Discussion:AICPA tax section or NATP
From TaxAlmanac
Discussion Forum Index --> Business Growth Community --> AICPA tax section or NATP
Eastendcpa (talk|edits) said: | 7 October 2007 |
| Just curious...I am a sole prac. looking for additional resource. Does anyone have opinions as to which association you prefer AICPA tax section or NATP. Is the "member only" content actually useful? Any likes or dislikes would be appreciated. | |
| 7 October 2007 | |
| idea: Why don't you attend one seminar put on by each and talk to the members there and listen to the content and then determine which one better meets your needs. Maybe you will come to one of my seminars and we can talk after the class. | |
| 8 October 2007 | |
| Although I am a member of the AICPA, I have found the NATP resources (such as their annual conference) to be quite useful.
Kevin, I heard one of your seminars for the first time this year and I look forward to more of them in the future! | |
| October 8, 2007 | |
| I've found the monthly Tax Advisor magazine [1] for tax section members of the AICPA to be very useful, timely, and relevant to my practice. Membership in the section is ~$170 per year if you want to include the magazine subscription. Also the many (at least once a week) e-mail tax updates also seem to provide important information to help us stay current. I believe there may be some online resources available too but have not used those. There is also a tax discussion forum online although I haven't used this or checked it out. Tax section membership is also available to non-CPA's. AICPA website says: [2] | |
TheTinCook (talk|edits) said: | 8 October 2007 |
| How about the National Association of Enrolled Agents, Is it worth joining? | |
Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said: | 8 October 2007 |
| I keep my membership in NAEA, but if I had to choose between it and NATP, I think I would choose the latter. I would qualify that by saying my membership in NATP is less than a year old, but the publications and weekly email alerts simply have more meat than NAEA, and seem to me more devoted to educating the tax professional.
So much of NAEA's EAalert concerns itself with organizational matters, elections, and what seems to be at times self-promotion ['self' is a bad word, but do I really have to read about so-and-so's testimony at some Congressional hearing). In the past I have also questioned some editorial content of EAalert, especially one issue where pages were turned over to a special pleader for a Flat tax proposal. Then again, anything I say must be taken with a grain of salt, for I would not join any organization that would have me as a member. [Your CPE question of the day: who said that originally? If you know, the duck will come down and pay you $50.] | |
Eastendcpa (talk|edits) said: | 8 October 2007 |
| I'm currently an AICPA member (not of the tax section)and I'm leaning towards NATP. The publications that I've reviewed were easy to understand and the tax research service of theirs that I've used had a good turn around time gave easy to understand documentation and references. Thanks for all of your replies. | |
| 8 October 2007 | |
| I wish I had joined NATP from the beginning. I belong to NSA. It's beneficial on the local level, as each state has it's own "chapter" so to speak, and there's a monthly luncheon and a chance to meet local practitioners. On the national level, NSA seems to be asleep. As I mentioned in the Chat forum yesterday, the head of AICPA's tax section has sent a letter to Congress regarding this "more likely than not" standard, and some possible unintended consequences. As far as I know, NSA has not taken a position, yet they claim to represent "Main Street's Accountant". Maybe they've given some input, and I don't know about it. If your organization can't speak up about something like this, it makes me wonder what their commnitment is to the practitioner. At least with NATP, you're getting some solid tax material and offerings. | |
| 8 October 2007 | |
| Being both a CPA and an EA perhaps I can provide a balanced view.
I am NOT a member of AICPA - never was, never will. Being a sole practitioner, it hardly supports my interests and that's why sole practitioner CPAs and small practice CPA partnerships have been dropping out en masse. I belong to NSA and NAEA, and previously NATP. NAEA is the organization that, yes, promotes interests of tax practitioners because there's a common bond of its members - the EA license - so it's going to focus strictly on tax issues and promote licensure requirements to practice in keeping with Circular 230, to avoid the negative publicity and harmful effect of unlicensed, unscrupulous, unqualified practitioners. Note that merely HAVING a license doesn't preclude unethical behavior, but it greatly curtails it. NSA (that I USED TO be active in) and NATP represent multiple classes of practitioners so anytime they're going to officially take a stand on an issue, they have to be careful not to offend a class of membership so they won't drop out of their treasury coffers. NSA has its ACAT (educational institution) similar to NYS Society of CPA's Foundation for Accounting Education and NAEA's Educational Foundation. In order to attract more candidates to support its program, years ago ACAT offered "lifetime experience" credit for its accountancy exam, where upon substantiation of years of experience, one can pass the ACAT exam without scoring required points on the exam strictly based on merits of passing the exam by itself. Not being an active member of NATP, I don't have adequate information to form an opinion. | |
| 8 October 2007 | |
| I also belong to NATP and NAEA. I have to disclose that when teaching for them, I am being paid by them.
NAEA is great for matters of representation - their National Tax Practice Institute (NTPI) is unequaled for learning how to handle audits, collections, liens, levys, and OICs. NATP is more hands-on tax preparation issues - the laws and the how to's. NAEA is going to have a free research option this Winter (probably not as good as TA), and NATP only charges a few dollars for referenced research. | |
Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said: | 8 October 2007 |
| Here comes the duck! | |
