations, cut costs, or forecast... whatever decision needs to be made, there is simply no one else in the company who can match your level of knowledge. In our neck of the woods, maybe some marketing or sales gurus can sell smoke to owners, but even that won't last long. Plus, with the way people skip foundational experience nowadays—hiring analysts and controllers who have never actually performed accounting—they will never have the full picture. How can someone who has never done the books truly understand what drives the financial indicators? You could let a child compare ratios; numbers are one thing, but understanding the reality behind them is another. I wouldn't advise anyone to invest even three cents based on that kind of shallow analysis. I don't see how anyone can make informed decisions today without the expertise we possess.

Though, what you are saying applies mostly to small businesses and sole proprietorships. To them, professional services are just a burden. They've always viewed it that way and always will; they just want to get paid for their work and survive. Anything beyond that is just a nuisance and an expense.

But honestly, does it even matter? Our leaders have opted for a high-tax model that lacks any real oversight, simply because if we were to implement both heavy taxation and rigorous supervision, no business could possibly survive. The alternative—lower taxes paired with stricter enforcement—is completely off the table, primarily because such a system would demand an immense amount of labor, specialized expertise, and genuine integrity from everyone involved.

Walmart was allowed to keep running right up until the moment a single decisive factor exposed the entire massive fraud: negative cash flow. If that hadn't happened, they could have likely continued operating just like this for another twenty years.

The situation with financial reporting for small businesses and sole proprietorships is much the same, only in reverse; it makes it appear as though these individuals are surviving on just a few thousand dollars a year, if they are making anything at all. It is a greater miracle than when Jesus multiplied the loaves and fish according to the Gospels of John and Mark.

It seems we have once again found ourselves lagging roughly thirty years behind the developed world in nearly every respect. In our current system, regulatory oversight appears solely concerned with ensuring that those looking for political patronage receive their slice of the pie, and nothing more.

It serves no purpose in that regard either. No revenue is generated from oversight, nor does anyone actually perform the accounting for it.

Do not let yourself be discouraged; anyone participating in the market requires your expertise, even if they aren't strictly compelled to seek it, as everyone else is operating under a profound delusion.

Personally, it makes no difference to me. I don't make my living through accounting, financial consulting, or tax advisory services; rather, those fields serve as a secondary interest that I picked up while pursuing a different, more exotic branch of finance.

In the West, we are seeing an increasing number of accountants ascending to executive leadership roles, and the reasoning behind this trend seems quite transparent. I believe I recently came across data indicating that the proportion of CEOs with an accounting background has surpassed 30% among the top largest corporations in London. Ultimately, no matter what one aims to achieve in the business world, everything eventually boils down to the numbers.

I am in complete agreement. In the upper echelons of finance, the precision of numbers carries even greater weight. Since the 1980s, Wall Street has seen a distinct shift toward hiring talent from STEM fields—specifically mathematicians, physicists, statisticians, programmers, and AI specialists—who may lack a traditional background in economics.

The most successful hedge fund in history maintains a hiring policy that excludes economists entirely, opting instead for a workforce comprised almost exclusively of nearly 100 PhDs specializing in pure mathematics, statistics, physics, and artificial intelligence. Their reasoning is quite logical: it is far simpler to teach the fundamentals of accounting to an expert in stochastic calculus who can effortlessly code a valuation model for fixed-income securities, whereas teaching someone steeped in accounting how to develop complex programming for statistical arbitrage on the capital markets is an immensely daunting task.

Ultimately, the discussion we are having hinges entirely upon straightforward economic logic, a firm grasp of accounting principles, and a fundamental understanding of finance and the tax system—all of which essentially boil down to the proficient application of numbers.

For instance, how could someone who has never practiced accounting truly grasp the underlying drivers of financial indicators? In my view, even a child could compare ratios, but there is a vast difference between looking at raw figures and understanding the reality behind them. I wouldn't advise anyone to invest even three cents based solely on that kind of superficial analysis. I fail to see how anyone today can make a meaningful decision without possessing the specialized knowledge we hold.

I cannot say.

While what you're saying applies to small sole proprietorships and similar setups, for them, this is nothing more than a burden. It always has been and always will be; they simply want to get paid for their labor and make a living, viewing everything else as mere nuisance and overhead.

That is an honest way to work, certainly, but basic bookkeeping is the lowest tier where one merely records whatever the client provides. The dilemma lies in the fact that entrepreneurs expect comprehensive financial and tax advisory services from their bookkeepers, yet most accountants operate under fee structures based strictly on volume rather than the quality or complexity of the work provided. One cannot expect sophisticated tax consulting for a couple of pennies per line item in a ledger. 😁

We’ve got an association, a president, a vice president who are all incredibly sharp, hands-on, and actually get things done—plus a solid council backing them up.
The first hurdle is behind us; now it's time to double down and keep fighting the good fight. 😉

Congratulations to the hairdressers and waitresses; you've successfully defended your incompetence and ignorance, proving your absolute determination to learn nothing at all before retirement. It clearly paid off!

My God, what a joke of a country..

There’s nothing more pathetic than this kind of nonsense. It’s honestly shameful how you can just spit on so many skilled, honest, and brilliant professionals like that.
I, for one, am proud that we stood together and that I had the chance to meet so many capable and outstanding people along the way.

Nathan Kelly5 said:Congratulations to the hairdressers and waitresses; you've successfully defended your incompetence and ignorance, proving your absolute determination to learn nothing at all before retirement. It clearly paid off!

My God, what a joke of a country..

🤣 I’ve already told you that getting certified isn't going to be your saving grace. I see firsthand how hard a truly talented accountant works for peanuts. Mine is incredibly knowledgeable and pulls massive hours, yet he doesn't earn anywhere near what he deserves. This is despite him having a degree from a top business school, holding his CPA and CFE credentials, and sinking countless hours and dollars into continuous education...

My point is this: the reason you can't command the fees you deserve isn't because of "waitresses and hairdressers" as you put it, but because there is zero oversight. Everything just slides by. And if everything passes without scrutiny, why would anyone bother paying for high-end accounting, tax, or financial advice?

Henry Edwards33 said:There’s nothing more pathetic than this kind of nonsense. It’s honestly shameful how you can just spit on so many skilled, honest, and brilliant professionals like that.
I, for one, am proud that we stood together and that I had the chance to meet so many capable and outstanding people along the way.

Not everyone is going to see eye to eye. While mandatory certification feels a bit absurd here, in functional countries, people pursue these credentials voluntarily if they actually intend to be serious about the profession. Without certification, you simply lack credibility. In the USA, sure, you can keep books, but if you aren't a CPA, you aren't taken seriously—who would hire you?

The gap between a certified accountant and an auditor here is far too wide, and auditors have exploited that divide to their own advantage. In the USA, a CPA has the authority to perform audits, which proves that the exam is anything but trivial.

On top of that, you have access to the CFE, CFM, CMA, and other specialized designations, plus there is the EA—a credential issued by the IRS that guarantees, from their perspective, that you are a true tax expert.

Just imagine if our version of the IRS started handing out certifications like candy... 🤣

urbanwalker72 said:🤣 I’ve already told you that getting certified isn't going to be your saving grace. I see firsthand how hard a truly talented accountant works for peanuts. Mine is incredibly knowledgeable and pulls massive hours, yet he doesn't earn anywhere near what he deserves. This is despite him having a degree from a top business school, holding his CPA and CFE credentials, and sinking countless hours and dollars into continuous education...

My point is this: the reason you can't command the fees you deserve isn't because of "waitresses and hairdressers" as you put it, but because there is zero oversight. Everything just slides by. And if everything passes without scrutiny, why would anyone bother paying for high-end accounting, tax, or financial advice?

Not everyone is going to see eye to eye. While mandatory certification feels a bit absurd here, in functional countries, people pursue these credentials voluntarily if they actually intend to be serious about the profession. Without certification, you simply lack credibility. In the USA, sure, you can keep books, but if you aren't a CPA, you aren't taken seriously—who would hire you?

The gap between a certified accountant and an auditor here is far too wide, and auditors have exploited that divide to their own advantage. In the USA, a CPA has the authority to perform audits, which proves that the exam is anything but trivial.

On top of that, you have access to the CFE, CFM, CMA, and other specialized designations, plus there is the EA—a credential issued by the IRS that guarantees, from their perspective, that you are a true tax expert.

Just imagine if our version of the IRS started handing out certifications like candy... 🤣

Honestly, I agree with the sentiment, but trying to force this into our system is just madness.

Voluntary licensing is great in theory, but as you pointed out, it carries zero weight in our current setup. On the flip side, if we went with the proposed licensing model, it would basically mean shuttering a massive number of accounting firms overnight. Unfortunately, people haven't taken the time to really look at what that model entails—we're talking oversight from the Chamber, fixed price lists, 160 hours of mandatory annual education, and so on.

You need to build a sustainable foundation first; you don't start by trying to "polish" a broken system with licenses and fancy authorities.

Just imagine the IRS handing out certifications here. 🤣

The worst part is, I actually had the exact same thought about a year and a half ago.🙂