Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Continuing Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
CBA committee reviews phased plan to modernize continuing‑education requirements
Summary
Staff outlined a five‑phase project to modernize continuing education (CE) rules, including drafting regulatory text for CCR changes, broader evidence‑gathering on subject areas, and possible future legislation; members discussed emphasizing technical CE and preserving flexibility.
Staff briefed the Committee on Professional Conduct on a multi‑phase project to modernize continuing education (CE) requirements for licensed CPAs in California and invited committee feedback.
"Phase one focuses on getting board approval regarding how to modernize the CE regulations to address technology, improve clarity, emphasize quality, and make structural changes," Miss Center told the committee. Staff described five phases: board approval and planning, drafting regulation language (phase two), gathering evidence and stakeholder input on subject areas and credit hours (phase three), pursuing legislative changes if required (phase four), and implementation (phase five).
Timing and outreach: staff said it hopes to present draft regulations for board action in July or September 2026 and will conduct focus groups, surveys and comparative reviews of other state boards and NASBA examples to build the evidentiary record for any subject‑area or credit‑hour changes.
Early focus‑group feedback highlighted support for more flexibility in CE delivery and a stronger emphasis on technical subject areas needed to maintain CPAs' currency of knowledge for consumer protection. "They supported making CE more flexible with a focus on technical subject areas," Miss Center said, while noting participants viewed non‑technical topics — such as mental‑health supports and broader professional‑development training — as valuable but better situated in other professional‑development models.
Members asked staff to consider ethical subjects within technical requirements; Miss Center confirmed ethics is already included among the subject areas under consideration. Several members also raised the point that capital needs (for example to adopt costly technology such as AI systems) may drive firms to seek alternative ownership or partnership arrangements, which connects to broader regulatory discussions already on the committee’s agenda.
Next steps: staff will continue phase‑two drafting, pursue evidence gathering for phase three, and return to the committee with draft regulatory text and findings from further outreach. There was no committee vote on rule changes at this meeting.
Quotation sources: quotes and paraphrase in this article are drawn from Miss Center’s presentation and committee discussion at the March 12, 2026 Committee on Professional Conduct meeting.
