Letters to the Editor
Equivalency = Tough Work
Lou Grumet’s December 2006 Publisher’s Column
(“Interstate Commerce Versus Public Protection: Why
Cross-Border Licensing Must Be Handled with Care”) summarized
well the constitutional challenges related to the noble objectives
of state protections and interstate commerce. Grumet’s
middle-ground (my term) approach between where we are in our
struggles with substantial equivalency and the newly rolled
out exposure draft touting the “no notice, no fee”
version is one that’s been discussed by the National
Association of State Boards of Accountancy (NASBA).
It’s not that we
disagree with Grumet’s well-stated approach; it’s
the matter of effectiveness. To reach the substantial equivalency
objectives that meet both constitutional mandates that Grumet
described, we must no longer kid ourselves that some compromise
approach will result in a grand reception by the states.
We’ve tried that under the current version of the
Uniform Accountancy Act (UAA), and it can be argued that
we have more diversity and nonacceptance of substantial
equivalency than we experienced before the revised UAA was
adopted in 1998. So, we have determined that because compromise
measures have not been at all effective for substantial
equivalency, we would then be bold and go for the ideal
situation and hope and trust that we will encourage our
states to reach more nobly for a higher standard of substantial
equivalency. As you know, it’s tough work—whether
it’s New York, California, or Tennessee.
for the commentary and for being involved in the debate.
President and CEO
National Association of State Boards of Accountancy (NASBA;
Issues Not Enough
I agree with Lou Grumet’s points in his February 2007
Publisher’s Column (“Social Security and the
U.S. Tax Code: Ripe for Reform”), my feeling is that
raising issues isn’t enough. I was always taught not
to bring up a problem unless you offer a solution. That
always forced me to think harder, and although the problem
sometimes disappeared on its own, whenever I did come up
with an idea the results paid off.
all the resources available within the Society, it seems
to me that you could develop a think tank on hot issues
affecting the profession. Let the group conduct research
and ask the members for input, then publish the findings/solutions/ideas
for tackling the issue. We might not always hit the bull’s-eye,
but I’ll bet we’d hit the target every time.
F. Doll, CPA (Retired)
New York, N.Y.