As I observe the goings on (some might say histrionics) in Washington, and particularly among those who are seeking the Republican nomination for president, it seems that the parties can’t simply agree that they have different perspectives and don’t agree. Lately, any disagreement seems to immediately be followed with something bordering on thermonuclear war to discredit the other party and prove that they’re either wrong or stupid. That approach never leads to constructive dialogue. The parties simply dig in and either pout or proclaim to all that they’re right and the other party is wrong.  Saying “we simply disagree” or “we have different perspectives on this issue” has been lost in Washington, and in society!

Lately I’m also experiencing this notion that the opponent has to be proven to be wrong as we’re working on a movement related to streamlining Ohio’s municipal taxation systems. Those who don’t think there’s anything wrong with the current system of almost 600 municipalities applying different definitions, different forms and different rules to the challenge of complying with local taxes are engaging in a campaign to discredit our organization for simply raising the issue of the need for common sense and streamlined processes. The level of mischaracterization of our position, and our motivation, that’s going on today is nothing short of amazing. Rather than engage in constructive dialogue, we’re left with dueling arguments about hidden agendas, selfish motivations and ridiculous rhetoric. But that’s what we accept as the norm in the political process today. We can’t simply disagree and leave it to the legislators to consider the alternative sides and then make a decision.  No . . . the objective is to bury the opposition, regardless of whether the claims being made are true.

Plus, I’m finding it’s not just Washington or the Ohio Statehouse that has this problem. More and more frequently, I find that even the simplest discussion – and disagreement – can lead to a polarized discussion and the same “you’re an idiot” type of response. Simple disagreements about the merits of anything (and I’m not talking about conversations related to clearly controversial issues like social values, religion, etc.) can lead to endless arguments (not intelligent debate) and entrenched attitudes that force us apart. Last summer, I was playing golf with a colleague and we started talking about an issue that affected both of us. After nine holes of endless haranguing on the issue, I finally decided that I couldn’t take it any longer and decided I had to get out of the golf cart. I wasn’t going to subject myself to another nine holes of him continually arguing to prove to me that my view was wrong (or have me admit that I was simply too stupid to understand that he was right). I simply disagreed and was willing to say “let’s move to another subject,” but he was relentless. So I took the easy alternative and got out of the cart. And that was annoying because I normally enjoy the time I spend with this person. But in this instance, it apparently wasn’t meant to be.

When did society change? When did the objective become to win the discussion at all costs, rather than to simply engage in a civilized conversation —– that could end with the parties simply agreeing to disagree? I hate to say, “I long for the old days,” but in this instance, that’s exactly how I feel. cp

2011 is history, but reverberations will continue until after Congressional elections in November 2012. Let’s start with what got done in 2011. Obviously the payroll tax cut and it’s heavily debated extension would be fresh in our memory. The most significant failure, of course, was the descent into partisan bickering of the so-called “super committee.” That was the last hope for meaningful action on over 100 various tax provisions; some now expired, some really creative new proposals, but all doomed to perish in the quagmire of political posturing.

Read more: 2011: What Got Done, What Didn’t, Now What ? « E. Lynn Nichols, CPA.

A new version of a current Trojan Horse virus called SpyEye allows thieves to steal your bank information, make fraudulent purchases and then hides those purchases and modifies your balance in your online banking so you don’t know that it has happened.

Find out how it works and how to protect yourself with this article from MSNBC.com: Red Tape – New virus raids your bank account – but you won’t notice

The best way to protect yourself from an online financial scam is to diligently check your bank accounts. At least, until now.

Israeli-based Security firm Trusteer has found an elaborate new computer virus that not only helps fraudsters steal money from bank accounts — it also covers its tracks.

Think of a crime plot involving a spy who plans to break into a high-security building and begins by swapping out security camera video so guards don’t notice anything is amiss. Known as a surveillance camera hack, the technique has been used in dozens of movies.

As always make sure your anti-virus software is up to date and you have a firewall installed and turned on on your computer. Always know the sites you are going to and if something doesn’t look right just close the browser. Never install any software that you did not expressly start the install for yourself.

As 2012 PTIN renewals begin, Forbes.com contributor Kelly Phillips Erb (aka TaxGirl) wrote a scathing reproach of the IRS for its Notice 4809 letters, previously known as the “10,000 letter initiative.”

A few thoughts jumped out when I read the Forbes.com article. First, those with concerns and frustrations regarding the so called “10,000 letter initiative,” PTIN, and other IRS tax preparer changes are joining OSCPA by becoming more vocal. Frustration with quiet acquiescence is no longer the norm.

Second, although I did not personally receive the letter from the IRS, from what I have seen I understand the confusion (and for some the anger) as to how to interpret the letter. Not only has the distribution appeared to increase over the previous years, but the scope of the Notice also has broadened.

If the intent was to say to certain tax preparers there may be a visit starting in November, then it should have just addressed this. It also should have made clear that the intent is only to visit 2,100 out of the 21,000 notified. If the intent was to alert certain tax preparers to correct errors or misinterpretations of law, then it should have been specific about those issues.

I agree with the CPA from California that we don’t need to be reminded of our general obligations as tax preparers. Whether CPAs are associated with tax returns containing “entries far beyond average ranges” or not, we understand our obligations and take these obligations very seriously.

Third, and probably the most troubling, it appears the IRS does not distinguish among the types of tax preparers targeted in the campaign. Whether it is the Notice 4809 initiative or the fraudulent earned income credits issue, the IRS wants to lump CPAs and non-CPAs together as a group. I may be biased, but my assumption is there are distinctions between issues resulting from CPA preparers versus non-CPA preparers. The issues the IRS has discussed so far are much more prevalent with non-CPA preparers. To some extent the IRS even acknowledged this in previous discussions regarding earned income fraud issues. Yet CPA preparers continue to be subject to all of the tax preparer changes aimed at non-CPAs, as if we are just as much of the problem. If the IRS has information that indicates my assumption is wrong, they should disclose it.

As a profession, we are very good at addressing issues and resolving problems. Provide more detail as to the issues and, as a profession, we can help solve them. However, if my assumption is correct, then the IRS needs to change its approach and distinguish between CPA tax preparers and non-CPA tax preparers.

Fourth, the note on the IRS website acknowledging the issues addressed in the blog article not only shows the IRS hears the comments, but it gives hope they will act to address the concerns. Being more vocal has its benefits. I had the opportunity to be one of OSCPA’s representatives when we met with IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman and staff last spring. When we discussed these matters, they did appear interested in the issues we identified and our concerns about the impact on CPA tax practitioners, including making a commitment to move the firm visits out of tax season and better communicate the results of the visit. But there is still more to be done. Obviously, the tone of Notice 4809 is not a step forward.

We need to continue to address these concerns and Society leadership will continue to do so. If you want to help, or if you have specific facts or examples that we should raise with the IRS and Ohio’s Congressional delegation, please let us know. Share your thoughts below, or send them to cpavoice@ohio-cpa.com.

As CPAs, we are charged with defending the public interest. We are responsible for conducting ourselves according to professional standards and ethics. But how far does that responsibility extend? Are we now blindly assigning responsibility beyond what is appropriate?

There is increasing pressure from the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) to have auditors be responsible for more than opining on financial statements and internal control over financial reporting. Last June, the PCAOB unveiled a proposal outlining a major overhaul of the auditor’s reporting model that represented the most significant changes in more than 50 years. It is intended to increase the value and transparency of the report for investors, but there is room for it to go far beyond that. PCAOB Chair James R. Doty has been outspoken in his opinion that the audit report is not offering enough to protect investors. But is that the primary function of the audit and auditor? As a profession, we are charged with providing a level of assurance, but we aren’t detectives.

The PCAOB Investor Advisory Group went even farther, calling the current audit report “deficient as a communications vehicle.” They called for the auditors to include their assessment of the judgment of management and the quality of the accounting practices.

As more judgment is employed on behalf of corporate management, the PCAOB Investor Advisory Group would like auditors to give their opinion on the validity of those judgments and the completeness of the information shared.

In August, the PCAOB issued a concept release calling for mandatory audit firm rotation, arguing that such a change would enhance “auditor independence, objectivity and professional skepticism.”

I understand the issues around the call for greater transparency, and I am not saying that maintaining the status quo is the only acceptable answer to this. Some changes might be appropriate, but I would like to see specific solutions that don’t create bigger ancillary problems than the issues they are intended to solve. The PCAOB identifies issues with certain audits, and those need to be addressed. But is it appropriate to extrapolate these concerns as broad based issues that require changes across the board, as suggested by the PCAOB? Do the actions of a few needs to impact all?

Beyond the impact on auditors and our profession, such changes will sharply increase the cost of an audit.

In a struggling economy, is it prudent to increase the cost of doing business? Do the long-term additional costs really provide a greater or even corresponding benefit?

Let’s also make sure that we aren’t mixing issues. Some issues I see appear to be financial disclosure issues and not audit issues. If greater financial disclosure issues need to be addressed, then let’s address them as such. In doing so, let’s make sure the market place is driving the needs and not the perception of a small group of regulators.

These are important issues for our whole profession. Do not ignore public company issues and changes driven by regulators under the premise that they don’t impact non-filers or privately held entities. History shows the likelihood that such changes will eventually be forced on non-filers or privately held directors or the market place is almost guaranteed.

There is still time to comment on the PCAOB Concept Release on Auditor Independence and Audit Firm Rotation (deadline: Dec 14, 2011) and the Proposed Rule to Improve Transparency Through Disclosure of Engagement Partner and Certain Participants in Audits (Deadline: Jan 9, 2012). Comment now at http://pcaobus.org. Also, OSCPA’s Accounting & Auditing Public Company Subcommittee is submitting comments on behalf of all of us. One of the benefits of OSCPA membership is the clout that comes from all of us speaking as an organization on issues that impact our profession. Please direct any comments you would like included to OSCPA staff liaison Laura Hay, CPA at LHay@ohio-cpa.com.

Whether you are for it or against it, nobody can deny that State Issue 2 has raised plenty of emotion.

Unfortunately, as is often the case with hotly debated topics, some of the concern felt by voters has been generated by misinformation about just what Issue 2 will do. I encourage all Ohioans – especially  members of OSCPA – to look objectively at what the act really says and does, and weigh the impact on all citizens before voting.

Why is OSCPA taking a position?

The OSCPA Executive Board could have shied away from the issue, but we felt it was important to continue to be an impartial voice of fiscal reason among state leaders. As CPAs, we are committed to protecting the public interest, not just the interests of our profession. As CPAs, we understand the importance of operating efficiently and the need to adjust to meet fiscal realities.

A lengthy process was followed in considering the issue. OSCPA’s Governmental Affairs Advisory Council carefully considered both sides of Issue 2, and made recommendations of support to the Executive Board. The Executive Board then spent a considerable amount of time debating the issue. In the end, the Board voiced overwhelming support that formally endorsing a “YES” vote on Issue 2 was the right thing to do.

Why is OSCPA encouraging a YES vote?

We all know that Ohio is struggling economically. A byproduct is that most taxpayers are not willing to support tax increases. Over 80% of levies failed this year. At the same time, state and local government and school districts, most of which already have made cuts, are facing rising costs. Where school districts are concerned, a five year projection shows that personnel costs on average will make up 96% of district expenses by 2015 – up from the current 85%. That will leave 4% for buses, textbooks, utilities and everything else. You don’t need to be a CPA to know that the status quo is unsustainable. Something has to give. Issue 2 will provide state and local leaders with much needed flexibility to control administrative costs. Some have characterized Issue 2 as union busting and as a criticism of our highly valued teachers and first responders. Issue 2 is neither. This measure isn’t a value call, it is simple math; voters aren’t willing to support tax increase after tax increase, meaning government leaders can’t cover rising expenses.

These changes are not an attempt to break up the unions or put firemen and policemen in danger. These changes are an attempt to untie the hands of government officials so they can be more responsive to the budgetary issues they are facing now and in the future. These budgetary issues are real and cannot be ignored or put off. They will be dealt with one way or another. A Yes vote does not end all collective bargaining rights for government employees or reduce public safety. However, if Issue 2 is voted down, the only viable option for many jurisdictions will be to cut even more crucial jobs and services – including emergency service personnel.

Health care premiums are a huge cost to all employers, including state and local governments. So are retirement benefits. In 1983, it was common for health insurance to be a free fringe benefit, and for many of us to have a pension to look forward to. Today, it isn’t unusual for a private-sector worker to pay for 30% of their premium cost, and most pension plans have switched to 401(k) plans. If upheld, Issue 2 will help government control expenses by ensuring that employees pay a reasonable share of both benefits.

The savings to the public sector can be significant: in Youngstown City Schools, such a health insurance mandate would save the district $1.5 million a year. In the City of Columbus, the pension contribution mandate would save $41 million a year. Those are real dollars that can help save jobs.

Just as important is that Issue 2 would allow government leaders to better control costs by removing from union negotiations operational subjects such as where employees will be located, hours of operation, whether services can be shared with other jurisdictions, and whether some services, such as janitorial and maintenance, can be outsourced, to name a few. It also will allow them to more aggressively shop around for potentially better yet less expensive health insurance, just as the private sector regularly does. Doing so would give each municipality and school district the flexibility to respond better to market conditions and local needs.

This is an important issue, with a lot of emotional appeals being thrown around. I urge you to rise above the rhetoric and consider the realities we are facing. Support Issue 2 on Nov. 8. If you have any questions or concerns, let us know at cpavoice@ohio-cpa.com.

For more information, visit OSCPA’s Issue 2 page.

They say that money doesn’t buy happiness. But, then again time is money, so which is really more valuable?

If you think about it logically, the money you make from work buys you vacations and items that you enjoy during your weekends and days off. However, you wouldn’t get to enjoy those things without the time away.

TIME magazine published an article that cites a new study by the Association for Psychological Science, which says time is clearly more valuable than money. However, Forbes magazine has an article that explains how consumers are more likely to feel attached to a product if advertisers focus on the price associated with the product instead of the time spent using it.

Clearly, the answer to this question depends on the person, but I think everyone can agree it’s most healthy to achieve a balance in one’s life between investing in time to recharge and making money.

In an era of ever-present online communication, people are in a way connected to work 24/7 with emails on their smartphones and instant messaging, so they’re working around the clock even if they think they’re engaging in and enjoying “free time.”

Sure, staying plugged in at all times may increase your productivity, but it’s also exhausting and can cause a person to miss out on some of the little, and sometimes most important, experiences in life.

Take some time to unplug. Turn off your phone for a few hours while you go to a movie or out to a restaurant. Seriously, turn it off. You can do it … There. Now isn’t that liberating? (Or completely nerve-wrecking. Don’t worry, that feeling will pass.)

And in a broader sense, take time for relationship building during work as well. Especially for small business owners, networking and building relationships with clients is just as important as churning out a product, because if your client isn’t happy they won’t return for future business or recommended you to others.

This may seem like common sense, but you’d be surprised at how many people need to be reminded. It’s all too easy to get swept up in the rush of everyday life.

After all, your phone just alerted you to five new tweets from Twitter and your sister just posted Facebook pictures from her vacation and the client you’ve been playing phone tag with all week finally responded to your email at 10:30 at night because he’s in China and it’s 10:30 in the morning there.

Yes, those things are all important. But so is your sanity. Work hard to buy that Jacuzzi. But then remember to take the time to actually use it.

What do you value more and why?

We want to hear what you value more, time, money or something else, and why. Leave your comments below.

“You’ve got a friend in me.” “Two heads are better than one.” “It takes two to tango.” Clearly, we as humans function better when we’re working with someone else.

I frankly wouldn’t be at OSCPA right now if it weren’t for a mentor who taught me how to write and opened doors for me with his networking connections.

And that’s where the true value in having a mentor lies.

Defining the mentor/mentee relationship

A mentor can provide a new way of looking at things and the relationship can be as formal or informal as you want. The experience is your own and how you and your mentor decide to shape it will impact the worth of the relationship.

Someone who has experience and is willing to share his or her experience can be invaluable to a person’s career. Whether you are simply going out for coffee to ask advice, or are using your mentor to help you network with future employers, the benefits are endless.

What separates a mentor from the typical contact you make by mingling and exchanging business cards is a long-term commitment and a genuine concern about your future. This mentor will probably be in a professional position that you are aspiring for one day, and you will respect this person enough that you enjoy being around him or her, but you will also be able to take some constructive criticism from this person when it is dished out.

Finding a mentor

Before you can be connected with a mentor, it’s important to decide what you’re looking to get out of the connection. Are you searching for someone who is on their way out the door, and is looking for a successor? Or are you new in your career and seeking guidance on professional development, or somewhere in between?

No matter your reasons, finding a mentor can be a piece of cake if you’re willing to get out there. First, check with your company and any professional organizations to which you belong. Contact your alma mater to see if it has a formal mentoring program in place. In these types of situations, you will probably take a test of some kind that will help the program match you up with the best person for the job. Bam. Mentor assigned.

If that’s not an option, look around! Chances are if you’re outgoing enough, it will be easy to notice someone in your workplace or school with a similar personality as yours. And that’s the key, too. You and your mentor need to be able to click, and you need to both have the same goals for your mentoring relationship in mind. Your mentor should be motivating, and encouraging, and will hopefully provide feedback that will help you define your skills and grow in your career.

What’s working for you?

Do you currently have a mentor or mentee that you consult with regularly? What is your role, and what value have you received from the relationship? Let us know in the comments!

OSCPA members networking at the Dayton Accounting Show

Last week I attended OSCPA’s Ohio Accounting Show in Dayton and as always, I came away with a few a-ha moments.

The first is no surprise really—CPAs, like every other professional, like to mix fun with business. On the first day, I was very popular as I handed out raffle tickets for the Kodak-Pocket Video Camera and iPad drawings. After breakfast, members hurried off to sessions but on the first break, they were back in the exhibit hall, visiting with exhibitors and straining to hear whose name was called for the latest prize drawing.

At the Society, we are always promoting the value of networking and this event delivered on such opportunities in abundance. But just as in any group, some took to networking like fish to water while others hung back, not sure of where and when to join the conversation.

At the networking breakfast, I sat with a group of business and industry CPAs. As we chatted amiably over eggs and sausage, the conversation moved from how small employers can afford to keep offering healthcare coverage to the outlook for college graduates. We didn’t pick these topics off of a networking card in the center of the table. We got there by sharing personal bits about ourselves which moved the discussion in new and sometimes funny directions, like how we get our teenagers out of bed for school.

I lunched with a group of exhibitors from CCH Walters Kluwer, and learned one from Canton knows the football coach at my daughter’s high school. We ended up talking about school funding challenges.

To my left was a retired CPA who is still active on our Dayton show committee. We both worked for the same international holding company years ago—me in Pennsylvania and he in Dayton. Who knew we’d someday be sharing lunch and talking about how much we love the mountains in my home state?

I’m pretty sure we didn’t solve world hunger or Ohio’s budget problems in those two half hours, but the conversation was interesting and provided a few friendly faces in the crowd of more than 500.

It didn’t just feel like a business event anymore. And it occurred to me that the best networking happens when you’re not even trying that hard.

Throughout the day, I ran into every one of my table mates and each time we smiled and said, ‘hello’ or shared our opinions on what we just learned—or on the food which, by the way, is fabulous at Sinclair Community College.

If networking doesn’t come easy to you, try thinking of it differently. It’s not something you must do to advance your career. It can simply be a way to meet new people. The other benefits are icing.

Getting started

For tips on effective networking, see OSCPA’s April blog post on that same topic. It includes a link to networking tips for shy people.

You can also ease into networking by sharing your time and talents doing something you love. The Ohio Society has a ton of volunteer opportunities where you can work side by side with other CPAs.

We are recruiting volunteers right now for our standing committees, and always have room for willing CPAs to plan shows and events, or to teach FETCH!, the elementary financial literacy program. There are even programs geared specifically for networking.

It all comes down to a mindset, really. Networking doesn’t have to be the big, scary elephant in the room. It can just be dinner with new friends. And who can’t use more friends?

My email inbox reached maximum capacity last week, and I had thought about keeping it that way. Not deleting any items so that I couldn’t receive any more email was liberating.

Then reality set in and I cleared out my folders, continuing on the endless chain of communication that has become the staple of the way the working world communicates. We all know that email is a must, but what you may not know is that the way you email can make or break you.

How can emailing go wrong? Your email etiquette is just as important as how you dress on the job; both are a direct reflection of who you are.

Amanda Moore, the outside sales and marketing representative for PIP Printing and Marketing Services, wrote about an email experience in her Marketing for Tomorrow blog:

“I received two emails this week that caught my attention for two drastically different reasons. The first was from a job applicant who was submitting a resume. Although my company has no job openings right now, I opened the attachment because his email was so well written. The applicant had perfect grammar, spelling, addressed me personally, and took the time to do some research on my company. As I read the email, I felt as if this job seeker knew me, my business, and what I was looking for in an employee. Unfortunately, I do not have a position to offer him but you can bet I am keeping his resume. The second email was forwarded to me by a friend and actually was a marketing email from a competitor of mine. I have never seen a more unprofessional email. The email had purple font, grammar mistakes, spelling issues, illegal use of ellipsis, capitalization mistakes, random poetry-like indentations all over the place, and exclamation point abuse. My first impression was that I would never do business with this person”.

Perhaps you know better and make sure your emails are as professional as you are in the office, but do you forward annoying chain messages? Save the junk mail for your private accounts. Otherwise, people will resent you for making them sift through more emails than they already have to. It makes you look unprofessional and may result in your emails getting automatically deleted, even when they aren’t junk.

Mixing personal matters with your company email can have its consequences. Check out this video segment from the Today Show.

Even for the most well-mannered emailer, there are a few tips to be more effective.

Do you remember the last time your inbox wasn’t saturated with endless messages? If you actually want your emails to be read, you can’t neglect the power of the subject line. About.com offers great advice on how to write precise subject lines that don’t waste peoples’ time. Honestly, did you think “Hi” or “Meeting” actually works well?

Emails are informal, but failure to include a greeting and a closing can come off as cold and your communication will be less effective. Ehow.com suggests different greetings for certain people.

Perhaps before even thinking of composing an email, think about what you’re doing. It’s always easy to shoot off an email, but what is it accomplishing? When composing emails, Oprah suggests taking 10 seconds to evaluate whether or not email is the best way to say what you need.

For more, Lydia Ramsey, business etiquette expert, has a lot to say about the top email faux pas.