| THE ISSUES | WHAT OPPONENTS SAY | WHAT ADVOCATES SAY |
| Creating a NEW Credential | 
We may need this type of credential 20 years from today, but not now |
This is a long-term strategy and to ensure we are first to market we must start now |
| |
The Big 5 don’t need and won’t use this type of credential because the firms’ names are their brands |
Most CPAs have created successful personal brands, but the CPA brand is largely viewed as attest and tax |
| |
Credential makes end run around regulatory system needed to protect public interest |
License restricts ability to stretch CPA brand to cover all services individual CPAs provide |
| |
CPAs “do it all” already and don’t need other credentials to validate competencies outside those associated with the CPA license |
CPA/global business credential would signify depth of knowledge in finance plus breadth of knowledge across a broad range of disciplines |
| |
The CPA brand provides all the clout a professional needs in today’s marketplace |
Market has been too slow to recognize true scope of profession’s services; 85% of CPAs don’t do audits |
| |
Will confuse the market and ultimately diminish the CPA brand |
CPAs remain premier financial expert; research suggests credential helps emphasize strategic skills |
| |
If the market doesn’t accept the new credential, the CPA will be undermined |
The proposed credential carries the risk, while CPA brand stays protected and intact |
| |
CPAs are already too busy; they don’t have time to pursue and maintain other credentials |
The credential infrastructure would accommodate compressed schedules of today’s professionals |
| |
AICPA is pursuing this credential to increase its membership numbers |
Credential holders would be members of new, separate institute and not of the AICPA |
| |
The AICPA cannot afford to support both the CPA and the proposed credential |
AICPA will continue to support CPA brand; new global institute would support new credential |
| |
If CPAs want a broader credential, they should get an MBA |
MBA quality differs based on university, does not require work experience or mandate CPA values |
| |
| Admitting Other Professions |
Creates new sources of competition |
Competition already exists outside core services |
| |
Professionalizes the competition and gives them leg up over CPAs |
CPAs set the rules by which all credential holders must abide (ethics, lifelong learning, etc.) |
| |
If it is created, credential should be reserved only for CPAs |
Credential is not a rebranding of the CPA; it defines a larger professional services footprint |
| |
Quality of credential holders will not be up to standards of the CPA profession |
Admission exam to be as psychometrically stringent as the CPA exam, but not focused on A&A |
| |
CPAs already have ability to outsource to non-CPA or CPA firms and have extensive access to expert networks |
Creates unprecedented worldwide knowledge resource and networking opportunities, which may not be otherwise available to smaller firms |
| |
Entry exam should be closed to all other professionals |
Preempts non-CPAs from creating new hurdles for CPAs and taking lead in strategic knowledge area |
| |
| Spending Member Dues |
Detracts from other initiatives |
Development funds less than 2% of AICPA budget |
| |
Most CPAs are not interested in obtaining the credential |
More CPAs are interested in credential than in any other AICPA accreditation now offered |
| |
Funds being spent on the credential should be added to AICPA advertising campaign on behalf of the CPA profession |
AICPA ad dollars for CPA at all-time high, with $25 million for new recruiting program; R&D funds needed to build opportunities for tomorrow’s CPAs |
| |
CPAs are less interested in the AICPA’s investment in long-term strategies than in immediate remedies to today’s challenges |
Research shows credential could significantly increase the number of students attracted to the CPA profession |
| |
AICPA cannot afford to support CPA and new global credential |
Credential will be self-funded soon after launch and AICPA will have no ongoing obligations |
| |
| Developing a Interdisciplinary Framework |
Sounds like jack of all trades and master of none |
Market demands strategists who can apply knowledge from multiple disciplines |
| |
No one professional can know and do everything that’s required |
Candidates don’t have to know it all, but need an effective knowledge of other disciplines |
| |
| Developing a Self-Funded Financial Structure |
No assurances that AICPA funds will not be needed in future to cover revenue shortfalls |
Global institute is designed to be self-funded soon after launch; AICPA not obliged to cover shortfalls |
| |
Ability to self-support is questionable |
Strategic alliances/member fees will finance growth |
| |
There is no hard evidence that market will accept the new credential |
Market data indicates businesses would pay premium to credential holders |
| |
Risk of failure jeopardizes the financial future of the AICPA |
Once created, the new Global institute would assume funding responsibility and all financial risks |
