Merry Christmas to Peter Wilson. When it was suggested that Peter Wilson should be independent of the old board so that we can have a fresh start Peter responded with "That's your issue". Summary of the meeting here: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=594
A good summary of where we are up to by Joe Aston of the AFR, linked to from here: viewtopic.php?f=5&p=4137#p4137
If you are new to this website read the story so far: viewtopic.php?t=321#p1793
Check out some of the AFR articles, too many to list and check out some of the ABC reports: http://www.afr.com/business/accounting/ ... 215-h055ej http://www.afr.com/business/accounting/ ... 211-h02x1d http://www.abc.net.au/news/programs/the ... s,/8626662
Please join this website to participate in discussions. Also join our email list at http://eepurl.com/cWsgfb
Image

CPA Membership Fees

A weekly round up of the issues and progress
incitem3
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun May 21, 2017 3:39 pm

CPA Membership Fees

Post by incitem3 » Sat Nov 04, 2017 8:42 pm

I got the notice for the CPA accounting fees in the mail. I feel disappointed that the fees were not reduced for the coming year as so much waste and over compensation was exposed in the last six months. The review even said that the compensation levels were too high. I think it is tough to justify another year of fees that are a lot higher than the CA's. I think we need to do some kind of protest or at least let the new board know that we are not going to just let them keep on ripping off the membership. I would like to see a budget for the year to justify the fees.

User avatar
Brett Stevenson
Posts: 445
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2017 10:43 am

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Post by Brett Stevenson » Sun Nov 05, 2017 5:25 am

I think this shows that it is business as usual at CPA.
Even just a small reduction would have been an obvious and powerful statement by the new board that things are different at CPA.
But they do not even have the strength to do that.
They did not even give any explanation or reason given all that has gone on. You are absolutely right Incitem3. - even a very simple budget for the year ahead by way of explanation would have helped. But no, they did not even have the vision to do that.
It's the same old 'team' at CPA having the influence.

Here is my suggestion on what the board should have done at their first meeting to show things are different at CPA.
1. Reduce membership fees for the year ahead by 10%. In other words to say we understand what happened at CPA over the last 10 years and have read and understood the IRP Preliminary Report
2. Reduce directors fees and senior management Remuneration by 50% and reset all other management remunerations proportionally. For the same reason as 1.
3. To say we are seeking legal advice on the CEO's termination pay with a view to recouping it. For the same reason as 1, and also to show we have listened to the membership and want to show that things have really changed at CPA.
4. We have made a very brief submission to the IRP for their final report to look at how directors can be directly elected by the members.
5. We have decided to engage a forensic accountant on a six month contract to look closely at major expenditur areas at CPA including travel and contracts, and to report directly to the board.
6. We apologise to the members for the wasted marketing expenditure of the past and even though we individually are not responsible for that we will not do the same. To show that, we will not be offering a competition to members to the Australian Open nor will the directors and management be accessing free tickets, to try to show our genuine distancing from such waste.
7. We are looking closely at CPA Australia Advice to stop the bleeding.

But as we all have clearly seen already, it is business as usual with the new board. Such a pity, they really could have made a mark but chose 'more of the same'.

User avatar
Brett Stevenson
Posts: 445
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2017 10:43 am

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Post by Brett Stevenson » Sun Nov 05, 2017 5:35 am

I reckon one of the most powerful statements the new board could make to indicate to the watching world that things have really changed at CPA is to say very openly that no-one will use the 'Corporate Box' at the Australian Open.
Can you imagine the howls of protest from the 'your eminences' and others 'in the know'.
But but but but......
Yes, we know.
I reckon we should have a reward for who can identify the CPA heavies that use the freebies provided by our wasted sponsorship at the Australian Open. Let's trust that the new board at least can set a good example to the membership by refraining.
Mmmmm.
We shall see.
And it goes without saying that includes the Independent Review Panel and the Nous Group. You already are being well rewarded.

User avatar
nakedadmin
Site Admin
Posts: 653
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 4:38 pm
Location: Iceland

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Post by nakedadmin » Sun Nov 05, 2017 9:49 am

They should have reduced the fees by $100 so that they'd be the same as CA. The point being they recognise that there is not need for a NFP to have such a large surplus and indicate to members that they will be more responsible with the money.
The Naked Webmaster

JWheldon
Posts: 327
Joined: Wed May 24, 2017 6:43 pm

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Post by JWheldon » Sun Nov 05, 2017 10:46 pm

May l suggest that the membership fees were reduced for the $55 in Limitation of liability scheme fee and therefore the other amount of $100 is a token reduction to those in public practice. Does it mean that CPA has been increasing the public practice fees in prior years to cover the so called marketing budget? The basic fee of $720.00 is still the same.

Maybe members could email Adam Awty or Jeff Hughes and seek an answer as to why the level of reduction.

How much does CPA pay in FBT? Maybe the board can advise the members the amount paid each year from 2007 to current for the members analysis?

Even ASIC has seen the problems with the quality of audits being undertake by the big four. Maybe ASIC agrees with the members that Deloitte's audit of CPA Australia was poor?

User avatar
nakedadmin
Site Admin
Posts: 653
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 4:38 pm
Location: Iceland

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Post by nakedadmin » Mon Nov 06, 2017 8:56 am

Hi JWheldon,

There was no reduction other than the $55 PSC scheme for public practice holders. What I was saying is that they should have reduced it to the same level as CA, it's about $100 higher at the moment. There is no need to have massive surpluses in a NFP.
The Naked Webmaster

chuck_meister
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 8:58 am

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Post by chuck_meister » Mon Nov 06, 2017 3:42 pm

On the renewal form, there is the Australian Accounting Review offered as a $100 Optional extra for the electronic version.
Guess who is still the editor... Tryone Carlin. I guess he has plenty of time to devote to this now he no longer chairman or deputy vice chancellor. Whilst putting aside the issue of whether CPA (and ultimately members) should continue to fund this journal, shouldn't this be provided free?
Upon further investigation, when you log onto your online account, clicking library, online resources, pro-quest, search for the AAR under publications, then select the article, then the DOI link, then continue reading the full article, we already have access, though you really have to work for it.

User avatar
The Nude CPA
Posts: 254
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 4:21 pm

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Post by The Nude CPA » Tue Nov 07, 2017 5:09 pm

chuck_meister wrote:
Mon Nov 06, 2017 3:42 pm
On the renewal form, there is the Australian Accounting Review offered as a $100 Optional extra for the electronic version.

...shouldn't this be provided free?
You would think so. But all CPAA seems to do is stick its hand out for more money.

User avatar
The Nude CPA
Posts: 254
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 4:21 pm

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Post by The Nude CPA » Tue Nov 07, 2017 5:13 pm

chuck_meister wrote:
Mon Nov 06, 2017 3:42 pm
Guess who is still the editor... Tryone Carlin.
I wonder if he gets remunerated for this?

If so, isn't that the type of thing that should be included in the s202B disclosure?

User avatar
nakedadmin
Site Admin
Posts: 653
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 4:38 pm
Location: Iceland

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Post by nakedadmin » Tue Nov 07, 2017 8:36 pm

The Nude CPA wrote:
Tue Nov 07, 2017 5:13 pm
If so, isn't that the type of thing that should be included in the s202B disclosure?
That's a good point. I've noted the persistent referring the the related parties AASB standard every time they mention disclosure and I am guessing that it's significant. e.g. if a payment was made to an uncontrolled entity like Aus Accounting Review or Sydney Uni on the basis that it was funding a project or payment to a Director it's not included as it's not a controlled entity. I am not sure about this so if anyone can clarify if that's a possible reason that would be great.
The Naked Webmaster

chuck_meister
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 8:58 am

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Post by chuck_meister » Wed Nov 08, 2017 12:10 pm

I just got an email from CA:

If you apply to become a CA before 31 December 2017 the reduced fees* are:
2017/2018 Subscription fee: $309.09 (save 50%)
Application fee $355.00 (save $235.00)
*All prices are in AUD and GST exclusive

I also found out from Jen Dalitz that if you are a member of Spillers group that the CAANZ CEO, Simon Grant will
waive the application fee too.

Two scenarios:

1. They match the reduction.

Without significant action, this would not be enough in itself to convince members who had already made up their minds to reverse their decision.
This would equate to roughly $40M reduction in membership fees (based on 2016 annual report). Given that cash reserves were listed at $97M, there is scope to absorb this, though serious restructuring and prioritisation would be needed. The real question is what level of attrition will be faced?

2. The don't match. Loses will be limited to those who would chose to leave, business as usual.

At this stage I feel number 2 will be more likely as they will treat members who leave as a sunk cost. Also given the lack in inaction that we've currently seen of the new board this level of change is just too far beyond them.

go_davey
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 10:48 pm

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Post by go_davey » Wed Nov 08, 2017 1:44 pm

I read also that the application fees have been waived. I have now started the process, however, was sent the following replay by CAANZ when i asked for clarification:

The application fee has been reduced from $590 to $355.

User avatar
The Nude CPA
Posts: 254
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 4:21 pm

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Post by The Nude CPA » Wed Nov 08, 2017 5:18 pm

nakedadmin wrote:
Tue Nov 07, 2017 8:36 pm
The Nude CPA wrote:
Tue Nov 07, 2017 5:13 pm
If so, isn't that the type of thing that should be included in the s202B disclosure?
That's a good point. I've noted the persistent referring the the related parties AASB standard every time they mention disclosure and I am guessing that it's significant. e.g. if a payment was made to an uncontrolled entity like Aus Accounting Review or Sydney Uni on the basis that it was funding a project or payment to a Director it's not included as it's not a controlled entity. I am not sure about this so if anyone can clarify if that's a possible reason that would be great.
I was thinking more along the lines that he could be directly remunerated by CPAA, rather than through the UoS.

User avatar
nakedadmin
Site Admin
Posts: 653
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 4:38 pm
Location: Iceland

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Post by nakedadmin » Wed Nov 08, 2017 8:38 pm

I suspect that CPAA will be happy to lose the 4,000 odd members who are complaining.
The Naked Webmaster

theallseeingeye
Posts: 99
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2017 4:23 am

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Post by theallseeingeye » Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:14 am

nakedadmin wrote:
Wed Nov 08, 2017 8:38 pm
I suspect that CPAA will be happy to lose the 4,000 odd members who are complaining.
I fear you are correct. It would suit any Board looking for an easy life and no accountability to have the remaining 146000 sheeple as a membership cash-cow who are unlikely to be asking hard questions ( a comment that I recognise is unfair on members who are not signed up as Spillers but are otherwise engaged in trying to make CPAA a better place....they do exist!).

Which , in turn , might cause a casual observer to infer a rather unflattering view of the calibre of an average remaining member of CPAA. Which ultimately might affect hiring decisions.....Who in their right mind wants a CFO who won’t speak up when their business needs it?

User avatar
Brett Stevenson
Posts: 445
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2017 10:43 am

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Post by Brett Stevenson » Sat Nov 11, 2017 9:42 am

Which , in turn , might cause a casual observer to infer a rather unflattering view of the calibre of an average remaining member of CPAA. Which ultimately might affect hiring decisions.....Who in their right mind wants a CFO who won’t speak up when their business needs it?
And one would have to say that allseeingeye is the long term damage that has been done to CPA Australia and the designation.
This is why the new board need to be strong and brave and make some tough decisions to turn the ship around.
If the softly softly appraoach of the IRP is an indicator of the approach of the new board and leadership of CPA Australia then what sort of impression will we be giging of the calibre of CPA members.
If we show ourselves to be disinterested and apathetic members of our own organisation, what does that say of us and our designation.
Would you as an employer wish to have staff like that?
I think your last sentence allseeingeye is very profound
Who in their right mind wants a CFO who won’t speak up when their business needs it?

brooding
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2017 8:59 am

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Post by brooding » Tue Nov 14, 2017 12:50 pm

Ladies &Gents, I'm over it.

I wrote CPA Australia a strongly worded letter asking them to give me one good reason to stay, given how events have turned out. No answer.

Given the CAANZ offer, which I accepted, I am voting with my feet and not renewing my membership as of 1 Jan 18.
To note, the CAANZ membership was approved within 24 hours.

Hopefully our paths will cross again one day after CPA Australia reforms itself.

User avatar
nakedadmin
Site Admin
Posts: 653
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 4:38 pm
Location: Iceland

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Post by nakedadmin » Tue Nov 14, 2017 1:52 pm

Hi booding,

A perfectly valid decision. It's hard to see how the CPA offer is better than the CA offer at this stage (or ever really). If your talking about value for money CA is cheaper, and the joining fee waived for the spillers. But I am still hoping that there will be enough people staying members to force some changes. There are a lot of dual members. The profession as a whole including CAs will benefit from CPA Australia being fixed.
The Naked Webmaster

User avatar
Stomper
Posts: 203
Joined: Tue May 02, 2017 9:55 am
Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Post by Stomper » Fri Nov 17, 2017 3:55 pm

I've decided to take up the CAANZ offer.

But I'll renew with CPAA too for 12 months to keep my options open and continue to agitate for change.

User avatar
jendalitz
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2017 5:20 pm

Re: CPA Membership Fees

Post by jendalitz » Mon Dec 04, 2017 10:01 pm

go_davey wrote:
Wed Nov 08, 2017 1:44 pm
I read also that the application fees have been waived. I have now started the process, however, was sent the following replay by CAANZ when i asked for clarification:

The application fee has been reduced from $590 to $355.
go-davey if you have any problems accessing the $0 application fee just email me jen@jendalitz.com and I'll have it sorted for you. CAANZ are fielding a lot of applications, Spillers have our own account manager and I can make an intro for you (as long as you're on the Spillers list or willing to join it)

Post Reply