Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Accountancy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board of Accountancy seeks statute changes in AB510 to align Nevada with national exam and extend testing window
Summary
AB510 would move detail from statute into regulation, extend the authorized window to pass the Uniform CPA Exam from 18 to 30 months, and remove an obsolete $1,000 fee tied to a prior sign-off process. The Board of Accountancy and Nevada Society of CPAs supported the bill in committee testimony.
Michael Hillerby, representing the Nevada State Board of Accountancy, told the committee that AB510 moves technical licensure details into regulation and updates Nevada practice to match national accountancy standards.
Hillerby said the Uniform CPA Exam and experience requirements are increasingly standardized nationally. He described two principal changes in AB510: updating the time allowed to complete all sections of the CPA exam (from 18 months in current regulation to 30 months consistent with national practice) and removing statutory specificity about education and experience so those details can be set in regulation.
Hillerby told senators the $1,000 inspection/sign-off fee in regulation tied to an older experience-verification process would be eliminated because certified public accountants now sign off on applicants’ experience. He said any regulatory updates would follow the usual public hearing process and the Legislative Commission review.
Anna Durst, CEO of the Nevada Society of CPAs, testified in support and said the changes would remove barriers to licensure, align Nevada with the Uniform Accountancy Act, and help attract CPAs and businesses to the state.
Senators asked about the existing $1,000 fee and the rationale for moving from an 18- to a 30-month exam window. Hillerby and executive director Vicki Winfeld explained the change reflects national practice and that exam administration has moved to more continuous testing windows, making 30 months a more realistic timeframe for applicants to pass all four parts of the exam while completing experience requirements.
No formal vote was recorded during the hearing; the board said it would follow the regulation process to adopt detailed implementing rules.
