- column
- Letters
More On Ethics Rulings Language
Please note: This item is from our archives and was published in 1999. It is provided for historical reference. The content may be out of date and links may no longer function.
Related
No Results
TOPICS
-
Uncategorized Article
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. |
