as is determined by the Commissioners, in their discretion, as being reasonably necessary to defray the approximate cost of administering each such Act." SEC. 203. Section 15 of the District of Columbia Practical Nurses' Licensin Act approved September 6, 1960 (74 Stat. 806; § 2-434, D.C. Code), is amende by striking "subsection (f) of section 7 of the Act approved April 1, 1942, a added by the Act approved August 31, 1954 (68 Stat. 1048)", and inserting i lieu thereof "section 11-742, D.C. Code". SEC. 204. Section 14 of the Physical Therapists Practice Act approved Septem ber 22, 1961 (75 Stat. 582; § 2-463, D.C. Code), is amended by striking "sub section (f) of section 7 of the Act approved April 1, 1942, as added by the A approved August 31, 1954 (68 Stat. 1049)", and inserting in lieu thereof "sectio 11-742, D.C. Code". SEC. 205. Any judicial or administrative proceeding initiated prior to th effective date of this Act under any Act or part of Act specified in section 104‹ the District of Columbia Licensing Procedures Act, or under regulations mac pursuant to any of the said Acts or part of Act, shall proceed to its conclusic without regard to the provisions of this Act or of any regulations made pursuar to the authority contained in this Act. SEC. 206. This Act shall become effective on the first day of the first mont which begins at least 30 days after its approval. Mr. ABERNETHY. You may proceed, sir. STATEMENT OF THOMAS F. MOYER, ASSISTANT CORPORATIO COUNSEL, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA; ACCOMPANIED E LAWRENCE E. DUVALL, DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF OCCU PATIONS AND PROFESSIONS, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA GO ERNMENT Mr. MOYER. I would like to identify myself. I am Thomas Moyer, Assistant Corporation Counsel. I am here to present t Commissioner's views on H.R. 7624. I am accompanied by M Lawrence E. Duvall, who is the Director of the District Departme of Occupations and Professions, which furnishes administrative ser ices to the various boards and commissions regulating the occupation and professions in the District, including the Accountancy Boar Mr. Chairman, I would like briefly to state what was in the Co missioner's report on October 8, 1965. They recognized the purpos of this bill and were in accord with the purposes, but they have f that the best way of accomplishing these purposes, and also to ta care of the problem of all these different acts relating to occupatio and professions in the District, is by general enabling legislati which would authorize the Commissioners from time to time, wh the need arises, to upgrade the educational requirements for any the occupations or professions or the requirements for revocation suspension of licenses or residency or any of these requirements whi are in the new CPA bill-that the Congress would authorize them do that from time to time. This would obviate the necessity of coming to Congress every ye or every few years with a request that any of these 20-some acts amended in some respect. Basically, the Commissioners are aski that this proposed legislation which has recently been sent to t Congress be considered, rather than an individual bill to take ca of one profession. Mr. ABERNETHY. Suppose the Congress did not see fit to gra that I am not assuming that it will do the Commissioners appro or disapprove of the legislation before us? Mr. MOYER. The Commissioners in their report state that they were in accord with the purposes of this bill. Mr. ABERNETHY. And they made no recommendations as to change? Mr. MOYER. That is correct. They feel this problem of the certified public accountants as well as all these other occupations Mr. ABERNETHY. Physicians, dentists, lawyers, engineers, merchants, optometrists, and so on? Mr. SICKLES. I do not think lawyers are included in that. Let's be careful about that. Mr. MOYER. They continue to be regulated by the courts. Mr. ABERNETHY. We lawyers do not like to be regulated, you know. We do the regulating. Mr. MOYER. The occupations and professions mentioned here, covered by 20-some statutes which are in title II of the District of Columbia Code, would be covered by this enabling legislation that would authorize the Commissioners from time to time, as the need arose, to keep pace with the development of the occupations and professions throughout the country and raise the educational standards. Mr. ABERNETHY. Of course, the members of the committee have not had an opportunity to review either the last letter of the Commissioners or the 13-page bill which accompanied the letter. I cannot imagine why this sort of recommendation from the Commissioners would require this much legislation, but I guess it does. Time does not permit us this morning to consider it. We shall look at it further, I am sure. Have you gentlemen who testified here this morning in support of the so-called CPA bill had an opportunity to examine this proposal? Mr. REGARDIE. Yes, sir. Mr. ABERNETHY. You did not mention it when you were testifying. Mr. GLICK. Mr. Chairman, we have not seen the Commissioners' last letter, and we do not know in what form their bill was finally submitted. We did have a chance to see a draft of the bill as the Commissioners submitted it to the Bureau of the Budget last year. Mr. ABERNETHY. Since this proposal involves physicians, dentists, hygienists, nurses, physical therapists, optometrists, and so on, all the way down through boxing contests, cosmetology, plumbers, gasfitters everybody but lawyers, I think we had better just suspend these hearings right now and give the public a little time to read and study and think. Soon we will call the committee back. We will see how much thunder comes in in the meantime. Mr. FRASER. May I comment on the general problem, Mr. Chairman? Suppose for the moment that the Congress did pass the new CPA bill and subsequently the Congress passed the bill you are seeking, there would be no problem, would there? That is, there are today statutes now governing the registration and the qualifications of certified public accountants. The Commissioners' new bill would supersede all that, along with the other professions. If we were to upgrade the CPA requirements, that still would not be inconsistent. Whenever this proposed new bill was passed, if it was, at that time the Commissioners would take over the responsibility. Mr. MOYER. That is right. Mr. FRASER. There is no inconsistency between the adoption of these two bills; only if yours should be enacted first, then the one I introduced becomes irrelevant. Mr. MOYER. Yes, that is right. Mr. FRASER. But your bill involves 20 different professions with a wide range of interests and problems. I am concerned, Mr. Chairman, about putting these in tandem here. They are really a wholly different subject. Mr. ABERNETHY. I entirely agree with you. Mr. FRASER. It would seem to me as long as they favor the principles of the bill, H.R. 7424, if we pass it and then next week we pass the Commissioners' bill, that is fine. That deals with a much broader grant of authority to the Commissioners. Mr. ABERNETHY. I think you make a fine point. I would like to say to the witness that if the Commissioners have any specific recommendations on H. R. 7624, such as amendments, we would like to have them in our hands within the next week. As I understand, they do not have any such amendments here now. I would assume that they might desire to recommend some. (Subsequently, the District of Columbia Commissioners submitted additional recommendations with regard to H.R. 7624 and H.R. 9815, which appear in the appendix hereof.) Mr. ABERNETHY. As Mr. Fraser has indicated, we might go ahead and report the pending bill before we get into the other one, because I think the Commissioners' latest bill would keep us here all the year. I may be wrong, but I think it would. Mr. SICKLES. One point for clarification. Would the authority granted under the Commissioners' bill give the Commissioners the right to abolish any of these boards, group them and regroup them, change completely all the regulations? Mr. MOYER. The Commissioners' bill would be supplemental to all the existing acts of Congress on these subjects and would give them authority to go forward and to upgrade the licensing requirements In no case could they lower the licensing requirements or make it easier to get licenses. Mr. SICKLES. Can they abolish the Board if they want? Mr. MOYER. The Commissioners can abolish the Board now, abolish them all. Mr. SICKLES. They can abolish the Accounting Board? Mr. MOYER. Yes, under the Reorganization Act of 1952 all these boards are made administrative agencies of the District. They get their functions through the Commissioners who temselves could exercise the functions of these boards or could redelegate them to somebody else. Mr. ABERNETHY. Actually the power, theoretically, is put in the Commissioners. Mr. MOYER. Yes, sir. Mr. ABERNETHY. They are authorized under these various acts to appoint boards, directors, and individuals to administer the act for and in behalf of the Commissioners? Mr. MOYER. Yes, sir. That is the way it has been done. Mr. ABERNETHY. Mr. Duvall, I know you are an expert in your field. We are not shutting you off but will hear from you later. Mr. DUVALL. Thank you. Mr. ABERNETHY. For the record, I wish to present a letter to Chairman McMillan and a favorable report of the Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission on the bill, H.R. 7624. Mr. Walter North, Assistant General Counsel of the Commission, has advised the committee that the Commission will stand on its written report and, having nothing further to add, does not desire to testify on this bill.' (The report referred to follows:) Re H.R. 7624, 89th Congress. Hon. JOHN L. MCMILLAN, SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Chairman, Committee on the District of Columbia, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in further reference to your request for this Commission's comments on H.R. 7624. Three copies of a memorandum of comment are transmitted herewith. The Bureau of the Budget has advised that from the standpoint of the administration's program it has no objection to the views expressed in the memorandum. Sincerely yours, MANUEL F. COHEN, Chairman. MEMORANDUM OF THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION ON H.R. 7624 H.R. 7624 would regulate the professional practice of certified public accountants in the District of Columbia and repeal the prior act, approved February 17, 1923 (42 Stat. 1261), on this subject. The Federal securities laws administered by the Securities and Exchange Commission and rules and regulations adopted thereunder require, with certain exceptions, that financial statements included in filings with the Commission under the several acts be certified by an independent public or certified accountant. For this reason the Commission is generally interested in proposed legislation which is designed to strengthen the standards for admission to the practice of public accounting. We note that the bill, the overall effect of which would be to modernize the accountancy law for the District of Columbia, would upgrade the standards of the profession through strengthening of the educational and experience requirements for prospective certified public accountants. Section 7 of the bill would provide, in general, that certain educational and experience requirements must be attained by those who desire to receive a certificate of certified public accountant. Section 7(a) would require effective upon upon enactment that all candidates for the issuance of a certificate of certified public accountant shall have completed certain educational requirements beyond the high school level coupled with a specified period of employment in the profession. Section 7(b) would provide for extended amounts of education in lieu of practice but in all combinations 1 year after enactment a longer period of practice than the present law requires. These provisions appear to recognize the increasing complexity of business affairs required to be examined by practicing public accountants, and their enactment should raise the standard of competence of persons permitted to enter the profession in the District of Columbia. Similar extension of the educational requirements has been enacted in many States in the last few years. Under section 7(c) (2) the Commissioners of the District of Columbia would be authorized, upon unanimous recommendation of the Board of Accountancy, to accept in place of any required year of certified public accountant employment provided for elsewhere in section 7 of the bill, 11⁄2 years of actual and continuous experience of any person "in reviewing financial statements and supporting material covering the financial condition and operations of private business entities to determine the reliability and fairness of the financial reporting and compliance with generally accepted accounting principles and applicable Government regulations for the protection of investors and consumers ***" Section 7(c) (2) would also provide that "Nothing in this subsection shall be interpreted as precluding consideration of Government experience for recognition under this subsection." The above-quoted portions of the bill would make it possible for accountants employed by this Commission who regularly review financial statements filed with the Commission to fulfill the experience requirements of the proposed District of Columbia accountancy law. This would be a long-needed improve ment in the law as it would recognize what we believe to be a wide variety of high quality experience obtained by accountants employed by this Commission. For the foregoing reasons the Commission supports H.R. 7624. Mr. ABERNETHY. Also, for the record I offer a number of letters addressed to Chairman McMillan in support of the proposed legislation. (The letters referred to follow :) THE CALIFORNIA SOCIETY OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS, Mr. JOHN L. MCMILLAN, Chairman, House Committee on the District of Columbia, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The certified public accountants in the District of Columbia have called our attention to H.R. 7624 that has been referred to your committee. As we understand it, this bill would raise the educational and experience requirements of applicants seeking to become CPA's in the District of Columbia. At the present time, the statute in effect may not even require an applicant to have a high school diploma. Most of the applicants for CPA certificates now have more education and experience than your law requires. In fact, most of the young men entering the profession are college graduates and many States now require an applicant to have a college degree or its equivalent before writing the CPA examination. The California Legislature amended the Accountancy Act last year so that candidates must now have a college degree or its equivalent. This has not proved to be any hardship to young men entering our profession and the new law seems to be operating very satisfactorily. We hope that the District of Columbia will join in raising the educational standards. If you would like any further information on this, please let us know. LORIN A. TORREY, President. DUNHAM, STEPHENSON & ASSOCIATES, Congressman JOHN L. McMILLAN, Chairman, House Committee on the District of Columbia, DEAR CHAIRMAN: We have been advised through the Certified Public Account ants of the District of Columbia that there has been referred to your Subcommitte No. 2 H.R. 7624, a bill relating to the regulation of the professional practice o accountancy in the District of Columbia. It is our understanding that the bi would raise the standards for education and experience of applicants for certifica tion as certified public accountants. We are also advised that the previous require ments fall considerably below the prescribed standards in a substantial majorit of the remaining States. We, in the Colorado Society of Certified Public Accountants, can testify that is very much in the public interest to raise the educational and experience standard and we heartily support the effort of the District of Columbia Institute of Certifie Public Accountants in improving the standards for professional practice. We hope that you will see fit to support this bill and to arrange for early hearing If we can be of any assistance by furnishing the experience of the State Colorado to your committee, we would be happy to do so. Yours very truly, HERBERT R. DUNHAM, President, Colorado Society of Certified Public Accountants. |