CBA committee opens study of 80‑hour CE requirement, calls for focused work group research

The Committee on Professional Conduct on Sept. 19 discussed whether California should join a national conversation about reducing the 80-hour continuing-education (CE) requirement that currently applies to active CPA license renewals and asked staff and an existing CE work group to research rationale, impacts and prioritized subject areas.

Sarah Benedict, manager of the Licensing, Renewal and Continuing Competency Unit, told the committee staff had surveyed other state boards and reviewed Department of Consumer Affairs boards, finding many jurisdictions follow the NASBA model but that California’s 80-hour requirement is higher than most DCA boards and many state accountancy requirements.

"CE requirements are based on work performed during the 2-year period immediately preceding license expiration with a total of 80 required," Benedict said. She told the committee staff found 28 jurisdictions responded to a NASBA quick poll and staff researched the remaining states’ statutes and regulations; some states have different approaches, such as New York allowing 24 hours per year if concentrated in recognized subject areas.

Several committee members urged caution and recommended further, focused study. Member Corrigan said enforcement shows many licensees still fail to follow standards despite hour requirements, and cautioned against leaving subject-matter choices solely to licensees. Member Hines recommended the board define why CE is required and identify priority subject areas — for example, ethics and timely technical topics — before debating a specific hour total.

Members discussed forming or directing a research body. Benedict and board counsel noted a two-member CE work group already exists and has begun examining hours and other CE issues; the committee directed that group to continue the work and to report back with research and recommendations. "This might be appropriate for the board to appoint an ad hoc committee to do some research and analysis and then present a recommendation back to the board," Hines said; staff and members agreed the existing work group could be tasked to dig deeper and coordinate with staff.

Public comment from Jason Fox of the California Society of CPAs encouraged a careful, evidence-based approach and emphasized that CE’s purpose is lifelong competency and public protection, not mere compliance.

No change to the statutory 80-hour requirement was adopted at the meeting. Committee members asked staff and the CE work group to gather more data on the original rationale for 80 hours (if available), compare cross-profession requirements, examine the role of nontechnical CE, and return with a proposal and recommended next steps.