Legislature(2005 - 2006)CAPITOL 17
02/01/2006 03:15 PM House LABOR & COMMERCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB242 | |
| HB274 | |
| HB331 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 274 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 242 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 331 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 274-PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS 3:31:08 PM CHAIR ANDERSON announced that the next order of business would be SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 274, "An Act relating to the practice of accounting; and providing for an effective date." REPRESENTATIVE MIKE HAWKER, Alaska State Legislature, speaking as the sponsor of SSHB 274, informed the committee that after reviewing the issues discussed at the prior hearing, he determined that an amendment was in order. He explained that the amendment would address the "prepare" and "compile" issue and leaves intact all existing statutory authority, while providing some safe harbor language in which an independent accountant can seek refuge. 3:32:16 PM REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG moved that the committee adopt Amendment 1, which read [original punctuation provided]: Page 27, lines 9 - 20: Delete "the following disclaimer language when used by nonlicensees in connection with financial statements: (A) "I (we) have prepared the accompanying (financial statements) of (name of entity) as of (time period) for the (period) then ended. This presentation is limited to preparing, in the form of financial statements, information that is the representation of management (owners)."; or (B) "I (we) have not audited or reviewed the accompanying financial statements and, accordingly, do not express an opinion or any other form of assurance on them." [COMPILATION OF FINANCIAL STATEMENT LANGUAGE THAT DOES NOT EXPRESS OR IMPLY ASSURANCE OR SPECIAL KNOWLEDGE OR COMPETENCE.] " Insert "(A) a compilation of financial statement language that does not express or imply assurance or special knowledge or competence; or "(B) the following disclaimer language when used by nonlicensees in connection with financial statements: (i) "I (we) have prepared the accompanying (financial statements) of (name of entity) as of (time period) for the (period) then ended. This presentation is limited to preparing, in the form of financial statements, information that is the representation of management (owners)."; or (ii) "I (we) have not audited or reviewed the accompanying financial statements and, accordingly, do not express an opinion or any other form of assurance on them." [.]" 3:33:30 PM CHAIR ANDERSON, upon determining there were no objections, announced that Amendment 1 was adopted. 3:33:41 PM REPRESENTATIVE LYNN moved that the committee adopt Amendment 2, as follows: Page 3, line 24, following "regulations": Insert "per the procedures under negotiated regulation making" CHAIR ANDERSON objected for discussion purposes. REPRESENTATIVE LYNN explained that although the Board of Public Accountancy doesn't license independent accountants, the decisions the board makes does have a significant impact on the profession. Representative Lynn expressed his desire to maintain the [current] balance between Certified Public Accountants (CPAs) and independent accountants. REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER stated that Amendment 2 adds the requirement of additional supplemental regulatory procedures in the regulatory authority for the Board of Public Accountancy to address the attest function. Since the regulations are addressing the attest function, there is no affect on the independent accountants. He highlighted that SSHB 274 has an immediate effective date in regard to the authority to prepared the regulations, but a delayed effective date for the legislation. Therefore, there's an opportunity for the regulatory process to go forward. The negotiated regulation making is really a supplemental procedure, and in this particular situation something is being regulated that has nothing to do with independent accountants. Representative Hawker opined that it's merely an additional regulatory burden, an additional cost, an additional time, and additional inefficiency in governing. CHAIR ANDERSON referred to a letter from Max Mertz, Chairperson, Alaska Board of Public Accountancy, dated January 26, 2006, which related the Alaska Board of Public Accountancy's support of SSHB 274. 3:38:05 PM REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX inquired as to what the language "per the procedures under negotiated regulation making" means. 3:39:12 PM DON BREMNER, Member, Board of Director, Yak-Tat Kwaan, Inc. (YKI), said that SSHB 274 has been a long time coming. The legislation draws a clear line between qualified and unqualified accountants and accounting services. Furthermore, the legislation addresses accountability and liability. Mr. Bremner recalled his past experience as an officer of Native corporations and the scams and schemes that have cost corporations large sums of money. He highlighted a Ponzi scheme that cost one Native corporation over $7 million. Therefore, at least this legislation raises the standards such that those presenting themselves as accountants or CPAs are who they say they are. Mr. Bremner concluded by relating his hope that the committee forwards this legislation. CHAIR ANDERSON turned attention to Amendment 2, which attempts to discern the difference between CPAs and non-CPAs. MR. BREMNER, in further response to Chair Anderson, specified that he supports SSHB 274 with Amendment 1. 3:42:27 PM JEANNETTE JAMES, Member, Alaska Society of Independent Accountants (ASIA), referred to the language on page 3, lines 25-26, which says: "the board may adopt the criteria established by a nationally recognized professional organization for accountants." The aforementioned doesn't specify the organizations to which it applies, and therefore there is no knowledge with regard to what it may do in relation to independent accountants. Ms. James then explained that the negotiated regulation making is a complicated system that allows the discussion of issues before the regulations are drafted. Although she understood, after talking to the sponsor, that SSHB 274 refers strictly to CPAs, she opined that it is important to place it on the record. Ms. James emphasized that she wants to be sure that SSHB 274 doesn't impact [independent accountants], which seems to be partially addressed in Amendment 1. However, [independent accountants] don't know what the [attest] regulations [of nationally recognized professional organizations for accountants] are and what effect they will have. 3:45:44 PM REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX inquired as to whether, on page 3, after line 23, inserting the language "the board shall adopt regulations with respect to certified public accountants" rather than the language proposed in Amendment 2 would address these concerns. MS. JAMES characterized Representative LeDoux's suggestion as extra language, and said that the aforementioned discussion will provide some strength with regard to the intent that this applies only to CPAs. 3:47:19 PM REPRESENTATIVE KOTT recalled that the sponsor's opening remarks clarified that this legislation only regulates CPAs, and therefore he felt the issues [of the independent accountants] are covered. 3:47:57 PM REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG highlighted that SSHB 274 falls under Title 8 and the Division of Occupational Licensing. He pointed out that Section 2 gives the [Board of Public Accountancy] the ability to regulate the profession of accountancy. He said he wasn't sure that this legislation speaks only to CPAs because part of the division's procedure is to ensure that those practicing are qualified and meet the standards. Therefore, he opined that this legislation does impact those who aren't CPAs and thus redrafting the legislation such that it excluded [independent accountants] would be "skating on thin ice." 3:50:30 PM MS. JAMES, in response to an earlier question regarding the definition of "negotiated regulation making", explained that [negotiated regulation making] simply means that the stakeholders are called together to determine what the language in the regulation should say. When the aforementioned is completed, it moves through the regular process of regulation making. Although it may be a lengthier process, usually there is no debate that results [after the regulations are in place]. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG interjected that the negotiated rule making process works very well in the natural resources arena, particularly when there are a large number of stakeholders. REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX questioned why the regulations regarding attest functions only applying to CPAs wouldn't be stronger if that was specified in statute rather than merely leaving it to be ascertained from the testimony today. 3:52:48 PM CHAIR ANDERSON inquired as to what/who is regulated now. He also inquired as to how someone would grieve to the state over mistakes made by an [independent accountant/bookkeeper] versus mistakes made by a CPA. 3:54:01 PM MS. JAMES pointed out that there is a court system. She opined that the public is somewhat protected from those who make mistakes. She reiterated that she is comfortable with this conversation on the record that indicates that this [legislation] speaks only to CPAs and has no effect on independent accountants. 3:55:39 PM CHAIR ANDERSON recalled Representative Rokeberg's question as to whether SSHB 274 with Amendment 1 is sufficient and accurate in relaying that the legislation doesn't impact those performing accounting activities who aren't CPAs. 3:56:10 PM REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG pointed out that Section 7 only relates to rule making as it relates to attest functions. "This has nothing to do with the overall rule-making ability which is in the catch-all portion of Title 8, which allows any regulatory rulemaking by any occupational licensing board." Therefore, he opined that [Section 7] isn't a way to allow the Board of Public Accountancy to redraw the rules because they already exist. CHAIR ANDERSON inquired as to whether Representative Rokeberg feels that Amendment 2 is in opposition to the legislation or duplicative and not necessary. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG opined that it's not appropriate in this section and he said he wasn't sure that it was appropriate in a new section either because it could "break the mold of all the other occupational licensing." CHAIR ANDERSON expressed his concern that it might be precedential. REPRESENTATIVE LYNN asked if Ms. James would be more comfortable with Amendment 2 as it's written or with the language as Representative LeDoux suggested. MS. JAMES reiterated that she feels comfortable with the intent [of SSHB 274 unamended] being placed on the record. However, she noted that there are other [independent accountants] who may hold different views. Ms. James specified that she would prefer the language in Section 7 to refer to CPAs rather than merely "accountants." 3:59:50 PM REPRESENTATIVE KOTT inquired as to how Ms. James would define "persons professing special competence in accountancy." MS. JAMES answered that one would have to pass a test. In fact, members of the National Society of Accountants can take an examination to be certified as an accountant. The aforementioned is different than a certified public accountant which is a license from the state and for which there are different rules. She opined that the current system in Alaska works for this state, and therefore she expressed concern with the reference to the nationally recognized professional organizations because it treats all states the same. REPRESENTATIVE KOTT, referring to Section 2, pointed out that the purpose is to regulate those who have special competence in accounting, which he associated with a CPA. He related his understanding that there are three different layers of work that a CPA can perform and a public accountant can enter the top two layers. REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked then if anyone can call himself/herself an accountant in Alaska. MS. JAMES replied yes. 4:03:11 PM MICHAEL CURNOW, Independent Accountant, informed the committee that he is a member of ASIA and a past president of the organization. He said that Amendment 1 addressed one of his [concerns]. However, the legislation, even in the face of today's testimony, impacts him as an independent accountant because the definition of attest was changed to include compilations, which he said he does occasionally. Therefore, he requested the negotiated regulatory process, which he said provides him with more comfort. Mr. Curnow noted that he likes the rest of the legislation and hopes that it passes. 4:05:19 PM REPRESENTATIVE KOTT asked how Mr. Curnow would define "persons professing special competence in accountancy." He also asked if Mr. Curnow would place himself in that group. MR. CURNOW answered that he would not include himself in that category because that [refers] to a CPA who has received a state license. Mr. Curnow explained that he holds a federal license and his work concentrates on taxes. 4:06:40 PM BERNADETTE KOPPY, Vice President, Alaska Society of Independent Accountants (ASIA), informed the committee that ASIA supports Amendments 1 and 2 to SSHB 274. Ms. Koppy opined that this legislation [as amended] will allow independent accountants to continue doing business in the manner in which they do now. 4:08:05 PM ELAINE WILLIAMSON, Appointee, Alaska Board of Public Accountancy, stated her personal support for SSHB 274 and its amendments. She opined that conforming the state statutes to the Uniform Accountancy Act will benefit both the profession and the Alaska Board of Public Accountancy. Ms. Williamson opined that the reciprocity afforded [by adopting the aforementioned Act by reference] is beneficial in that it will allow CPAs to practice in multiple jurisdictions without having to conform to multiple laws and requirements. Furthermore, this legislation allows the Alaska Board of Public Accountancy to amend regulations as the national organizations change in accordance with the Uniform Accountancy Act. 4:09:00 PM REPRESENTATIVE KOTT asked if Ms. Williamson, who is a CPA, would consider herself a person with special competence in accounting. MS. WILLIAMSON replied yes. 4:09:50 PM CHAIR ANDERSON, upon determining no one else wished to testify, announced that the public testimony was closed. MS. WILLIAMSON, in response to questions regarding whether she supported Amendment 2, expressed her support for the legislation and moving forward with regard to conformity with the Uniform Accountancy Act. Therefore, she stated that she is in support of getting the legislation passed. REPRESENTATIVE HAWKER, in response to Chair Anderson, related his opinion that Amendment 2 is not necessary. REPRESENTATIVE KOTT agreed that Amendment 2 isn't necessary; and therefore he said that he would oppose Amendment 2. REPRESENTATIVE LYNN opined that SSHB 274 is important legislation. However, he said he would like to err on the side of caution with Amendment 2, which he didn't believe does any harm. Therefore, he said he maintained his motion to adopt Amendment 2. REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD noted his agreement with Representative Rokeberg's earlier comment that this merely provides independent accountants a seat at the table to know what regulations might result. He opined that [Amendment 2] doesn't do any harm, and therefore he said he was in favor of Amendment 2. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG reiterated his belief that Amendment 2 isn't necessary. 4:15:17 PM A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Lynn, Guttenberg, and Crawford voted in favor of the adoption of Amendment 2. Representatives LeDoux, Kott, Rokeberg, and Anderson voted against it. Therefore, Amendment 2 failed to be adopted by a vote of 3-4. REPRESENTATIVE KOTT moved to report SSHB 274, as amended, out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSSSHB 274(L&C) was reported from the House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee. The committee took a brief at-ease at 4:17 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|