Attention E.A.s

[Uncle Sam]

Attention EAs

Apparently, you late joiners to this thread didn't read my prior post.

This issue has been hashed and rehashed numerous times by NSA and NAEA. The legal analysts concluded that there are legal obstacles to getting the name changed.

I assume, although I don't know for sure, that among them is the fact that the title came from U. S. Congress during the Civil War, and it would require an act of Congress to get it changed.

So - even though I fully and wholeheartedly agree with all the posts in favor of changing the title, it is not possible to change the term without an some dramatic (and probably costly) action - that I don't feel is cost effective.

[Black Bart]

To echo Snag's sentiment,

I also thought Roland Slugg said it best -- defining our problem (I'm an EA) more clearly than any other. He concluded we need a name change. I agree. Here's the gist of Roland's post from 4-11-08.

"As specialists, most EA's are very qualified..." (and so on and so forth) "...as qualified as many CPA's..." (etc., etc.). "Having said that, the problem with the EA title is public perception. It just isn't very well known by the public at large. Furthermore, I believe the name itself is weak. "Enrolled Agent" consists of two words, and both of them, IMO, conjure up negative images. "Enrolled" suggests someone who is on a list of some kind, or perhaps someone who's going to school, and "agent" sounds a bit like Internal Revenue Agent." I believe the EA 'industry' would be wise to change that name to something else. There is no need for any of the EAs who may read this to reply with crys of outraged indigantion. I personally have a lot of respect for the EAs I know or have met on this and similar forums."

So...comparing "Enrolled Agent" to "Certified Public Accountant," what's better about theirs? Well, as Roland says, "Enrolled" sounds as if we have signed up for a class, while their "Certified" clearly indicates one authorized by government. And "Agent" does indeed raise the question "Agent for who? IRS?" The last two words of the CPA title leaves no doubt for whom they work (the public) or what they do (accounting).

After getting my certificate, I ordered some stationery listing "EA" after my name (not spelling out "Enrolled Agent"). Knowing me personally and delivering it to a tax preparer's office, the printer still asked "What's an EA?" But even if I had ordered "Enrolled Agent" printed, he would still have been in the dark about it.

So...it's a matter of common sense and clarity. Our egos/pride/hurt feelings and feuds with CPAs are irrelevant. Question is, does the general public recognize our initials or our name? And the answer is a resounding "NO" (ask your next five clients -- four won't have a clue). In fact, ask yourself -- if you weren't in this business and someone told you "I'm an Enrolled Agent," would that mean anything to you? Compare this to "I'm a Certified Public Accountant"; which leaves no doubt whatsoever as to what he/she is and does.

As someone said earlier, you can explain: "I've worked hard, I passed a test, I did this, I did that...etc. etc." but, the thing is, a good title is supposed to do that for you -- there should be no need to explain.

What's a good title? I don't know; I haven't seen anything yet that appeals to me, although I'd like to hijack "Certified" from the CPAs (who says they own that word?).

[thomtax]

How much work have you put in with your state and national EA societies to help be part of the solution? Just because CPAs may have a better PR campaign from their societies isn't a reason to resent them.

Personally I don't worry if somebody wants to put me down. It says more about them than it does about me.

Since I guess you don't read the answers, this will be short and the last thought I post on it.

1. I don't know where you got it, I didn't say it, so please do not credit me with resenting CPAs. I was pointing out facts. CPAs have a system of PR that works and in the last email I was using it as a goal. What I resented was the ACTIONS of some who try to hurt my business by bad mouthing EAs.

2. Your other question probably is not even worthy of an answer, but I have been a director of the state group for the last two years and have volunteered to write a newsletter this year, plus talking with officials of an adjoining state organization trying to get ideas.

LT

[dodgedipduck]

I'm not knocking the CPA, far from it. They, mostly, have earned their designation. What I do have a problem with is that I know of many CPAs that put down the EAs as inferior.

The failure of the EA group to advertise to get their name in front of the public seems to me to be of of the big failings. How many times have you heard generic advertisements on radio extolling CPAs as being experts? Then how many times EAs? When driving through Dallas was the only time I heard a generic EA ad.
LT

How much work have you put in with your state and national EA societies to help be part of the solution? Just because CPAs may have a better PR campaign from their societies isn't a reason to resent them.

Personally I don't worry if somebody wants to put me down. It says more about them than it does about me.

[BOB W]

I am happy with the EA designation, but if it were to be changed I would have a couple of choices in mind.

Enrolled Taxpayer Representative> ETR
Enrolled Taxpayer Agent > ETA

The word "Taxpayer" becomes important in order to show who is being represented before the IRS.

[oceanlovin'ea]

wording is important

I think how we word things is important. After I became an enrolled agent and with my new clients, I tell them that "I am an enrolled agent which means that I am authorized to represent clients before the IRS in matters of representation and audits." I also tell them that as an enrolled agent I am required to have 72 hours of CPE credits during a 3 year period which means that I attend several seminars and must keep up on the latest tax situations. I also tell them that Enrolled agents are held to high standards of ethics and must be extra careful in the preparation of returns.They were usually impressed.

But we all know from experience that sometimes what we say and what people hear are not the same. One word can change the whole meaning of a sentence. So we have to make sure that we use the correct terminology when taking about being enrolled agents.

As far as changing what we are called, I will accept the designation that we are given. I really don't see NAEA supporting a name change when they are finally getting recognition. I have too much to do in my life right now to take on that kind of a project. So I will be content to be an EA.

Linda F

Linda F

[OtisMozzetti]

authorized to represent taxpayers with the IRS

My description of an EA, or other Circular 230 professional, would be a tax professional who is "authorized to represent taxpayers with the IRS". That doesn't give any impression that the EA works for the IRS, although we of course know that an EA has certain ethical responsibilities.

Also, of course, the taxpayer(s) must authorize the EA to represent them.

[thomtax]

Harlan - In Arkansas you would run afoul of the state board of accountancy. A few years ago they hired a company to clip ads of everyone who ran an ad during tax season and used the word accountant, accounting or any derivation. They then contacted some of the companies in our small town and made them change their name to omit this wording. The option was to also put into signage, letterhead, advertising, etc. a statement to the effect that they were not in any way connected with or approved by the ASBPA. You can advertise bookkeeping - not accounting.

LT

[thomtax]

Respectfully disagree

I'm proud to be an EA.

That having been said, I wish EA'S would stop trying to tag onto the coattails of CPAs. We're not "CPA Lites." We passed a test. A hard test, but it was only one test. A CPA had to go to college for years, also pass hard test on a much wider range of subjects, and might have had to intern at a CPA firm for a few years depending on the state.

Test - Yes, the CPA exam had a wider range of subjects. This is because they are being certified for a wider range of services. However, the last I knew, only part of the exam was on taxes. The sections of the CPA exam are

Auditing and Attestation (AUD)
Business Environment and Concepts (BEC)
Financial Accounting and Reporting (FAR)
Regulation (REG)

At the time I took the EA exam, there were 4 parts and all were on taxation.

Education - Now the CPA exam basically requires the equivalent of a master's degree.
The EA does not require this, but I do have a BA. And at the time that I was working as a controller for a company, took and passed the Certified Management Accountant exam.

I'm not knocking the CPA, far from it. They, mostly, have earned their designation. What I do have a problem with is that I know of many CPAs that put down the EAs as inferior.

The failure of the EA group to advertise to get their name in front of the public seems to me to be of of the big failings. How many times have you heard generic advertisements on radio extolling CPAs as being experts? Then how many times EAs? When driving through Dallas was the only time I heard a generic EA ad.

And I also am proud to be an EA

LT

[ChEAr$]

One EA

in my area advertises that her company is "an enrolled agent OF the IRS."

Two things wrong here. 1. obviously the use of the word "OF" above and
2. circular 230 clearly states that only individuals may be EA's.

Anyway, when trying to choose an acceptable alternative title, we can't
run afoul of the 50 states which license public accounting, and in all (probably)
50 states, there are prohibitions against using the term "public".

However, I've always described myself as a "tax accountant" and never feared the
state calling me on it.

[BHoffman]

Back to the topic

"This might be a question better posed to the NAEA, but can we collectively find some way to move away from this IRS-endowed perception?"

I think this is an important issue for EAs. The public perception may well be that EAs are not only IRS endowed, but "managed" by the IRS. Enrolled Tax Professional, Enrolled Tax Specialist. I think it's the "Agent" part that can skew the perception.

[dodgedipduck]

I'm proud to be an EA.

That having been said, I wish EA'S would stop trying to tag onto the coattails of CPAs. We're not "CPA Lites." We passed a test. A hard test, but it was only one test. A CPA had to go to college for years, also pass hard test on a much wider range of subjects, and might have had to intern at a CPA firm for a few years depending on the state.

You could say "Except for the academic requirements, the testing, and the experience, I'm like a CPA." That's reality, but it's going to sound funny to a client.

Just be proud to be an EA and promote your profession. Don't be envious of some other professional's designation.

[Snaggletooth]

Yes I believe there has been

Is there some pervading sense of scorn among EAs for CPAs?

I believe there has been lack of comfort between EAs and CPAs, and the idyllic vision of CPAs and EAs walking arm-and-arm together will not happen in my lifetime.

Although there are strong friendships between myself and local CPAs, and there is much amiable dialogue on this board between the two, there have on occasions been some thorny interface.

I remember a proposal by the AICPA to limit tax practice to CPAs and Attorneys, essentially ignoring any competence by EAs. There are also CPAs who have what I would call a "God Complex" very similar to what nurses think about doctors. If you detect any scorn on the part of EAs, it is this kind of behavior that has been responsible for it. In fairness to CPAs, their theatre in economics is much broader, and the exam is inifinitely more complex. With decent preparation, most EAs can pass their exam on their first or second try, whereas an aspiring CPA may never pass all parts of their exam. The scope of what has to be passed is just simply too broad to be easily assimilated into study time.

However, because CPA practice is so broad, many of them work in areas not related to taxes. There are specialists in audits, banking, mergers/acquisitions, etc You will thus find many CPAs who know virtually nothing about taxes, and any attempt to interface in that area is reduced to GAAP. Conversely, you will never find a single EA who does not pruport to practice in the tax arena.

Before I resigned my last employment in 2005, I had two CPAs working directly for me. They were very sharp, but treated me as a superlative in the area in which we worked. One of them got promoted, and the other got promoted to my job when I resigned. There is no condescending from the CPAs who know me, and we exchange information as equal parties. I have thus not had to deal with any who thought they were in the clouds looking down on EAs.

Fact of the matter, there are good and bad preparers everywhere. There is one very good preparer in my town who isn't of any designation whatsoever. The guy is a stockbroker and also has a thriving tax practice with 900 customers. Conclusion to all of this, Ms Hoffman, is that the label is only as good as the person wearing it.

[JG EA]

Should not change

Perhaps not even the most educated, tax savvy clients really understand what EA means even after years of service and written explanations.

But they do understand it means an important accreditation and qualification. The only reason CPA is well understood is because of decades of familiarity. Enrolled Agents have successfully developed a reputation for competence, knowledge, honestly.... So, EA's are now more and more familiar.

Many people now look for an EA on advice from others in their families or from their friends. So, I don't think starting over with a new name makes sense.

[Uncle Sam]

EA Name Change

I'm both an EA and a CPA.

This idea of changing the professional title of EA to something else is not new.

It has been researched many times over the years by NSA and NAEA. The last time this idea was brought up (I believe by NAEA) there were legal reasons for not being able to change it.