I read “ Don’t Invest for Clients—Plan for Them ” ( JofA, Jan.02, page 32), and I take exception to the impression created in the sidebar “ Changing Tax Laws ” (page 35).

The irrevocable trusts used by our clients give the trustee authority to purchase life insurance should he or she deem it prudent. The trust document does not obligate the trustee to purchase life insurance or to use its proceeds to pay estate taxes.

Vincent E. Walsh, CPA
Giunta, Ferlita & Walsh, PA
Tampa, Florida

“ The Full-Service CPA ” ( JofA, Mar.02, page 74) struck me as ironic in light of the current criticism of combining audit functions with management services.

As a career insurance agent, I often have had my recommendations reviewed by my client’s CPA. I have welcomed such participation, but I wonder to whom a client would turn for such a review when the accountant and agent are one and the same.

Ira E. Graham, CPA, CLU
Evanston, Illinois

Thank you for publishing the special bulletin “ To the Members of the AICPA ” from James G. Castellano and Barry C. Melancon (JofA, Mar.02, page 15).

I was relieved to read my profession’s official stance is that AICPA members will be held accountable for their actions: “The profession has zero tolerance for any CPA who does not adhere to the rules that are the hallmark of our reputation.”

However, it seems to me that additional rules, regulations, and guidelines are not really needed. Those of us who are among the “hundreds of thousands of CPAs [who] do their jobs every day with nothing but the highest level of integrity” follow the rules that already are in place to evaluate whether our independence could be compromised and immediately step away from a situation in which our independence and objectivity even appear to be compromised.

More rules won’t stop those CPAs willing to compromise integrity in the name of profit. Perhaps swift and harsh punishment would. I hope the AICPA does not shirk its duty to the rest of us.

Rosalie J. Gerding, CPA
Gerding, Korte & Chitwood
Columbia, Missouri

I don’t want to be critical of my profession, but we really do need to get our act in order.

“Global credential?” We don’t even have a national credential. There is one national exam—there should be one national license with national standards. Apparently, our different state boards can’t even agree on the computerization of the CPA exam. The state boards should be administrative and not set policy. Policy should be established nationally.

Then there’s the set of professional standards we are supposed to follow—one standard superseded by another standard superseded by another standard—and all from various sources and boards. We should have a set of standards with section numbers that stay the same and are amended, much like the Internal Revenue Code.

And finally, compliance with the standards makes it increasingly impractical to give a small business client a GAAP statement. Therefore, it limits my ability to give a client a quality product that provides the maximum amount of information. It’s enough to make a CPA throw up his hands and just give the client a piece of paper with numbers on it. Is this how we get public confidence back—by discouraging the flow of information?

Bruce H. Walter, CPA
Jed Cohen & Company, PC
New Bedford, Massachusetts

Congratulations on two very fine articles “ Preserving the Family Legacy ” ( JofA, Mar.02, page 34) and “ Pass the Baton Without Missing a Beat ” (page 43). As chair of the AICPA succession planning conference, it was great to see the exploration of these important topics.

I implore all JofA readers who found the articles of interest to come to our conference to be held on December 5–7 at Caesar’s Palace in Las Vegas. We will be covering in depth the issues that were raised in both of those articles and will provide CPA practitioners with information that can help expand their practices in the family and business succession planning area.

Stuart Kessler, CPA/PFS
Goldstein Golub Kessler LLP
New York City