ACA Practice Cert

toobeyshaw

Hi,

Does anybody know where I could get a definitive list on what financial services you can offer as a Chartered Accountant without having a practice cert? I want to set up my own company but I don't have the 2 years post qualification experience yet to get a practice cert. I have looked on the CA website but it is quite vague. Any help at all would be appreciated!! :rolleyes:

Immy

In ACCA all you can do is bookkeeping and I've been told for ACA you can't even do that. So basically nothing. I would give them a ring, there is a specific person who deals with practice certs. But I think if you want to start a company and offering accounting and tax services, you need a practice cert.

toobeyshaw

Thanks Immy, it would be a bookkeeping company as I don't have the requisite experience yet for a practice. It does seem to me to be as you said, very little an ACA can do as self-employed without a practice cert. I have put a query in to the Institute to get further clarification on it.

Martin567

I would assume you could provide a full bookkeeping/management accounts service without needing a practicing cert. Obviously all such accounts would then have to go through another office where there was a practicing accountant in order for the accounts to be finalised and an accountants/auditors report included.

I don't have any link to support the above but I would be absolutely amazed to discover that a CA could not even do bookkeeping without a practicing cert!

TonyStark

toobeyshaw wrote: »

Hi,

Does anybody know where I could get a definitive list on what financial services you can offer as a Chartered Accountant without having a practice cert? I want to set up my own company but I don't have the 2 years post qualification experience yet to get a practice cert. I have looked on the CA website but it is quite vague. Any help at all would be appreciated!! :rolleyes:

Have a look at this. If you are in any doubt, CARB are the people to talk to.

Martin567

Interesting in that it seems I was incorrect in my earlier post! I struggle to understand the logic of these rules though.

If a person is employed as company accountant/financial controller for a company, they will not need a practicing cert. In this role they will be responsible for preparation of the company accounts as well as submission of PAYE & VAT returns. The year-end accounts will go to a firm of accountants/auditors who will complete the official accounts for the period.

Now, imagine if that same person was providing exactly the same service to 3 or 4 companies on a part-time basis. If they were on the payroll of each of these companies as a part-time employee, they would not need a practicing cert. If, however, they were self-employed (invoicing each company & looking after their own tax) then apparently they would need a cert.

That strikes me as very odd and not at all logical. They would be providing the exact same service in both scenarios but in one case they would need a practicing cert. I would think a serious cost/benefit analysis of the advantages of remaining an Institute member might be appropriate in this case!

Jim2007

Martin567 wrote: »

That strikes me as very odd and not at all logical. They would be providing the exact same service in both scenarios but in one case they would need a practicing cert. I would think a serious cost/benefit analysis of the advantages of remaining an Institute member might be appropriate in this case!

There is a very big difference between offering your services to the public and being employed by a couple of companies! There is also the use of the CA brand, if you FU then it reflects badly on the rest of us, so we'd like to be sure you have the required skills, experience, insurance etc...

Martin567

Jim2007 wrote: »

There is a very big difference between offering your services to the public and being employed by a couple of companies! There is also the use of the CA brand, if you FU then it reflects badly on the rest of us, so we'd like to be sure you have the required skills, experience, insurance etc...

In the scenario I described, is there really a big difference? You would be doing the exact same work for the exact same companies. If you mess up while employed by a company, you would still be a member of CAI who has messed up. Why does this not reflect badly on the CA brand?

toobeyshaw

Thanks, I had that document which is what was confusing me i.e. you can do book-keeping but not really if you can't do tax returns! No-one would want a book-keeper who can't do their payroll/VAT return. I have all that experience as I am currently working in industry (a private company) and I am responsible for all of the tax returns, payroll and accounts prep (not sign-off) as the employee of the company which I don't need a cert for. I can see why they have the rule in place, they would not want the CA brand tarnished if it was seen that you were giving advice as a public accountant as opposed to being an employee who does accountancy work in the finance department of a private company. It is ironic though that even though I am fully qualified, it would have been easier for me to set up as a book-keeper before I did the accountancy qualification! Thanks for the feedback everyone, it has more or less validated what I thought. I have put a query into CARB for complete clarification. It may be that I just have to wait a couple of years before I can do, but getting further experience can be no bad thing either in any case.