- quote -

Although this year's western edition isn't for another 5
weeks, the feeling I get from attending the past NINE years
is that in this part of the country, the average age of
attendees is probably near 48 or so. There are some in the
20-39 range (myself included) but I don't see as many. Now,
of course, it could be that there are alot, and they LOOK
like 40+ because they've been in the industry too long! :-)

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

- quote -

I was pleasantly surprised at the Atlanta Tax Forum, where
I teach what is an EA. I would say the average age in the
room was not in the 40s or even 50s, but 20 to 35. Of
course, the eight year old sitting with Mom helped those
odds.

Helen, EA in PA
Member of The Tax Gang
President, PA Society of Enrolled Agents
1040EZ and 1040A tax prep at www.1040.com/1040pro

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

"Dave Woods, EA" <d.woods[at]verizon.net> wrote:

- quote -

What's the point when the largest tax preparation firm in
the country employs unlicensed total amateurs off the street
and calls them "tax experts"

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Michael T Wing CPA wrote:

- quote -

Of course this fact may say more about the fact that the
general public (and those same college students) generally
have no idea what an EA is, nor do they see getting that
license as a "ticket" to better earnings potential. That
is, I think it says more about the public relations problems
of the EA license than anything else.

--
Ed Zollars, CPA
Phoenix, Arizona

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

"Dave Woods, EA" <d.woods[at]verizon.net> wrote in

- quote -

Congratulations on your ability to pass tests<G> ! I'm sure
there are others. Did you jump right in to practice by
yourself?

I never prepared a Corporate or partnership return but I
could study enough to pass that section with just enough
points to pass. One of the attorneys for whom I worked at
the time congratulated me on not overstudying <g> . I made
sure all the attorneys knew I was not qualified to prepare
the returns on my own.

In Ohio attorneys do not have to "intern" (although most do)
before being admited to practice. I think it would help them
a lot to do so. In my experience there are some attorneys
that I can't figure out how they passed the exam much less
graduated from law school. Like every profession, there are
CPAS and EAs in the same position.

Interning might help some but I do not think that should be
a requirement for the designation.

Martha Matthews, EA

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

"Ed Zollars, CPA" <ezollar[at]mindspring.com> wrote:
- quote -

Does experience with Arthur Anderson count? <G
Gene E. Utterback, EA

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Harlan Lunsford <hlunsfordnoway[at]bellsouth.net> wrote:

- quote -

Hmmm... How about ETR ("Enrolled Taxpayer Representative")?

MTW

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

EA Dave Woods <d.woods[at]verizon.net> wrote:

- quote -

OK, that's 2... <g> But contrast this to the CPA exam where
a very large number pass it straight out of college with no
significant work experience.

MTW

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Michael T Wing CPA wrote:
- quote -

I would like to see that too, Mike. But... to what?
"LTP"? "LTA"? Seems to me we "voted" on some designations
with NAEA, but I do't recall hearing what the majority
opinion was.

Cheer$,
HL,
EA in LA

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Phoebe Roberts, EA wrote:

- quote -

See Section 15.9.D of the Oklahoma Accountancy Act that
become effective July 1, 2003. It appears that a one year
experience requirement was just added to the law.

I get to speak there again this year (Oklahoma Tax
Conference in December), so I figured it might be useful to
look into that bit of trivia <grin> .

--
Ed Zollars, CPA
Phoenix, Arizona

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Thanks for all the feedback. Some good comments about
issues I hadn't considered. My main concern was that I
thought it looked negatively about being an EA where just
about every other designation did have some form of
experience requirements.

As to those who commented about actually knowing someone who
took and passed the SEE before some form of arbitrary time
frame of say 2-3 years, well I know of one person who did at
the multiple lettered store front chain, and well I know of
someone else sitting at this computer typing that did.....

--
David M. Woods, EA
Boston, MA 02109

Postings here are general information only and not to be
relied upon as advice.

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Dave Woods, EA wrote:

- quote -

Like the requirement for working for slave wages for a CPA
for a year in order to become a CPA?

Naw, no need I think. Any tax pro, EA or not, must pass
the public scrutiny exam in order to be judged worth his
salt.

Also, have you ever heard of anyone worth his mettle (i.e.
dumb enough) to get an EA without having worked in the
field?

Cheer$,
Harlan Lunsford, EA in LA
EA # 16xxx

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Dave Woods, EA wrote:

- quote -

....Then you also add the issue of how to rate that
experience - i.e. what qualifies and what doesn't.
There's a whole bunch of additional issues there.

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Dave Woods, EA wrote:

- quote -

My first comment would be that, given the current political
climate on regulation in general, I doubt that the proposal
would stick--Congress certainly wouldn't pass it, and I
doubt the IRS could make it stick if they tried to do it
administratively.

Second, you would expect that it would decrease the number
of new EAs out there, since at least some individuals would
decide against going for the license with the experience
requirement. Note that, generally, such requirements have
had specific supervision issues--so, for instance, you would
have to work under the supervision of another EA. As well,
you would have to have some method of documenting that
experience.

Third, you'd need to make a compelling case that currently
inexperienced EAs are causing damage to third parties
sufficient to warrant imposing an experience
requirement--and that the experience requirement you suggest
would solve the problem.

The real issue is that it may be viewed primarily as a means
to protect current EAs from competition, since I doubt we'd
ask anyone already with an EA license to prove they have had
the qualifying experience. As well, I would expect that
some would charge that CPAs (and heck, maybe even attorneys)
were really "behind" this since, again the argument would
go, it would serve to protect their interests as well. Then
the argument would be that such a requirement, rather than
being a public good, really would harm the public by denying
them affordable EA representation.

---
Ed Zollars, CPA
Phoenix, Arizona

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Dave Woods, EA wrote:

- quote -

Is there an experience requirement to become a CPA in all
jurisdictions now? I know Oklahoma hasn't had one in the
past, but I'm not sure what the situation is now that
they've adopted some version of the UAA.

When I took the SEE, I had a year of experience, and had
never done a C-corp return. I did best on the sections I'd
actually had experience with, even though many questions
addressed issues that never come up in our practice (or come
up so rarely that looking up the answer is more practical).
Most of the people sitting for the exam had much more
experience than I.

I don't think that an experience requirement would
significantly impact the number or experience level of SEE
applicants. And I think there are relatively few people who
go out on their own having taken a test but never done a tax
return. I'm not opposed to an experience requirement, but I
don't think it would improve preparer quality, either.

Phoebe

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

EA Dave Woods <d.woods[at]verizon.net> wrote:

- quote -

Hmmm... Let me ask a parallel question: Does anyone know of
a case out there where someone successfully passed the EA
exam WITHOUT having ever worked in the field? It is
certainly ~possible~, but I'd bet it is sufficiently rare
that a "de facto" experience requirement is sort of "built
in" to the process.

But, back to your question, I think I'd vote "no." My theory
is that the world would be better served if MORE tax
preparers were "licensed" in some fashion. Making the EA
designation MORE difficult to attain would be inconsistent
with that objective.

I passed the EA exam about 5 years ago. I guess my "take" is
that the exam itself is sufficiently difficult to assure an
appropriate "right of passage." I would not favor either
increasing or decreasing the current requirements. (I would,
however, favor changing the name. <g> )

MTW

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Currently, only the EA designation out of all the myriad
titles and designation in the finance and accounting world
(to my knowledge) doesn't require a minimum experience
requirement to become an EA (not including those who worked
for the IRS). All you need to do is pass the exam and
background check and you're an EA.

I was wondering what others thought about the merits of
adding a two year experience requirement in tax practice to
the EA requirements.

--
David M. Woods, EA
Boston, MA 02109

Postings here are general information only and not to be
relied upon as advice.

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->