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.

RESOURCES

Keeping you informed and prepared amid the coronavirus crisis

We’re gathering the latest news stories along with relevant columns, tips, podcasts, and videos on this page, along with curated items from our archives to help with uncertainty and disruption.

SPONSORED REPORT

Getting leases in line

ASC Topic 842 is a relatively simple standard that can mean profound changes for organizations with leases. This report examines what makes this standard challenging and describes new ways for CPAs to add value.