An audit by the Board of Audit and Inspection found that the selection of domestic certified public accountants ( CPAs ) is far short of the demand required by the accounting market, and that the entry barrier must be lowered.
In addition, it was pointed out that the financial authorities have been artificially controlling the number of certified public accountants selected by operating the certified public accountant exam, which is required by law to be an ‘absolute evaluation’, as in fact a ‘relative evaluation’.
The Board of Audit and Inspection released the results of the Financial Services Commission’s regular audit today (30th).
Ahead of the announcement of the results of the 58th Certified Public Accountant selection this afternoon, the Board of Audit and Inspection only released the ‘Certified Public Accountant’ selection part of the Financial Services Commission’s regular audit.
■”The number of accountants selected will be limited to 1,100″
The Financial Services Commission sets the ‘minimum number of accountants to be selected’ every year in accordance with the Certified Public Accountants Act. Afterwards, the Financial Supervisory Service sets the ‘test management standards’ such as the test scope and difficulty level and supervises the test progress.
However, the Board of Audit and Inspection pointed out that the Financial Services Commission has been calculating the minimum number of accountants to be selected lower than market demand. What the Financial Services Commission used as evidence was a research service conducted by the Korea Development Institute ( KDI
) in 2019 , which said that this service did not properly reflect the demand for certified public accountants.
The Board of Audit and Inspection also pointed out that although the demand for certified public accountants in the non-audit sector has increased since 2019, the Financial Services Commission has set the minimum number of people to be selected by directly reflecting the results of KDI’s research service in 2019 .
Accordingly, the total number of successful certified public accountants in 2022 (1,237 people) was lower than the total number of employees hired by domestic accounting firms (1,256 people). It was similar to the employment size of the four largest corporations (1,232 people).
The Board of Audit and Inspection announced that, excluding the four large accounting firms, small and medium-sized accounting firms (36) were able to hire only 10% of the target number of employees (247 people), and general companies and financial companies were having difficulty recruiting accountants.
■Re-scoring several times to meet the target number of selections… “actually relative evaluation”
In order to meet the number of selections set by the Financial Services Commission at 1,100, the examination method, which is ‘absolute evaluation’ as stipulated by law, was not followed, but internally closer to ‘relative evaluation’. It has also been confirmed that the Certified Public Accountant exam has been administered.
In accordance with the revised Enforcement Decree of the Certified Public Accountant Act in 2004, the public accountant exam was changed to an ‘absolute evaluation’ in 2007, in which applicants must receive a score of 60% or higher (60 or higher out of 100) in all 5 subjects to pass.
Absolute evaluation is the default, and relative evaluation (highest total score) can be used to select only when the minimum number of candidates to be selected is not met. However, in this case, all applicants who scored more than a predetermined score must be passed, so the financial authorities have effectively ‘adjusted’ the number of successful applicants.
The Board of Audit and Inspection revealed that the Financial Supervisory Service had the scoring committee members temporarily score 20% of the test takers and then change the scoring criteria two to three times and re-score them until the ‘expected number of successful applicants’ was reached. During this process, the questions, provisional grading, and grading criteria (partial scores, etc.) for the main grading continued to be changed arbitrarily먹튀검증. In the case of an answer sheet with ’59 points’ , which is close to the passing mark of ’60 points’,
ask the grading committee to lower the score to ’58 points’ or raise it to ’60 points’ to raise it to ’59 points’ .The adjustment was made by eliminating the ‘dot’ answer sheet. The justification for the score adjustment was to further adjust the number of final successful applicants and prevent objections from applicants who reached the passing score of 60.
An official from the Board of Audit and Inspection said, “If it is an absolute evaluation, it should be possible to predict successful candidates by adjusting the difficulty of the exam based on common sense.”
The Financial Supervisory Service, which was entrusted by the Financial Services Commission to manage the test, presented a review opinion that there was a possibility of violating the law, but it was found that the Financial Services Commission stuck to the ‘appropriate number of successful candidates’ initially planned.
■”Accountant entry regulations must be relaxed to reflect market demand”
The Board of Audit and Inspection told the Financial Services Commission to reflect the demand from non-accounting firms such as general companies and public institutions and accounting firms due to changes in the accounting environment when setting the minimum number of people scheduled to be selected for the future accountant exam. Recommended. In addition, we notified the Financial Services Commission Chairman to conduct a selection examination for certified public accountants in accordance with the purpose of ‘absolute evaluation’ stipulated in the law.
In response, the Financial Services Commission said, “We agree with the Board of Audit and Inspection’s point that the entry regulations for the Certified Public Accountant exam and the exam burden on test takers are excessive,” but added, “Rather than just following the board’s point out, is there a way to improve the system in line with the purpose pointed out? “We will collect opinions from all walks of life and review them,” he said.
The Financial Supervisory Service, which has actually conducted the accounting exam, said, “We think it is good to maintain a steady level of difficulty from the examinees’ perspective, so we have adjusted the grading rather than the questions,” and added, “If it is operated as an absolute evaluation, it may not be easy to adjust the difficulty level.” “He said. However, as pointed out by the Board of Audit and Inspection, they responded that starting this year, grading was done according to the standards without any additional adjustments.
There is also concern in the industry about this audit.
A representative of an accounting company said, “Unlike last year, demand for both consulting and auditing has decreased this year, so demand for accounting from large accounting firms is expected to decrease significantly. If too many accountants are selected, there will be an oversupply and dumping of accounting fees later.” “I am concerned that problems may arise,” he said.