[payfields]

I am not trying to offend anyone, as i know there are a lot of people who have taken parts of the exam multiple times…

But does anyone thing there should be some kind of limit to the amount of times you can take each section of the exam?

I recently heard about an ex employee who took over 40 exams, then finally passed all 4, but not within the 18 month period, actually had one exam expire by two months, then another by 3 days… yet wrote a long complaint letter and asked for a reprieve from the rules and was granted a license.

I was so annoyed to hear not only did they take 40 exams, but they didnt even complete them within the time period, but the BOA still gave them a license!

Unfair to the people who did complete it within 18 months. It then also make me thing of the max number of times for failing a section.

Thoughts?

[Biff-1955-Tannen]

“I guess the only people who really care are the ones who think the CPA is their biggest accomplishment and they dont want other students to join the club.”

I don't think that its they don't want other people to join the club. It's more of they want being a CPA to actually mean something. If everybody and their brother can be a CPA by taking the exam 40+times, it kind of diminishes the status of being a CPA.

AUD 93 Jan 16
BEC 83 Feb 16
FAR 83 Apr 16
REG 84 May 16

99% Ninja MCQ only

[Skynet]

You guys do know that there are over several hundred million people in America and CPA's only comprises a very small fraction which makes still a very exclusive club.

[Spartans92]

@Biff, I see your point. But does it prove that person is incompetent? He/she may be “lucky” to pass after so many attempts but by passing the exam alone means they are knowledgeable regarding the standards and concepts. Personally, I have not heard of a CPA took it that many times. That is a very extreme case scenario? Or No? At the end I would only care about the result of their work and not how many tries they took the exam. Some are just more book smart.

BEC- PASS

[Biff-1955-Tannen]

@Spartans92 honestly in my opinion that person is incompetent. I'm not saying that people who have failed each section like 4 or 5 times are incompetent or don't deserve to be CPAs. I realize people are going to fail these exams. Hell, I'll probably end up failing FAR. I'm talking about the extreme times of 40+ times. In my opinion if somebody fails that many times, I would bet that it's a good reflection of their work they do. Is there a chance that they are stellar at work? Yea. But seriously. You know that person is the idiot at work that's always messing stuff up.

AUD 93 Jan 16
BEC 83 Feb 16
FAR 83 Apr 16
REG 84 May 16

99% Ninja MCQ only

[Skynet]

You also have to look at it this way.

The CPA exams touches on every aspect of accounting as well as other Business Subjects. Not everyone will be an expert on everything because in reality Accountants often specialize in certain areas and have zero to limited knowledge in other areas. So studying for those subjects will be uncharted territory to them so making it study from them difficult and resulting in multiple exam failures.

[Martin]

Biff-1955-Tannen, I dont think anyone would care to take the exam 40 times, it wouldn't be worth it (too many years and money), so if you did it in 10 months and someone else did it in 3 years, the difference is not huge, so he should deserve to be a CPA.

Through God all things can happen!

“You never fail until you stop trying.”
― Albert Einstein
When I was young, I used to admire intelligent people;as I grow older, I admire kind people.
“Just keep swimming, just keep swimming.”

FAR= 72-84
Audit= 73-82
BEC= 74-75
Reg=77

[Spartans92]

@BIff, I totally understand 40+ time is too extreme.I don't think anyone in their right mind may even continue after failing so many times? Personally, I wouldn't. But that does not mean they should not be licensed. I also do not think they would be incompetent but may take longer to understand the material. Even people with years of experience may not learn as fast as others.

BEC- PASS

[Skynet]

Ok, I admit that i will hire only according to grades 😀

I give more considerations to grades C (cups) and D (cups) then to A (cups) and B (cups).

[golfball7773]

@skynet – isn't that illegal? 🙂

FAR: 63, 55, 62
REG: 65, 77*
AUD: Fail, 64, 71
BEC: 72, 74, 81

*expired

[jlee1086]

Skynet, you hit the nail on the head with why passing rates are low. Everyone sees something on the exam that they never use on the job. Except for the parts that fit with audit, I have no idea how me knowing IT is supposed to protect the public.

FAR 57 (11/2014), 64 (1/2015), 79 (7/2015)
AUD 68 (2/2015), 79 (11/2015)
REG 79 (1/2016)
BEC 81 (4/2016)

[the LAST Coffee]

jlee1086 – Knowing IT is important in a world that's relying on IT all the time.

A complete knowledge of IT isn't needed I'd say but to not know anything about it? Bad!

Helps with reasoning skills and critical thinking too when you're working on an audit team and doing some planning.

FAR 84 (AUG '15)
BEC 83 (AUG '15)
AUD 79 (OCT '15)
REG 71, 78! (NOV '15, FEB '16)

[golfball7773]

IT helps me when your IT team of 2 are both out of the office and your server goes down before opening the credit union….

FAR: 63, 55, 62
REG: 65, 77*
AUD: Fail, 64, 71
BEC: 72, 74, 81

*expired

[Missy]

And the CPA exam is an entirely different animal than the BAR or MCAT, or any other professional exam. All the other exams require much more education as a prereq (and higher level, at that), none of them accommodate a BS plus some basket weaving classes to meet the requirements to take the exam. Even the PHR exam requires 2+ years professional experience unless you have a Masters. What other professional exam allows you to sit, in some cases, before you get your Bachelors? The CPA is hard, don't get me wrong but comparatively the threshold to take it is night and day. Wanna see the pass rates go up, number of candidates cut in half? Require an MS in accounting or tax plus 2 years experience before you can take it. Problem solved but nobody is jonesing for more years of college here………..so nobody will agree LOL. Heck require a BS in accounting, most people are able to phone in enough accounting credits to be eligible to sit, don't have to be a rocket scientist to acquire 30 accounting credits but you're still “qualified” if you can study enough to pass all 4 exams? Not to me.

Plus said graduate level classes are taught toward the exam, where few accounting classes really gear toward the exam. So am I personally more forgiving of a struggle to pass the CPA than the MCAT, you betcha. The CPA is absolutely a function of short term memory, very few if any people retain enough that successfully passing a section once means they could or would again.

I agree it may be time to reevaluate the barriers of entry to the profession, personally I'd rather see the experience requirement and/or the education requirement come under more scrutiny. Even on this message board I see so many people who passed the exams but have exceptionally elementary questions about their real job, so the ability to pass this exam does not imply competence at all. Its just one barrier of entry.

Licensed Massachusetts Non Reporting CPA since 2012
Finance/Admin/HR Manager

[D]

“Even on this message board I see so many people who passed the exams but have exceptionally elementary questions about their real job, so the ability to pass this exam does not imply competence at all. Its just one barrier of entry.”

Agree 100%!!!

For those who have passed all 4 parts straight out of college and/or with little professional experience, kudos. But I'll be dam*ed if someone is going to imply that just because someone has a CPA and I do not, that it makes them a better employee or candidate for a job for that matter.

I get that there are jobs with minimum requirement as a CPA, and I know how prestige the certification is and what type opportunity it will give me vs not having it.. that's why I'm on this site and sitting for it!

However I've been in industry accounting and auditing a long time- worked with colleagues who have their CPAs and many who don't. In MANY cases the most intelligent, professional and trusted individuals who lead our company and have taken a large role in leading our accounting organization do not have a CPA. Our company encourages and supports it- but does not penalize or require it. Likewise I work closely with our Big 4 audit firm and its staff – many of them have passed their CPA exam yet cannot perform miniscule tasks on a daily basis.

TL:DR version: I don't think someone merely having a CPA makes them more capable or competent than someone who does not. Also, I don't agree there should be a cap on the number of fails, and I also don't think the squeaky wheels should get preferential treatment.
There are guidelines for a reason, and they need to be followed.

----------
AUD - 74, 77! (1/2016)
BEC - 80! (5/2016)
REG - tbd (8/2016)
FAR - tbd

Study materials: NINJA MCQ/Audio/Notes

"I can do ALL things through Christ who strengthens me!"
----------

[Ninja Juice]

Do you guys think NASBA takes this into effect in grading?

[Author]

Replies