According to an anonymous KPMG spy:
Dear Firm Spy,
I have been applying for vacation positions for the summer. I am surprised and disappointed to hear that KPMG will not provide financial support for College of Law, and requires graduates to pay for this out of their own salary. However, firms PwC and EY say they will financially support College of Law. Since College costs ~$8000, the graduate salary for KPMG graduates will be significantly less than PwC/EY graduates completing PLT/College, despite prima facie these firms offering on par salaries!
It’s not like $8,000 is chump change for Big 4 grads, either – PwC pays its Melbourne-based grads $55,000, meaning that if they were to pay for CoL, they would suddenly be nearly 15% poorer. Perhaps an alternate graduate program? One supported by the firm?
Which gets us to the debate we hear occasionally around the water-cooler; which is better – a CA or CPA? The prevailing view you’ll hear many accounting juniors articulate is that the CA is more difficult and more expensive, but better recognised in the West, while the CPA is better suited to Asia and can, depending on electives chosen, unlock the door to commercial roles.
This very topic was canvassed in a recent AFR article, which noted:
There are about 38,000 students doing the CPA program internationally and CPA Australia has 132,000 members. The Institute of Chartered Accountants [had] overall membership of 54,000 last year.
It is interesting to note that enrolments in CPA grew 5.3% last year, while CA enrolments remained steady. Perhaps this shows that the rise of Asia looms large in the minds of grads trying to make the best decision. Or maybe they just want some choice – the CPA has electives whereas the CA does not. Chris Jenkins, a recent graduate now working at Lawler Partners, told the AFR what he believes underlies the decision-making process:
It’s interesting that people say CA is better than CPA because I don’t know anhyone who’s done both. So what are they basing that on? … CA is a set course. CPA lets you choose electives, so if there’s an area you’re weak in you can get around it… I was working in a CA firm so there was almost an expectation that I would do the CA qualification.
Mr Jenkins’ view were supported by Ernst & Young Sharon Tan, who decided to follow in the footsteps of her mentor in signing up for the CPA:
The reason for choosing CPA over CA is mostly peer pressure
We invite your views on the CA v CPA debate in the comments below.
Send the Firm Spy your news and views!
Loading...
I am a CA but did one CPA module (an elective) as part of an additional training program run by my firm.
I think there is surely no question that CA is a superior program – this is not to say that the CA Program is good, but rather that it is far better respected than the CPA Program and the quality of candidates undertaking CA exceeds the quality of candidates undertaking CPA. Whilst this may sound harsh, and CPA proponents may object, given that the vast majority of graduates at top 10/20 firms undertake the CA program and not the CPA program I think it is really beyond serious question.
Whilst there may be exceptions, I would be surprised to hear that graduates at accounting firms (they are invariably ‘Chartered Accounting’ firms) are offered a choice between CA and CPA – the expectation would be that you would undertake the CA program – based on my experience at the firms I have worked at it is only people you have regularly failed CA units that are offered the opportunity to do the CPA program as an easier option… (this rarely happens though as repeated fails typically see you ‘managed out’…).
I was once told that previously under ASIC regulations only a memberof the ICAA could become a Registered Company Auditor and therefore sign audit opinions. Thus requiring all signing partners to be CA qualified and hence their preference for the CA qualifiacation in their fiems. This ASIC requirement has since changed however the audit firms perferences have not. I am CA qualified as i began my career in public pratice, I now work in commerce and do not see my CA qualification as a hinderance to that. I also work with CPA’s and do not see them as being more comercially aware then myself.
CA vs CPA is a product of where you begin your career after university. Perhaps you didn’t do an accounting degree which would have ruled out CA qualification up until a few years ago. However maybe would have meant you could qualify to do your CPA.
One is not necessarily better than the other depending on where you sit and what views you have.
Perhaps the firms aligned with the ICAA just like the snobish fact they operate under a Suplementary Royal Charter…
Questions:
How many overseas countries is the CA Programe offered?
Of the increase in the CPA enrolments, how much of that relates to overseas enrolments?
None of the accounting firms pay for college of law unless you put forward a business case to support why they should fund it.
It is very rare that you will be successful unless you are in the tax team (even then it’s quite unlikely)!!
At $8,000, there are quite a few institutions on King Street which gives you better bang for your buck.
IMO grads should sort out if they want to pursue a career path in accounting/reporting roles before considering the question of CA or CPA.
In the end compared to other qualifications in the business field CA/CPA qualifications are at the bottom of the pile.
In my experience, big business and Big 4 strongly favour CA instead of CPA.
CPA has the reputation of being the easy option compared to CA, which is akin to postgraduate university education (versus CPA which is like TAFE).
I see CPA as something you’re more likely to do as a suburban accountant, H&R Block style.
Being a big 4 employee I didn’t have a choice, it was CA all the way. I know 2 people who have completed CPA’s in smaller firms and have gone on to do CA.
In addition, CPA exams are multiple choice whereas CA is not – it’s short answer all the way. This also leads one to believe CPA is an easier option.
To me, at the end of the day they are equal, however I am glad I did CA.
Still not quite sure I get bang for my buck paying $800 a year to write CA after my name though!!
At Big 4s CA is the way to go. You don’t become a good accountant by taking the soft option.
We Joke CPA means Car park attendant. CA is Much tougher and by far a better qualification.
Forgive me if this is a stupid question, but does the grad actually need to be a qualified lawyer to do their job? If they will just be working as an accountant, and will not be providing legal advice, I can’t see any reason why their firm should pay for them to do College of Laws. I have a Law/Commerce double degree and work at a top tier firm. You can bet they wouldn’t pay for me to do my CPA or CA, because it’s not needed for my job.
If they will be providing legal advice and do need to be a qualified lawyer then yes, I agree that their employer should be footing the bill for College of Laws.
To ‘Anon’, I guess it’s a question of recruiting the best graduates. Sure, the firm doesn’t have to support College of Law, but that just means a substantial proportion of Law/Commerce graduates will pass them by, and they’ll be left to select from non-legally qualified students.
My firm paid for me to do College of Law, and it was made quite clear to me that it is a recruitment tool, not a work-improvement thing.
Do you know the jokes people make in front office about CA’s?
Anonymous – It seems like a short-sighted recruitment tool. Chances are that if someone wants to do college of laws, then they are planning on practising law at some point (otherwise why bother). When that happens, the employee is most probably going to quit the accounting firm to go to a law firm.
Re: CA vs. CPA. If you go to work abroad you’ll find that it doesn’t make a difference one bit. Having said that, Americans seem to understand what you are if you’re an Australian CPA much more than you being an Australian CA. CA’s have to explain it’s the same etc. etc.
I can’t believe how many snobs there are who actually think they’re better because they’re CAs. Is that just because they had to contend with the terrible course structure the ICAA offers with continuous focus sessions and quizzes and changing the structure every couple of years too? CPAs can actually plan their own schedules a bit more which would probably mean they take in more too. The Big 4 partners only support the CA because they pretty much own and run it, doesn’t mean it’s better or worse than CPA (which is more supported by industry/corporates).
By the way, I chose the 3rd option at a Big 4… neither….
@Traveller
An American CPA (‘Certified Public Accountant’) is hardly comparable to an Australian CPA (‘Certified Practising Accountant’).
The Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia (ICAA) is the only Australian accounting body with an alliance with the AICPA (American CPA), and the CA is the only Australian qualification to get exemption from the US Uniform CPA Examinations.
I worked at a big 4 firm and did the CFA program which craps over both accounting qualifications in terms of difficulty and prestige, the bean counters can get f*&cked.
I note that experience is undoubtedly ranked above either qualification and that if you want to go overseas and work as a low level accountant, there is probably not much of a difference between the CA and the CPA, so long as you don’t want to work for big 4. The CA is seen in the profession as the technical qualification, where as the CPA is more seen as a practical qualification. The CPA is for the person who wants a qualification, the CA is for the person who wants the best qualification. CPAs typically work in commerce as accountants or financial controllers. CAs typically work for professional services, or as FCs or group FCs or CFOs. It is rare to find a CA accountant, without professional services experience in commerce if you are outside the ASX 100.
The CA is undoubtedly the better organisation and certainly improves your career prospects immensely. All the big 4 firms and large midtiers encourage their staff to be part of the CA program rather than the CPA program for a reason. It’s more difficult, but the end result is a better trained and more technically knowledgeable accountant. CPA is primarily a qualification held by lower level accountants and FCs, where as CA is the more common qualification with upper level management.
Further
-The CA allows you to receive credit for subjects when studying at a range of universities, the CPA only affords you credit at Deakin University in Vic (as that is the institution from which the CPA is run).
-The CA is a global affiliate organisation and part of the GAA (Global Accounting Alliance). The GAA is affilliated with the US CPA, the main accounting bodies in the UK, Ireland, Germany, South Africa, Japan and Hong Kong. The CPA has no such affiliates.
I completed my college of law whilst working at KPMG. Of course I had to pay for it myself because it was not a requirement of being able to perform my role in the tax division. I never wanted to work in a law firm, but I completed it and got admitted because I wanted to finish what I had started when I graduated from my law degree. As far as I am aware, none of the firms paid for college of law. This was 8 years ago though so I dont know if times have changed.
I now work in corporate in a top 50 ASX listed company and most people in the finance team here are CPA qualified – just sayin.