cpa feb2006 by 0QZF19


                             BOARD OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTANCY

DATE        : February 7, 2006

TIME         : 9:15 a.m.

PLACE        : 500 N. Calvert Street, 3rd Floor Conference Room, Baltimore,
                Maryland 21202

PRESENT      : Jacob J. Cohen
               Leslie A. Mostow
               Craig Bancroft
               Barbara R. Stewart
               Thomas S. Chambers
               Michele L. Pittman

ABSENT       : Arnold Williams

PRESENT      : Dennis L. Gring, Executive Director
               Matthew Lawrence, Counsel to the Board
               Ronette Jarvis, Assistant
               Thomas Hood, MACPA
               Carol Kirwan, MACPA
               Sandy Steinwedl, MSA

The meeting was called to order by the Chair at 9:15 a.m.
It was moved (I) by Dr. Stewart, seconded by Mr. Chambers and unanimously carried to approve
the minutes of the meeting held January 3, 2006 with modifications.
The following is the report of Chairman Cohen:

“Last month was a very busy month especially for me personally. As part of my responsibility as
Regional Director of NASBA, I was invited to attend the Virginia State Board of Accountancy
during their regular monthly meeting. I did spend a very pleasant day with the Board observing
their deliberations and listening to their views regarding the various initiatives undertaken by

I learned quite a lot about how our neighboring state regulates and serves it constituency. They
were gracious enough at the end of the meeting to share with me a copy of their Board manual
which I will circulate to you in the future along with some of their more effective procedures. My
next visit will probably be the D.C. Board of Accountancy and I will keep you informed once this
is done.

The NASBA Board meeting took place last month as well and I had the very difficult task of
traveling to Rancho Mirage, California. I did not know what awaited me since it was my first
board meeting after being elected. It was a very busy couple of days where I gained a lot of
February 7, 2006
Page 2


respect for those volunteers who take time from their jobs and families to advance the goal of
NASBA. By the way, NASBA’s goal is to make the state boards more effective.

The first day was the Regional Directors’ Meeting and the Agenda included a review of recent
important developments in the 54 jurisdictions, developing quarterly focus questions for the next
quarter, planning for the 2006 regional meetings, planning for new state board members day-
long orientation, as well as other agenda items.

The second day was a meeting of the entire Board and had a very busy Agenda that included
various reports by many board members on NASBA/AICPA summit issues:

                         NASBA three year plan;
                         Special examination task force;
                         Examination Committee;
                         Uniform Accountancy Committee;
                         Relations with member boards committee;
                         Compliance Assurance Committee;
                         Strategic initiatives, ethics code changes;
                         Regulatory Structure Committee and many other
                          agenda items.

If you are interested in material that I received, please let me know. I will e-mail you some
items that may be of interest to you within the next few weeks.

In the local scene, House Bill 103 was introduced in Annapolis by Delegates Krebs and Feldman
for our special funding. We will hear from Mr. Sliwka, our Acting Commissioner, or from Dennis
Gring later on about the specifics of the Bill.

In addition to that, I am very encouraged at the progress achieved by Tom Chambers and the
Peer Review Regulations Committee. We will also hear a short report from Tom later on.

I was requested by a couple of states to have a copy of our new board members orientation
material. I will have Dennis send it to them.

I received various communications from MACPA and MSA regarding the pending peer review
regulations, and I want to assure them that the Board and Tom’s Committee are taking their
views very seriously.

Dennis will report on changes in candidate fees for the Uniform CPA examination, however, it
seems that the dip in candidate registration for the exam is revering itself according to a letter I
received from the AICPA/Prometrics.

There are a number of NASBA representatives on AICPA committees which are open including
the Auditing Standard Board. If you are interested in serving on any Committee, please let me
February 7, 2006
Page 3

Uniform CPA Examination

         The AICPA and NASBA have released statistics regarding candidate performance on the
Uniform CPA Examination since the launch of the computer based administration of the exam in
April, 2004. I have compared the pass rates for Maryland exam candidates with the national
pass rates for each of the seven examination administration windows that have been completed.

                        2ND QTR    3RD QTR    4TH QTR    1ST QTR   2ND QTR    3RD QTR    4TH QTR
                          '04        '04        '04        '05       '05        '05        '05
   MD PASS RATE         35.67%     35.35%     33.58%     34.45%    35.70%     41.07%     39.43%
   NAT PASS RATE        46.87%     43.39%     39.15%     38.71%    43.72%     46.25%     41.71%

                        2ND QTR    3RD QTR    4TH QTR    1ST QTR    2ND QTR    3RD QTR    4TH QTR
                          '04        '04        '04        '05        '05        '05        '05
   MD PASS RATE         37.04%     43.28%     33.62%     36.00%     40.66%     44.36%     40.98%
   NAT PASS RATE        48.42%     42.99%     38.53%     39.62%     46.15%     44.92%     42.94%

                        2ND QTR    3RD QTR    4TH QTR    1ST QTR    2ND QTR    3RD QTR    4TH QTR
                          '04        '04        '04        '05        '05        '05        '05
   MD PASS RATE          37.14%     27.50%     35.83%    35.42%     38.04%     38.69%     38.27%
   NAT PASS RATE         44.12%     44.66%     44.76%    43.19%     42.70%     48.57%     41.82%

                        2ND QTR    3RD QTR    4TH QTR    1ST QTR    2ND QTR    3RD QTR    4TH QTR
                          '04        '04        '04        '05        '05        '05        '05
   MD PASS RATE          34.04%     34.74%     33.33%    43.08%     27.03%     45.45%     39.35%
   NAT PASS RATE         47.47%     43.74%     38.10%    36.44%     43.68%     48.05%     39.93%

                        2ND QTR    3RD QTR    4TH QTR    1ST QTR    2ND QTR    3RD QTR    4TH QTR
                          '04        '04        '04        '05        '05        '05        '05
   MD PASS RATE          35.42%     31.03%     32.03%    26.04%     37.98%     36.29%     39.43%
   NAT PASS RATE         47.47%     42.32%     35.06%    35.34%     42.26%     43.47%     41.71%

Maryland Board of Public Accountancy Fund (HB103)
Delegates Susan W. Krebs and Brian Feldman have introduced HB 103 which would grant special
fund status to the Board. A hearing is scheduled on this legislation on Thursday, February 9, at
1:00 in the House Economic Matters Committee. The legislation would grant the Board the
authority to establish fees for licenses and permits to approximate the direct and indirect cost for
the Board to fulfill is responsibilities under the Maryland Public Accountancy Act and Board
regulations. The Board would be able to establish and collect new fees beginning July 1, 2008.


       Peer Review – Board member Tom Chambers, Counsel Matt Lawrence, and I have
        received comments on the draft peer review regulations that were distributed at last
        month’s meeting. As a result of these comments, a new draft of the regulations is in the
        process of being drafted. As we work on this next draft, the Committee will consider the
        comments of Board Members, MACPA, and MSA in light of the requirements of the
        statute and practicalities of the conduct of peer reviews.
February 7, 2006
Page 4


       Exam Fees –NASBA has advised the Board that beginning August 15, 2006, the cost of
        each section of the exam will increase by an average of $23. A new fee schedule for the
        examination sections of the Uniform CPA Examination has been prepared for the Board

Jason Brown satisfied the 150 credit hour requirement with corrected transcripts and meets the
business ethics requirement after review of course syllabus. Still lacks three semester hours each
in oral and written communications. Upon a motion (II) by Dr. Stewart, seconded by Mr.
Bancroft, and unanimously carried, Mr. Brown’s appeal was denied.

Ms. Pittman reported that thirty-six (36) Reports of Practical Experience were reviewed: three (3)
were returned for further information.

Upon a motion (III) by Mr. Bancroft, seconded by Mr. Mostow, and unanimously carried, the
Experience Committee Report was approved.

Dr. Stewart, gave the following report: fourteen (14) reciprocal applications and one (1) transfer
of grades application were approved. The following applications were denied:

Reciprocal License Applications

Mingshi Lu – Did not meet Maryland’s education requirements when he obtained his initial
license in Virginia. Lacks 150 semester hours, three semester hours each in written and oral
Matthew D. McClure – Did not meet Maryland’s education requirements when he obtained his
initial license in Virginia. Lacks 150 semester hours, and three semester hours each in business
ethics and written communication.
Ashok K. Nayyark - Did not meet Maryland’s education requirements when he obtained his
initial license in Virginia. Lacks 150 semester hours, three semester hours each in U.S. federal
income tax, U.S. business law, business ethics, business finance, marketing, oral communication
and written communication. Also, possibly lacks some semester hours in financial accounting.

Upon a motion (IV) by Ms. Pittman, seconded by Mr. Mostow, and unanimously carried, the
Education Report was approved.

Mr. Chambers indicated that Task Force continues to review comments regarding the first draft of
the Peer Review Regulations and may have a new draft to report by the March meeting.

Mr. Mostow discussed the growing number of requirements for licensure an individual must meet
to obtain a license in Maryland. He volunteered to coordinate efforts to review all of the Board
licensing requirements to determine if they can be streamlined.
February 7, 2006
Page 5

The Board recessed its business meeting to conduct the administrative hearing in Board v. Eric
Roseman (CPA050015) at 10:20 AM



It was moved (V) Mr. Mostow, seconded by Ms. Pittman Chambers and unanimously carried to
go into Executive Session at 9:50 a.m. in the 3rd Floor Conference Room, 500 N. Calvert Street,
Baltimore, Maryland 21202. The purpose of this session was to consult with counsel. This
session is permitted to be closed pursuant to State Government Title Section 10-508(a), (7).
Upon completion of the session, the Board resumed its public meeting at 12:30 P. M.


Mr. Mostow presented the complaint committee report. During the period January 3, 2006 to
February 6, 2006, the Board received three (3) complaints. Ten (10) complaints were closed:
CPAS040026, CPAS050043, CPAS050045, CPAS050046, CPAS050047, CPAS050048, CPAS060026,
CPAS060028, CPAS060031, and CPAS060032. Two complaints were referred for Pre-charge
Review CPAS 060029 AND CPAS060030; One (1) complaint was referred for investigation –

Upon a motion (VI) by Mr. Bancroft, seconded by Dr. Stewart, and unanimously carried, the
Complaint Committee Report was approved.


Upon a motion (VII) by Mr. Mostow, seconded by Mr. Bancroft, and unanimously carried, the
Board denied the renewal application of a licensee which was reviewed in Executive Session on
the grounds specified under §2-315 (a)(1)(iii)(1) Business Occupations and Professions Article,
Annotated Code of Maryland.

Upon a motion (IX) by Mr. Williams, seconded by Mr. Mostow, and unanimously carried, the
Board approved the license renewal application of a licensee which was reviewed during
Executive Session.


There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 10:35 a.m.

______ With corrections

______ Without corrections

         ________________________________________                 ____________________
                           Chair                                         Date

To top