The Task Force makes it clear that the benefits, if any, will accrue to only a few and has not shown the necessity for the change. With all the money, time, and effort that is being spent on improving the somewhat tarnished image of the CPA, non-CPA ownership would be counterproductive. The public is likely to perceive the non-CPA ownership of professionals from other disciplines as strictly profit motivated to increase market share. We would appear to be more interested in increasing firm size as opposed to maintaining our position as a learned profession. Non-CPA ownership without effective control and self regulation could lead to regulation by a government agency.
Independence is the cornerstone of the accounting profession.
A very significant and potentially damaging outcome of non-CPA ownership would be the invitation it implicitly gives to other businesses to enter markets and activities that are now typically performed by CPA firms. This assumption could lead clients and others to place greater weight on the statements of the non-CPA owner than may be deserved. They would expect the same thoughtful and deliberative responses the CPA normally gives based upon the experience and training that comes with maintaining the CPA license. Firms will also want to be careful in the states where a CPA, or a firm of CPAs, enjoy special privileges or other special forms of confidentiality. Those privileges might be affected by non-CPA ownership.