More On Ethics Rulings Language


A letter in the October 1998 Journal (Finds Ethics Rulings Language Disturbing, page 114), grabbed my attention.

The writer proposes that the inclusion of the word cohabitation in ethics rulings nos. 107 and 108 suggests that the AICPA approves of immoral behavior and that such rulings will damage the reputation of the profession.

I am not familiar with the referenced ethics rulings, nor do I care very much about their content. What I would find appalling is if the AICPA allowed itself to be unduly influenced by a person who deems himself worthy to assert his moral judgments in this way. Then, and only then, would the reputation of the profession be damaged.

Edward N. Moller, CPA, Controller
Mount Ida College
Newton Centre, Massachusetts

Letters to the Editor

The Journal encourages readers to write letters on important professional issues in addition to comments on published articles. Because space is limited, letters submitted for publication should be no longer than 500 words. Please include telephone and fax numbers.

SPONSORED REPORT

Keeping client information safe in an age of scams and security threats

A look at the Dirty Dozen tax scams and ways to protect taxpayer information.

TAX PRACTICE CORNER

More R&D tax help

"Can I use the R&D credit?" PATH Act enhancements make the credit more attractive to a wider range of taxpayers.

QUIZ

Learn to choose between ‘who’ and ‘whom’

Writers can stumble over who and whom (or whoever and whomever). If you write for business, this quiz can help make your copy above reproach.