[Anonymous]

A board member on my state’s board told me that any time someone has asked for an extension they have given the candidate an extra 6 months without letting any exam scores lapse. I had never heard of this before and figured it would help people out. He said the board gets fewer than 10 requests for this a year. I just wanted to share since I have never heard anyone on these boards talk about it.

[Keely]

I agree with Mini simply for the fact that if you extend the 18 month rule for one person, why not another? Why not everyone? Why even have the rule in the first place? There are extenuating circumstances, but who's to say whose is extenuating and whose isn't? I don't think it makes someone a better CPA if they can pass within 18 months, but if you're going to have the rule, I think it should be all or nothing because it's unfair to say yes to one and no to another. JMHO.

BEC: (4/2012) 88
AUD: (5/2012) 91
REG: (8/2012) 82
FAR: (1/2013) 78 🙂

VA CPA #42010

[jenuno01]

Hmm, this is kind of a tough one. I can see both arguments; however, going through all the CPA exams, I honestly think that if I would've lost a section due to the 18-month rule (for whatever reason), I could have just studied a few days and I would've passed again. Unless you guessed on 90% of an exam and passed like Goodluck (lol), a candidate should be expected to pass a CPA exam again. Plus, it's not like ALL your sections expire in 18 months, worse case you lose a section or two.

Class of 2012

[jenuno01]

Plus, if any of the aforementioned situations would've happened to me during this process, the LAST thing on my mind would be worrying about a CPA exam expiring. Family and my life comes first. The CPA exam isn't going anywhere. It's not the end all be all.

Class of 2012

[Anonymous]

https://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/12359863.jpg

[Mrs 300]

Isn't it more important for the candidate to have knowledge sufficient to protect the public versus whether they can pass all 4 parts of a test within 18 months? Why is it SO important for the candidate to pass in 18 months? I really want to know the answer to that question. Other than the obvious, “It's the rule.” There are people who passed 30 years ago and have the same license as the people who pass it now.

To me, the 18 month window is stupid and seems like just another way for the AICPA to make money. I guess there has to be some sort of cap, but 18 months is not really that long of a time-frame. If there are any hiccups in your plan, you're screwed. I don't think that it should be so black and white that there is NEVER an exception made to this rule.

@jblevy10, I'm very sorry to hear about your circumstances, whatever they may be! I hope everything works out for you in your personal life and your CPA life. Good luck to you!

REG - 80 (Becker only)
BEC - 76 (Becker only)
AUD - 71, 76 (Becker only)
FAR - 65, 74, 81! (Becker, Wiley Test Bank, Ninja notes & Audio)

CPA Class of 2012 🙂

[Minimorty]

“If there are any hiccups in your plan, you are screwed.”

I totally disagree. You can take a test every single quarter, I mean c'mon. You have six chances in an 18 month window to pass the test. People pass all four exams in the same window all the time. The test is not THAT difficult. It is hard, yes, but some people make this seem like it is impossible. On another note, any time a designation is watered down with potentially undeserving candidates, it reduces the value and prestige for all of the existing designees.

[Anonymous]

The clock starts after you passed the first exam so you have 18 months to pass 3 exams. 6 attempts per part (7 if you count the window you passed the first exam in). I don't think that's unreasonable.

The problem with granting “exceptions” is once you involve human judgment in the decision it by default becomes a flawed process. Why can't you resit for the exam after your issue is resolved? It's not an impossible test if you put the hours into studying.

Sorry to sound heartless but EVERYONE has personal problems. That's life, you play the hand you're dealt. This societal attitude of, “I need special treatment because of…..” is the reason this country is falling apart.

[Sandra]

The 18 month window doesn't keep idiots from becoming CPAs. Mini, you and I both could probably name 10 people from this very forum that shouldn't be CPAs that are. Personally it would probably take me less than a minute.

The extension for the 18 month rule is rare and all the rules I've seen have stated that proof has to be included in the request. You don't think a death certificate of a close relative is enough to get an extension? People dont get extensions for being morons that can't pass the test. I don't think it's the (very rare) candidate that gets an extension that is diluting the quality of the CPA pool.

I don't disagree that we need to start thinking about how we are going to keep CPA numbers down, but someone who just had a kid/parent spouse die probably doesn't need to start over.

[Anonymous]

I am so sick of this crap! I think I'm gonna stay away for a while. This is supposed to be a place for people who are struggling, to get support, not to be told they are “watering down” the prestige of the license. That is an elitist, condescending attitude. What scares me the most about this whole conversation is the lack of humanity and common decency. Most of you are very, very young. You've never lost anything. You've never struggled. You sound like spoiled brats. Grow up! This is life. It ain't fair. If you are so scared that someone else is going to get an advantage then you must be seriously insecure about your own abilities. This is childish and foolish. I'm done!

[Anonymous]

I say we just all stop posting here and turn this into minimorty's pontification blog where he/she does nothing but berate his/her nemesis of the day, be it a person or a topic.

All I can say is that mini must be a very shallow, lonely human being to feel the need to come here and constantly antagonize and cause trouble. This site is about people posting their thoughts, questions and struggles. Mini's constant badgering of people for their thoughts it tiresome.

I'm with Kricket, it's time to give it up and try other sites. Enough is enough….even a broken watch is correct two times a day and whatever redeeming purpose Jeff finds by letting Mini stay around isn't worth the remainder of the trouble he causes.

[mla1169]

I can definately see the point of an extension for an extremely extenuating circumstance (like the people of Egypt, or a child or a spouse with a terminal illness) however I agree with Jenuno that those being the case, an extension on an exam is likely to be the LAST concern of a candidate.

However you know there are people with very loose definition of what an extenuating circumstance is. As much as we all adore our grandparents, the death of a grandparent is hardly extenuating.

FAR- 77
AUD -49, 71, 84
REG -56,75!
BEC -75

Massachusetts CPA (non reporting) since 3/12.

[Anonymous]

That's exactly my point.

One candidate might be devistated if his pet dog of 15 years Baxter got run over and another might not lose a wink of sleep if his estranged father whom he hasn't seen since he was 2 passed away. It shouldn't be up to some guy neither of them have ever met to make the determination of who deserves an exception. And any type of blanket rule (like in this example) would sometimes punish the legitimately grieving party while letting the other slide.

I could give two you know whats about “the number of CPAs” out there.

All I care about is fairness and that means everyone plays by the same rules.

[ihatestudying]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQ0zekNweMg

AUD - 2/27/12 - 76
REG - 5/31/12 - 78
BEC - 8/31/12 - 77
FAR - 12/6/12 - 76

[Minimorty]

@Kricket – Of all of my comments on this site, these are the ones that have crossed a line? I am just stating a straight-forward opinion, it is not meant to be offensive to anyone in particular. You state, “This is life. It aint fair”, but then you are advocating for a process that attempts to make life fair. Let me tell you briefly about an event that changed my life. In 2005, I was a senior in college about half way through my final quarter. Out of nowhere, I get a call from a policeman. My father has been in a car accident and I should come to the hospital. Well, it turns out that my father was in a coma for six weeks, suffered a traumatic brain injury that left him permanently disabled and in the need of 24 hour care for the rest of his life, and at 21 years old, left me in charge of all of the medical, financial, and life decisions for both of us going forward. Did my college give me an “extension” for this extenuating circumstance? No. I failed two classes, got an incomplete on another, and had to postpone my college graduation to the fall quarter so that I could make sure my father got the care he needed. So what did I do? I got back up on my horse and finished my college classes when I was at the point where I could mentally do so. The same should apply to the CPA exam. My point is, again, that everyone has something in their life that tests their resolve. The CPA exam is not the most important thing in the world by any means.

@sandra – I agree. My reason for not allowing extensions has much more to do with putting everyone on a level playing field than it does with making sure only quality candidates pass the exam. The need for the 18 month window at all is a whole separate discussion, one that I am happy to have, but not something I was focusing my attention on for the purpose of this thread. Again, it comes down to the fact that if one extension is granted the floodgates would open. It would be unfair for one person to get an extension when another is denied. I agree with the thought than anytime human judgement is involved you have a flawed process. Why not just simplify it and say no extensions.

[jaredo155]

I know this isn't really the center of the debate, but seeing the arguments posed by both sides. I agree that to show you have not only obtained, but also retained the accounting knowledge to be a good accountant you should be able to pass the sections within 18 months. However in certain circumstances it would be absurd that someone would lose credit for passed sections, and just be out the time and money they invested. I think a good solution would be if you pass the exam, but aren't able to complete all sections in the 18 months due to circumstances beyond your control, they should allow you to retake the passed section as many times as necessary for free. This would be a nice compromise because then you still have to pass all four parts within the time window to show you know all the material at that given time, but the person who was in a bad situation wouldn't be financially punished for that at least. Also what is all this nonsense about fairness, do you think it is fair that some people take the test straight out of college without a job, spouse, or kids while others take it while trying to juggle all three? Do you think it is fair that some people happen to get a test that hits on all the parts they happened to be strong on, while others get tests that happen to hit all their weak points? Life isn't fair, but if it doesn't hurt you to do so then you should always help someone else out when you have the chance. Everything isn't a competition, and we can get a lot further in life raising people up with us rather than defeating them.

AUD - 2/2013 - Passed!
BEC - 5/2013 - Passed!
FAR - 8/2013 - Passed!
REG - 11/2013 - Passed!
"Do or do not, there is no try." - Yoda

[Author]

Replies