MTW wrote:

- quote -

Here are a couple of links (with no sponsor endorsement from me)
that shed light on the current situation:

http://www.pescpe.com/Statelicenseinfo/NASBA.html

http://www.pescpe.com/Statelicensein...intropage.html

As for myself, I have decided to exercise PROFESSIONAL
JUDGMENT in the selection of appropriate courses, while duly
noting the confusion that currently prevails among sponsors
as to the calculation of credit hours. If the Washington
State Board doesn't like my choices, then I eagerly look
forward to addressing them in person on this topic !!!

MTW

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

Carl Heintz wrote:

- quote -

NASBA is the National Association of State Boards of Accountancy.

MTW

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

Harlan Lunsford wrote:

- quote -

One example would be Gear-up Tax Seminars (a major purveyor
out west). They claim that their self-study 1040 course,
consisting of the same manual used in their live
presentations, and a complete audio tape of an actual live
presentation, meets the "interactive" (as well as the QAS)
requirement. Note that there is no computer software or
online activities involved.

On the other hand is the National Association of Tax
Professionals "NATP". They also offer a self-study course
consisting of the same manual used in their live
presentations and, optionally, a complete audio tape of an
actual live presentation. They claim that their course
qualifies EAs for credit, but they basically take no
position as to whether it is qualified for CPAs (ie: "All
[non-EAs] should check with their state for CPE approval").
They have told me in a private email that they question
whether their course meets current NASBA standards, and that
due to "development constraints" (whatever that means) they
not yet submitted it for approval.

It would "tax credibility" to think that BOTH of these
apparently contradictory positions could be simultaneously
correct with respect to course formats that are seemingly
identical.

MTW

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

Paul wrote:

- quote -

Dude, you should have read s-l-o-w-e-r..... because I think
there is a "one hour minimum" requirement for any CPE
program. <g
- quote -

Totally! According to the people at my state board, if it
isn't computerized, it isn't interactive. So the reverse
must be true, right? <g?

MTW

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

"MTW" <mtwingcpa[at]yahoo.com> wrote:

- quote -

snip...snip

- quote -

snip... snip

- quote -

I think you are right on in seeing this as another
anti-competitive attempt by the AICPA. Those guys have done
more to destroy the legitimate practice of accountancy than
all the Enron's and Arthur Andersons of the world. What I
want to know is who exactly is the NASBA, who gave them all
this power, and why are the State Boards all following their
"leadership". It sounds like an incredible racket to me.

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

MTW wrote:

- quote -

Mike, I hope you don't mind if I snipped a bunch for ease of
response. But youpicked up on something I was trying to say
above, at least in re to CPA's.

- quote -

One question now. Just who conducts said interactive
courses? third parties such as publishing houses?
software developers? Or, as I suspect, CPA association
related?

And of course who gets the money?

(Old advice: "follow the money."

ChEAr$,
Harlan Lunsford

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

"MTW" <mtwingcpa[at]yahoo.com> wrote
- quote -

of a credit hour, or 1/20th of a credit hour?

Oh yeah, and since I responded, is it "interactive" credit?

--
Paul A. Thomas, CPA
taxman at negia.net

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

What follows is an editorial and/or "rant" on the current status
of self-study CPE credits. My focus is SOLELY on credits for CPAs
and, therefore, this material may be of no applicability to EAs
or other tax professionals.

For many, many years, CPAs have generally been entitled to claim
CPE credit for self-study courses. The general rule for computing
such credits was that you may claim 1 hour of credit for every 2
hours of study time (the so-called "100-minute hour" rule) based
on "field tests" conducted by the sponsor. Programs qualifying
under this rule, such as "read the book, take the test" courses,
have generally been labeled as "NON-interactive." Naturally, the
final authority as to the acceptability of such credits rests
with your state board. My understanding it that ~most~ (but NOT
all) boards will allow credit under the non-interactive
100-minute hour rule.

Then, a bit more recently, sponsors began developing
online/computer-generated courses. Because these were more
"interactive" in nature (you are asked questions as you go, and
routed back through relevant study material if you get the
answers wrong), these courses were allowed to offer credit on an
hour-for-hour basis under the "50-minute hour" rule that applies
to CPE generally. These courses are labeled as "interactive."

Then, a couple years ago, apparently NASBA and/or the AICPA
decided that ALL self-study courses should become "interactive."
I believe their "edict" on this point was to take effect on
January 1, 2004. However, because of confusion on the part of
program sponsors, it has been delayed until 2005 (or at least
this is my understanding, and if I were a betting man, I would
wager that said deadline will be extended again).

Now, it's easy to understand how a computer-generated course can
be made "interactive." It is a bit less easy to visualize such
structure for a "read the book, take the test" course, or even
for an audio tape course (apparently, merely ~listening~ to the
audio tape is not considered to be "interactive" - although
sleeping through a live presentation apparently is). But, I
believe program sponsors are of the opinion that they can meet
the interactive requirement for "read the book" courses IF they
include a "sample test" with COMPLETE explanations as to why
answers are right or wrong. Example: "Answer A is incorrect
because..., Answer B is correct because..." What I am not clear
on is whether you must provide any proof that you have ~actually
taken~ the sample test. In any event, you still must take and
pass the FINAL test.

Anyway, here is the current state of affairs as I see it: During
this transition period, there seems to be much confusion as to
how program sponsors have computed their credits for self-study
courses. We now see that many courses are labeled as
"interactive" or "NON-interactive." And/or many offer X number of
50-minute credits or Y number of 100-minute credits. And/or many
refer to NASBA "Registry" hours and/or NASBA "QAS" hours. (Don't
ask me to explain the difference between these two different
NASBA standards - sometimes the Registry and QAS hours are the
same, sometimes different, go figure...) I have contacted all of
the program sponsors that I regularly use and am somewhat
dismayed to find that there appears to be a lack of consensus as
to just ~what~ the rules are at the moment. Specifically, there
seems to be a wide range of opinion on the definition of
"interactive" versus "NON-interactive."

So, if you (like me) are a devotee of self-study CPE, I would
strongly suggest that you do the following: First, ascertain the
requirements of your state board. If they don't (or no longer)
accept non-interactive 100-minute credits, you will probably find
that MANY current self-study courses will no longer meet your
requirements. Second, contact your course providers to ascertain
just ~how~ they have computed their credits. I have found that
much advertising material on this point is incomplete or just
down right misleading. If you can't get a straight answer, then
the safest bet would be cut the recommended credits IN HALF
(which, by extension, DOUBLES your CPE cost!).

Lastly, am I the only person on this earth who perceives this
kind of thing to be another anti-competitive attempt by the AICPA
(and state societies) to put THIRD PARTY program sponsors out of
business???

P.S. Can I claim credit for "publishing" this article? <smirk
MTW

=========================
Moderator: Not this year
=========================

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