Thank you and Mr. Holton for the thoughtful response to my concerns regarding the proposed regulations for your agency currently under the fast track process. Please consider this letter as additional comment regarding the issue of the definition of a continuing professional education hour and regulations related to continuing professional education in general. I do not believe the interpretation that a 50 minute hour is legally a generally accepted national standard as defined by Code of Virginia §54.1-4413.3 Standard of Conduct and Practice is correct for the following reasons:
1.By reference (§54.1-4413.3.4) Virginia adopted the Code of Professional Conduct as issued by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). As stated in the Introduction to the Code of Professional Conduct authority is given to the AICPA Council to designate “bodies to promulgate technical standards under the Rules”. The process to do so is by resolution of the AICPA Council and integration into Appendix A of the Code of Professional Conduct where this authority is specifically referenced. §54.1-4413.3.5 mirrors this authoritative designation language without modification. Under the current listing of designated bodies neither the AICPA CPE subcommittee nor NASBA are included, therefore standards issued by these bodies do not meet the definition of a technical standard under the Code of Professional Conduct. NASBA is also not specifically referenced in Virginia’s listing under §54.1-4413.3.6.
2.The Statement of Standards for Continuing Professional Education (CPE) Programs (CPE Standards) is a publication jointly produced by AICPA and NASBA containing the definition that 50 minutes equals 1 CPE hour (Statement No. 12). AICPA may have adopted these standards as criteria for member CPAs to meet the requirements of the AICPA Bylaws under Sec. 2.3 through a resolution under Section 230R of the AICPA Bylaws. However, I was unable to identify a specific Council resolution or Bylaw amendment that specifically referenced this adoption. AICPA Bylaws are not integrated into the statutes of Virginia by specific reference. This resolution was not adopted under the Code of Professional Conduct authority given to AICPA as discussed in #1 above therefore I do not believe these standards are designated as technical standards. If the Board of Accountancy believes that the AICPA Bylaws are adopted by reference into the Code of Virginia then we have been at a mandated 120 hour CPE requirement since the enactment of those statutes as this has been part of the AICPA Bylaws requirements since January 1, 2001.
3.Several vendors of CPE clearly state that the quantity and quality of CPE is clearly regulated by each state. This would indicate that vendors believe that CPE standards are under the jurisdiction of individual states and that a national licensing standard does not exist that is automatically binding on individual states.
I realize that this is a legal interpretation issue. Since none of us (BOA staff/directors or myself) are qualified attorneys I therefore ask that the Board of Accountancy seek a legal opinion from the Office of the Attorney General to determine whether Virginia has uniformly adopted the CPE Standards or not. If these standards are not adopted through the Virginia statutes then I reiterate my objection to the omission of the definition of one CPE hour equaling 50 minutes. If these standards are uniformly adopted then I would oppose any deviation from the very well written and detailed criteria established under these standards as to qualifying continuing professional education. I believe any deviation would threaten substantial equivalency and evergreen standards and would not serve to provide any additional protection to the public. The proposed regulations contain many deviations from the CPE Standards which place further restrictions on eligible CPE. While these restrictions are under the authority of the Board of Accountancy as designated in §54.1-4403.12 I believe that placing such restrictions into effect would be in conflict with the Board of Accountancy’s goal of eliminating confusion among regulants and the public. To summarize, I recommend that either 1) the Board of Accountancy adopt the CPE Standards uniformly without modification or 2) the Board of Accountancy clearly delineate in detail all of the necessary requirements for CPE compliance in Virginia within the regulations.
Once again, thank you for your timely response and also for the opportunity to offer constructive input on the proposed regulations through the public comment process. The profession has made great strides in the last few years in adopting a global set of standards that allow for the protection of the public while encouraging national and international uniformity in recognition of the mobility of individual professionals. I applaud the efforts of the Board of Accountancy in proposing regulations that will further accomplish these goals. Please let me know if you have any questions or require any further clarification of my opinions.
