Senate committee hears testimony on H588 changes to CPA mobility and licensure pathways

The Senate Committee on Government Operations on March 31 heard testimony on sections 8–10 of H588, the OPR bill, which would update Vermont’s CPA mobility and licensure pathway language to align with a national model and make it easier for accountants licensed in other states to practice here.

Satie Fesser, executive director of the Vermont Society of CPAs, told the committee the proposal "doesn't change fundamentally how it works" but modernizes statutory wording to match what many states call the universal accounting act. "It's really just an update to the language," Fesser said, adding the change is intended to keep Vermont aligned with neighbors that are adopting similar mobility frameworks.

The witnesses and committee members discussed the statutory term "substantial equivalency." A committee member asked whether that phrase and mobility mean the same thing; Fesser and other panelists said mobility language generally embeds equivalency criteria and that many states are removing the specific "substantial equivalency" phrase to avoid duplication and clarify the statute.

Committee members queried whether the bill’s change to the definition of "principal place of business" would apply to other licensed professions. The committee was told the change is specific to CPAs in H588 and is not intended to alter other professions’ definitions.

A committee member raised access concerns, saying it can be "hard to get your taxes filed in this state" and that accounting services are concentrated in higher‑wealth areas. Fesser said the bill is not designed to "lure" licensees from other states but that reduced administrative barriers could expand the pool of available practitioners and improve access across Vermont.

A representative speaking for GFC Gallagher and Flynn, a large Vermont CPA firm, described hiring trends and the rationale for the pathway: fewer new college graduates remain in Vermont, firms increasingly hire later‑career entrants and remote staff, and the pathway places more emphasis on relevant work experience than on unrelated college credits. The representative said the current 150‑credit requirement (with 30 core accounting credits required to sit for the CPA exam) can mean candidates fill the remaining credits with unrelated coursework, creating a barrier to licensure for some.

Panelists discussed education options and exam performance. A witness said the uniform CPA exam has a low overall first‑time pass rate ("on your first try kind of like... probably 40%" according to the panel discussion), while UVM’s master’s program posts substantially higher pass rates in the high‑80s to 90s range, making the graduate route still attractive for many candidates.

Committee members and witnesses agreed the proposed changes are primarily technical and aimed at modernizing language to reflect how accounting work occurs across state lines today. No formal vote occurred during the session; the committee thanked the witnesses and took a five‑minute recess, with additional sections and testimony scheduled for later in the week.

What’s next: The committee will continue consideration of H588 in upcoming meetings, when remaining sections and additional testimony will be taken.